So close, yet so far away.
Yeah, I understand just how preposterous it is to suggest there being anything "close" about a game in which a team hardly even threatened to score, its only chance being a field goal attempt in which the kicker seemed to pull the wrong club.
But you have to walk before you can run, and while you sure as hell don't want to still be walking in Week 7, it's better to be than not to be.
Yeah, Danny Etling got the pinata treatment in the backfield again, but the offense ran the ball better than anyone could have expected, which is to say it ran the ball at all against the top run defense in college football. Brandon Cottom's physicality early and the offensive's line willingness to fight provided the spark that made that so.
Keep in mind, Purdue could barely run against Indiana State.
There were some third downs where Purdue looked like a capable offense.
This was a game where physicality really was going to matter, all across the board. Purdue didn't win in that regard by any means, but it didn't get completely punked out either and that in itself is a positive sign for a Boilermaker team that could just as soon have been over-run by the Spartans based on its performances thus far.
Even in a shutout, it was a baby step for the offense, IMO; for the defense, it was a significant bound forward, coming out in a tweaked-again scheme and led by a defensive front that really asserted itself for one of the few times this season.
Ryan Russell and Jalani Phillips, in those stand-up roles, both made plays and gave the front a bit more size. Bruce Gaston made plays. So did man-child Ra'Zahn Howard.
Michigan State didn't score on offense until nine minutes remained. I think you'll take that any day of the week if you're Purdue, and twice on Sunday, whatever exactly that expression means.
It helped that Michigan State's passing game set the forward pass back to an era before facemasks, but maybe Purdue had a little something to do with that. From the defensive line to the cornerbacks, the defense competed physically more so than any game since Notre Dame.
Another step forward.
Purdue was a four-touchdown underdog Saturday for a reason. This was a game where success didn't necessarily have to be defined by wins and losses. I'm not talking moral victories, I'm talking good sense here. The Boilermakers have been rolled time and again this season and this had all the makings of another such result.
What you wanted to see from the Boilermakers were signs in defeat that might spawn victories later down the line, whether it's against an Iowa, Illinois or Indiana this season or anybody on next year's schedule.
With that in mind, I think Purdue took a step forward Saturday.
Maybe down the line it might really mean something, in a game in which the Boilermakers actually score.
Copyright, Boilers, Inc. 2013. All Rights Reserved. Reproducing or using editorial or graphical content, in whole or in part, without permission, is strictly prohibited. E-mail GoldandBlack.com/Boilers, Inc.
Yeah, I understand just how preposterous it is to suggest there being anything "close" about a game in which a team hardly even threatened to score, its only chance being a field goal attempt in which the kicker seemed to pull the wrong club.
But you have to walk before you can run, and while you sure as hell don't want to still be walking in Week 7, it's better to be than not to be.
Yeah, Danny Etling got the pinata treatment in the backfield again, but the offense ran the ball better than anyone could have expected, which is to say it ran the ball at all against the top run defense in college football. Brandon Cottom's physicality early and the offensive's line willingness to fight provided the spark that made that so.
Keep in mind, Purdue could barely run against Indiana State.
There were some third downs where Purdue looked like a capable offense.
This was a game where physicality really was going to matter, all across the board. Purdue didn't win in that regard by any means, but it didn't get completely punked out either and that in itself is a positive sign for a Boilermaker team that could just as soon have been over-run by the Spartans based on its performances thus far.
Even in a shutout, it was a baby step for the offense, IMO; for the defense, it was a significant bound forward, coming out in a tweaked-again scheme and led by a defensive front that really asserted itself for one of the few times this season.
Ryan Russell and Jalani Phillips, in those stand-up roles, both made plays and gave the front a bit more size. Bruce Gaston made plays. So did man-child Ra'Zahn Howard.
Michigan State didn't score on offense until nine minutes remained. I think you'll take that any day of the week if you're Purdue, and twice on Sunday, whatever exactly that expression means.
It helped that Michigan State's passing game set the forward pass back to an era before facemasks, but maybe Purdue had a little something to do with that. From the defensive line to the cornerbacks, the defense competed physically more so than any game since Notre Dame.
Another step forward.
Purdue was a four-touchdown underdog Saturday for a reason. This was a game where success didn't necessarily have to be defined by wins and losses. I'm not talking moral victories, I'm talking good sense here. The Boilermakers have been rolled time and again this season and this had all the makings of another such result.
What you wanted to see from the Boilermakers were signs in defeat that might spawn victories later down the line, whether it's against an Iowa, Illinois or Indiana this season or anybody on next year's schedule.
With that in mind, I think Purdue took a step forward Saturday.
Maybe down the line it might really mean something, in a game in which the Boilermakers actually score.
Copyright, Boilers, Inc. 2013. All Rights Reserved. Reproducing or using editorial or graphical content, in whole or in part, without permission, is strictly prohibited. E-mail GoldandBlack.com/Boilers, Inc.
