Reviewing our predictions prior to Purdue's 24-14 win over Nevada ...
Kyle Charters:
Prediction: Nevada 30-27
I had a lot of questions about Purdue before the game, the main one being whether it would be able to stop the run.
I didn't think it could.
And I was wrong.
The Boilermakers were much better at it Saturday, because they forced the Wolf Pack to stay between the tackles by shedding blocks off the edges. It didn't let James Butler get on the perimeter. Who would have guessed that Purdue would have improved so much? It helped to have Da'Wan Hunte back; the cornerback was great in run support, doing it on back-to-back plays on opposite sides of the field before Nevada's missed field goal. But the Boilermakers' defensive line was markedly better as well.
Stacy Clardie:
Prediction: Nevada 28-27
Being in "show me" mode kept me from picking Purdue last week, and the defense did show a bit against Nevada. That was encouraging because the Wolf Pack's diverse offense made Purdue prepare for a bunch of different looks, and the Boilermakers did a good job of limiting Nevada despite that.
So kudos to Purdue's defense for generally being assignment-sound and, especially, for creating havoc in the backfield and generating five sacks.
Wondered whether the O-line would hold up with new starters Jalen Neal and Cameron Cermin, and Purdue's fortunate to have a mobile QB in David Blough. Neal was shaky, to say it nicely, and Blough did a great job skirting pressure and making plays, especially in the passing game.
Not so sure Purdue will be able to hold up much longer in this arrangement with the start of Big Ten play Saturday but, for one game at least, it was enough.
Alan Karpick
Prediction: Purdue 31, Nevada 28
Purdue won this game, but not for all the reasons I thought it might. Nevada didn’t sleep walk early, in fact thanks to Purdue miscues it got up 14-3. But Purdue had to rally from a double-digit deficit to victory for the first time since 2009 and asserted itself as the more physical team, which I thought it could based on what I had seen of the Wolf Pack. Also, the Purdue offense has success running the football, maybe not to the level I thought it could, but it was David Blough’s 48-yard pass to Bilal Marshall that turned this game around.
Brian Neubert
Prediction: Nevada 27-23
Well, they showed me, I suppose, because my prediction was based on nothing Nevada-related but rather the question of whether Purdue could beat anyone right now, what with its defensive issues and penchant for turnovers.
But Purdue's defense was outstanding against Nevada, by past standards or any standard. Those guys really controlled this game, then lucked out when the Wolf Pack botched the game-tying field goal.
If it turns out this is the defense's new normal and the offense can stop handing over footballs like it's handing out Halloween candy, Purdue might be a competitive team in Big Ten play.
Kyle Charters:
Prediction: Nevada 30-27
I had a lot of questions about Purdue before the game, the main one being whether it would be able to stop the run.
I didn't think it could.
And I was wrong.
The Boilermakers were much better at it Saturday, because they forced the Wolf Pack to stay between the tackles by shedding blocks off the edges. It didn't let James Butler get on the perimeter. Who would have guessed that Purdue would have improved so much? It helped to have Da'Wan Hunte back; the cornerback was great in run support, doing it on back-to-back plays on opposite sides of the field before Nevada's missed field goal. But the Boilermakers' defensive line was markedly better as well.
Stacy Clardie:
Prediction: Nevada 28-27
Being in "show me" mode kept me from picking Purdue last week, and the defense did show a bit against Nevada. That was encouraging because the Wolf Pack's diverse offense made Purdue prepare for a bunch of different looks, and the Boilermakers did a good job of limiting Nevada despite that.
So kudos to Purdue's defense for generally being assignment-sound and, especially, for creating havoc in the backfield and generating five sacks.
Wondered whether the O-line would hold up with new starters Jalen Neal and Cameron Cermin, and Purdue's fortunate to have a mobile QB in David Blough. Neal was shaky, to say it nicely, and Blough did a great job skirting pressure and making plays, especially in the passing game.
Not so sure Purdue will be able to hold up much longer in this arrangement with the start of Big Ten play Saturday but, for one game at least, it was enough.
Alan Karpick
Prediction: Purdue 31, Nevada 28
Purdue won this game, but not for all the reasons I thought it might. Nevada didn’t sleep walk early, in fact thanks to Purdue miscues it got up 14-3. But Purdue had to rally from a double-digit deficit to victory for the first time since 2009 and asserted itself as the more physical team, which I thought it could based on what I had seen of the Wolf Pack. Also, the Purdue offense has success running the football, maybe not to the level I thought it could, but it was David Blough’s 48-yard pass to Bilal Marshall that turned this game around.
Brian Neubert
Prediction: Nevada 27-23
Well, they showed me, I suppose, because my prediction was based on nothing Nevada-related but rather the question of whether Purdue could beat anyone right now, what with its defensive issues and penchant for turnovers.
But Purdue's defense was outstanding against Nevada, by past standards or any standard. Those guys really controlled this game, then lucked out when the Wolf Pack botched the game-tying field goal.
If it turns out this is the defense's new normal and the offense can stop handing over footballs like it's handing out Halloween candy, Purdue might be a competitive team in Big Ten play.
