It was the right clock management strategy.....

[bonefish1]

Everyone hates running the ball against a 9 man front on 3rd and 4 with the game on the line. And yes, the argument is "Get a 1st down and the game's over".
But, throwing the ball in that situation, if you don't get a 1st, gives UN and extra 20 seconds to work with. Running the ball was the right decision.
UN had no timeouts and if I'm not mistaken, their QB leads the B10 in interceptions. Brohm was simply playing the percentages that his D could make a play or their QB would make a mistake (remember Minny).

 

[boilermaker75]

With the clock stopped on first downs time outs are not as valuable in the college game as in the NFL. Those extra seconds didn't matter, there was still plenty of time. A first down would have mattered, we would have won. If it is not open the QB can always take a knee and keep the clock running.

 

[bonefish1]

The clock only stops on 1st downs until the ball is reset. Unlike on out of bounds when it starts on the snap.
I hate the conservative play calling and prevent defense as well, but it was the right strategy. UN just made the plays needed and didn't make a mistake.

 

[pboiler18]

Yeah, I don’t think that in college unless you can get the clock under 30 seconds that burning class comes is the right move.

Especially not when the other team is ripping you up in the pass game.

Even if they hadn’t gotten out of bounds all those times they could have gotten Lines back up without a ton of time coming off the clock. I thought it was a bad move before we lost and thought it was a worse move after.

Maybe some type of RPO and only throw it if he’s wide open and go down if you can’t make the first?

It’s 8 games into the year. The team isnt getting better. The coaches haven’t adjusted to the level of play.

When do we stop counting moral victories?

Newsflash for you...we lose basically every D contributor next year. Going to be tough to replace them. This was our best opportunity to go to a bowl for the next 2-3 years and we blew it.

 

[FirstDownB]

People keep saying prevent defense. I haven't re-watched any of the game, but what I recall seeing is Purdue playing more or less its typical zone defense, mixing four man rush w/ stunting and some zone blitz. Those are pretty typical looks for this defense on passing downs. Now one might argue our passing defense isn't typically very good.. that's probably the real takeaway here. We've faced 2 or 3 pretty good QB's this year and they all shredded our defense.

I don't think Holt trusted our db's without Hunte on the field to play man to man on that drive, which is understandable the way they were abusing our backup db's in the 2nd half. Blitzing an extra man or two may have helped, but if you don't get home its a big play opportunity. The strategy was to make them execute over and over again. Have to give Lee and the Nebraska offense some credit on that. That drive was flawlessly executed.

 

[boilermaker75]

People keep saying prevent defense. I haven't re-watched any of the game, but what I recall seeing is Purdue playing more or less its typical zone defense, mixing four man rush w/ stunting and some zone blitz. Those are pretty typical looks for this defense on passing downs. Now one might argue our passing defense isn't typically very good.. that's probably the real takeaway here. We've faced 2 or 3 pretty good QB's this year and they all shredded our defense.

I don't think Holt trusted our db's without Hunte on the field to play man to man on that drive, which is understandable the way they were abusing our backup db's in the 2nd half. Blitzing an extra man or two may have helped, but if you don't get home its a big play opportunity. The strategy was to make them execute over and over again. Have to give Lee and the Nebraska offense some credit on that. That drive was flawlessly executed.

Lee impressed me with his accuracy.

 

[BoiledSteel]

Everyone hates running the ball against a 9 man front on 3rd and 4 with the game on the line. And yes, the argument is "Get a 1st down and the game's over".
But, throwing the ball in that situation, if you don't get a 1st, gives UN and extra 20 seconds to work with. Running the ball was the right decision.
UN had no timeouts and if I'm not mistaken, their QB leads the B10 in interceptions. Brohm was simply playing the percentages that his D could make a play or their QB would make a mistake (remember Minny).

This is one of the few times that I agree with you and you are quite correct. People are calling on the coaching but it was the right play calling at the end of the game. The players needed to execute and we win.

Our talent level is just not good right now but I have little doubt it will improve and we see another jump in progress next season.

 

[threeeputtt]

Everyone hates running the ball against a 9 man front on 3rd and 4 with the game on the line. And yes, the argument is "Get a 1st down and the game's over".
But, throwing the ball in that situation, if you don't get a 1st, gives UN and extra 20 seconds to work with. Running the ball was the right decision.
UN had no timeouts and if I'm not mistaken, their QB leads the B10 in interceptions. Brohm was simply playing the percentages that his D could make a play or their QB would make a mistake (remember Minny).

I don't disagree with your premise. However, I remember many times on 2nd or 3rd in other games I have seen other do a play action and go for the juggler. I remember Ohio State doing that about 10 years ago at Ross Ade. They won. At the same time with our receivers as bad as they are dropping passes an incomplete does give NU more time on the clock. It would have been all moot as you say with another first down. Either scenario was OK. We simply lost.

 

[TC4THREE]

I disagree simply because the lack of timeouts in the college game is not that big of a deal because the clock stops on first downs and Nebraska had demonstrated the ability to pass the ball on us downfield.

Everyone wants to trust our defense in that situation but there's a difference between stopping people when they are trying to score and stopping people when they NEED to score. Clearly, Nebraska was in the latter category there. Not sure our defense was quite up to the task in that situation so I would've preferred going for the first down there. When we punted that ball I actually felt like we were going to give up the lead before that drive even started. We just couldn't make it hard on them to move the ball.

If the situation is slightly different, I'd have probably felt differently. If they had begun the drive with less than a minute I'd have felt much better about it. But I think they still had almost a minute and a half starting that drive and that's plenty of time to get off 10 or more passing plays and it only took them 8 and 68 seconds to score there. I felt with how the game was playing out that was about what I expected would happen. I think their QB had 350 passing yards before that drive even started so it's not like it was a surprise that he could pass on our defense.

 

[ossim]

Situationally it was not the right strategy for Purdue. I think the previous 3 drives on the offense were 3 and outs or close to them so you know the defense was gassed. They had just given up a points on the previous drive. Hunte and Bentley were out with injury and Hardy was getting killed in coverage. All the momentum was in Nebraska's favor at that point. I don't know if the staff expected Worship to muscle in for the first but Nebraska's D was not respecting our pass game at that point and was not going to take a playaction pass call seriously.

 

[boilermaker75]

Situationally it was not the right strategy for Purdue. I think the previous 3 drives on the offense were 3 and outs or close to them so you know the defense was gassed. They had just given up a points on the previous drive. Hunte and Bentley were out with injury and Hardy was getting killed in coverage. All the momentum was in Nebraska's favor at that point. I don't know if the staff expected Worship to muscle in for the first but Nebraska's D was not respecting our pass game at that point and was not going to take a playaction pass call seriously.

Exactly. When we punted I knew we had lost the game.

 

[boilerdug]

Everyone hates running the ball against a 9 man front on 3rd and 4 with the game on the line. And yes, the argument is "Get a 1st down and the game's over".
But, throwing the ball in that situation, if you don't get a 1st, gives UN and extra 20 seconds to work with. Running the ball was the right decision.
UN had no timeouts and if I'm not mistaken, their QB leads the B10 in interceptions. Brohm was simply playing the percentages that his D could make a play or their QB would make a mistake (remember Minny).

Couldn't disagree more. Nebraska was almost moving the ball at will on the series before. What made you think that that was going to change???

When Dawan Hunt didn't come out in the 2nd half, his replacement was out there on an island. Nebraska ate him alive. We were watching it from the stands and even the women in front of us could see what was happening. There were lining up to get man coverage against Hardy and toasting him all over.
Purdue countered by moving the safety over for help. That left less help elsewhere and Nebraska just went where the weak spot was.
I think if Purdue does play action and rolls Blough out with the option to run or throw on the 3rd down play, we get the first down and game over.

 

[Boiler Wolf]

I think the previous 3 drives on the offense were 3 and outs or close to them so you know the defense was gassed.

That in my opinion is what lost the game, not the last NE drive. At the end of the game with a lead you have to do better than 3 consecutive 3 and outs. I think one of those possessions we got one 1st down, but that was it. A few more 1st downs on any of those possessions would have sealed the win for the Boilers.

 

[bonefish1]

This is one of the few times that I agree with you and you are quite correct. People are calling on the coaching but it was the right play calling at the end of the game. The players needed to execute and we win.

Our talent level is just not good right now but I have little doubt it will improve and we see another jump in progress next season.

I don't think it was a lack of execution on offense on that last drive because you don't expect to pick up a 1st down against a 9 man front when they KNOW you're going to run. You're hoping for a busted tackle, or something but what you're really doing is just burning clock, setting up for the punt and hoping the D can make a play or the other team makes a mistake. UN executed the 2 minute drive to perfection. Hats off to them.

 

[BoiledSteel]

I don't think it was a lack of execution on offense on that last drive because you don't expect to pick up a 1st down against a 9 man front when they KNOW you're going to run. You're hoping for a busted tackle, or something but what you're really doing is just burning clock, setting up for the punt and hoping the D can make a play or the other team makes a mistake. UN executed the 2 minute drive to perfection. Hats off to them.

When I reference the offense not executing I am looking at the whole game and the frequent 3 and outs. Convert any of those to just 3 points and we win.

 

[Purdue0034]

Should have left Knox in the game after we got the first 1st down and he could of got us the second one we needed. Dude is fantastic in the 4th quarter, we need to remember that.

 

[bonefish1]

When I reference the offense not executing I am looking at the whole game and the frequent 3 and outs. Convert any of those to just 3 points and we win.

Well, it can also be argued that had UN scored a touchdown on one of those 4 field goals, that they would have won.
There's too many things that happen during the course of the game. What this game came down to was whether not UN could drive 70 yards with 1:30 and no timeouts needing a TD to win. They did.

 

[BoiledSteel]

Well, it can also be argued that had UN scored a touchdown on one of those 4 field goals, that they would have won.
There's too many things that happen during the course of the game. What this game came down to was whether not UN could drive 70 yards with 1:30 and no timeouts needing a TD to win. They did.

Great points and also we had plenty of opportunity to win way before then and make their TD drive at the end meaningless. Convert some 3rd downs instead of punting and we probably win going away.

 

[nips18]

Yeah, I don’t think that in college unless you can get the clock under 30 seconds that burning class comes is the right move.

Especially not when the other team is ripping you up in the pass game.

Even if they hadn’t gotten out of bounds all those times they could have gotten Lines back up without a ton of time coming off the clock. I thought it was a bad move before we lost and thought it was a worse move after.

Maybe some type of RPO and only throw it if he’s wide open and go down if you can’t make the first?

It’s 8 games into the year. The team isnt getting better. The coaches haven’t adjusted to the level of play.

When do we stop counting moral victories?

Newsflash for you...we lose basically every D contributor next year. Going to be tough to replace them. This was our best opportunity to go to a bowl for the next 2-3 years and we blew it.

Considering your expectations were so low heading into this season and even next, you should be pleased with the progress the team has made. The staff is recruiting fairly well this season and should continue to improve the talent level. Next season target 4-6 wins, then hope for a jump after that.

 

[pboiler18]

Considering your expectations were so low heading into this season and even next, you should be pleased with the progress the team has made. The staff is recruiting fairly well this season and should continue to improve the talent level. Next season target 4-6 wins, then hope for a jump after that.

I think the difference is that we are in these games and blowing them...that’s what makes it hard to swallow.

My expectations were based on a D that couldn’t stop anybody and an O that was honestly more consistent last year moving the ball.

It has taken the coaches too long into the season to figure out what works on offense, and even then we don’t rely on our key matchups enough. During the game, I wanted us to run on 1st and 2nd on that last drive and then try an RPO on 3rd. Have Blough tuck and run if somebody isn’t wide open. At least then we’d look like we were trying to win the game!

I think that was the right call IMO as Lee ripped our secondary the previous 3 drives. We went into a shell the last 3 or so minutes and it’s very concerning. Purdue beat themselves the last 2 weeks and even a few times during the season...that’s less to do with talent and more to do with coaching IMO.

I have few complaints about the job Holt has done. The offense on the ther hand has been BAD and truly not what I expected from the Brohms. That has easily been the most disconcerting part of it all.

The biggest adjustment we could have/ should have made...when it became clear our WRs couldn’t consistently catch wide open passes...why not flex out the RBs more? I know they can catch and so does the staff! I think the OCs get too creative with the gimmicks instead of focusing on getting guys what can make the plays in the game.

Knox, Jones and Worship should play every snap IMO!

 

[stout1]

go for the juggler.

What did jugglers ever do to you?!?

 

[pboiler18]

What did jugglers every do to you?!?

Easy targets. Focused on 3 or more things at once and never see you coming.

 

[BoiledSteel]

Considering your expectations were so low heading into this season and even next, you should be pleased with the progress the team has made. The staff is recruiting fairly well this season and should continue to improve the talent level. Next season target 4-6 wins, then hope for a jump after that.

Great post and anyone jumping off the ledge just has no idea what they are talking about at this point.

There is a large lack of talent on this team and the coaching staff is doing exceptionally well considering what they have to work with. There is a reason we won so few games the last several years and unfortunately that talent gap is extremely evident to anyone with any sense of reality.

We still have a very outside chance at a bowl which is more than any realistic person could of hoped for coming in to this season. If we manage to bring the bucket back where it belongs then that is a giant improvement that we all should be able to see.

 

[nips18]

I think the difference is that we are in these games and blowing them...that’s what makes it hard to swallow.

My expectations were based on a D that couldn’t stop anybody and an O that was honestly more consistent last year moving the ball.

It has taken the coaches too long into the season to figure out what works on offense, and even then we don’t rely on our key matchups enough. During the game, I wanted us to run on 1st and 2nd on that last drive and then try an RPO on 3rd. Have Blough tuck and run if somebody isn’t wide open. At least then we’d look like we were trying to win the game!

I think that was the right call IMO as Lee ripped our secondary the previous 3 drives. We went into a shell the last 3 or so minutes and it’s very concerning. Purdue beat themselves the last 2 weeks and even a few times during the season...that’s less to do with talent and more to do with coaching IMO.

I have few complaints about the job Holt has done. The offense on the ther hand has been BAD and truly not what I expected from the Brohms. That has easily been the most disconcerting part of it all.

The biggest adjustment we could have/ should have made...when it became clear our WRs couldn’t consistently catch wide open passes...why not flex out the RBs more? I know they can catch and so does the staff! I think the OCs get too creative with the gimmicks instead of focusing on getting guys what can make the plays in the game.

Knox, Jones and Worship should play every snap IMO!

Exactly, the coaching staff has done a great job of making a lousy team competitive and now you want more. They are mustering what they can with the team they have.

With an OL that cannot sustain blocks or WRs that can get separation or catch consistently, they are scheming well. Schemes only get a team so far, then talent has to do the rest.

 

[boilermaker75]

Well, it can also be argued that had UN scored a touchdown on one of those 4 field goals, that they would have won.
There's too many things that happen during the course of the game. What this game came down to was whether not UN could drive 70 yards with 1:30 and no timeouts needing a TD to win. They did.

There was plenty of time. Our defense had to stop them on downs, or a turnover. This required 4 consecutive plays by the defense. Miss one of those four, they get a first down and we have to start all over needing 4 consecutive plays to stop them. With a tired and injured defense we could not do it.

 

[nips18]

There was plenty of time. Our defense had to stop them on downs, or a turnover. This required 4 consecutive plays by the defense. Miss one of those four, they get a first down and we have to start all over needing 4 consecutive plays to stop them. With a tired and injured defense we could not do it.

Actually, tackling in bounds would've made a huge difference. Cannot allow them out of bounds the first four or five plays.

 

[boilermaker75]

Actually, tackling in bounds would've made a huge difference. Cannot allow them out of bounds the first four or five plays.

It would have helped. It would have forced Nebraska to play a little faster, maybe spike the ball a couple of times, and to have to try some deeper routes. But a minute 22 seconds is like 3 minutes in the NFL if you are getting first downs.

 

[nips18]

It would have helped. It would have forced Nebraska to play a little faster, maybe spike the ball a couple of times, and to have to try some deeper routes. But a minute 22 seconds is like 3 minutes in the NFL if you are getting first downs.

The clock doesn't stop near as long as it used to. If they stopped them in bounds, purdue wins the game. They didn't and lost.

 

[02Boilermaker]

Actually, tackling in bounds would've made a huge difference. Cannot allow them out of bounds the first four or five plays.

True.

The one time Nebraska was tackled in bounds without getting a 1st down, it took 17 seconds to get the next snap off. Twice on the last drive Purdue allowed Nebraska WRs to get out of bounds without picking up a first down:
7 yard gain - The WR caught the ball 3 yds down field at the hash mark & was able to run all the way to the sidelines.
6 yard gain - WR hopped and lunged out of bounds with DB wrapped around one of his legs.

Purdue also let Nebraska WRs get out of bounds after picking up a first down twice on the last drive. The one time Nebraska was tackled in bounds after picking up a 1st down, it took 4 seconds to get the next snap off.

Nebraska completely 7 of 8 passes, got out of bounds on 4 of 8 plays, and still ran it's last play with only 18 seconds left on the clock.

 

[FirstDownB]

Exactly, the coaching staff has done a great job of making a lousy team competitive and now you want more. They are mustering what they can with the team they have.

With an OL that cannot sustain blocks or WRs that can get separation or catch consistently, they are scheming well. Schemes only get a team so far, then talent has to do the rest.

Yep. And no offense to any specific fan, but IMO how you view this season as a fan is a pretty clear indicator of whether you lean optimistic or pessimistic.

First, Brohm and his staff have made clear, quantifiable improvements in Year 1. It does not require any amount of optimism to see that. Just look at the efficiency stats.

Now, the improvement has mostly been on the defensive side of the ball to start. The optimist looks at that and says Brohm chose his staff, plugged the necessary holes on the roster as well as he could in short time, and together they coached 'em up. The pessimist says that the turnaround on defense is all on Holt, not Brohm.

The optimist says the coaching has gotten about as much as they can out of the talent on BOTH sides of the ball, and that there is simply not enough talent on offense to draw from. Scheming make things look pretty smooth for awhile against bad defenses, but as competition has stepped up the talent very difficult to overcome schematically. The pessimist points to the chronology of results as a trend and a few individual play calls as evidence there are problems with the coaching.

The pessimist looks at the defense and thinks it is a given that we will not have this level of talent again for at least another 2 years. The optimist looks at the defense and says where were all the accolades for these players prior to this season? Purdue had ZERO preseason all conference first, second, third, or fourth teamers. Last season most Purdue fans couldn't wait for many of these players to exhaust their eligibility and bring in new blood.

I'm generally a pragmatic realist but prefer to remain in the optimist camp for Year 1 of a major rebuilt. Is every single detail going exactly as planned? Of course not. But when you take a step back and look at the big picture, you see the arrow is pointing up. I'll wait until Year 2 or 3 to start critiquing results. What I care about right now is which direction is the arrow pointing.

 

[ossim]

Well honest assessment it makes sense that our defense would be the best group as Freeman was the best assistant on the previous staff. We had Shoop for 3 seasons and Malone for only one. So from a roster standpoint the players we targetted are probably a mess from a recruiting standpoint since we were a run 2 times and get sacked on third down offense for so many years.

 

[bonefish1]

It would have helped. It would have forced Nebraska to play a little faster, maybe spike the ball a couple of times, and to have to try some deeper routes. But a minute 22 seconds is like 3 minutes in the NFL if you are getting first downs.

Well, clearly Holt had them in a prevent D designed to give up stuff underneath and not let anyone get behind the DBs. However, along with that, it's OK to give up all the underneath stuff you want but do it in the middle of the field, not along the sideline where they can get out of bounds. 1:30 with no TOs and needing a TD to win is still tough to do but the D needs to keep the plays in the middle of the field.

 

[pboiler18]

It’s not pessimist vs optimist IMO.

This team even last year was not that far from competing with teams like Rutgers and Nebraska or even IU and Northwestern. I think we even score the most points Iowa had scored on them all year.

Our D will look a lot worse and different next year.

This was our year for immediate improvement IMO and some silly decisions made us miss the boat.

I’ve never suggested that a Brohm should be fired, that he isn’t a fit or that we can do better. All I’m saying is that we had 2 very winnable games and blew them. That will slow down our upward trajectory.

 

[FirstDownB]

It’s not pessimist vs optimist IMO.

This team even last year was not that far from competing with teams like Rutgers and Nebraska or even IU and Northwestern. I think we even score the most points Iowa had scored on them all year.

Our D will look a lot worse and different next year.

This was our year for immediate improvement IMO and some silly decisions made us miss the boat.

I’ve never suggested that a Brohm should be fired, that he isn’t a fit or that we can do better. All I’m saying is that we had 2 very winnable games and blew them. That will slow down our upward trajectory.

We must have watched different teams last year. I saw a team that was competitive in about 4 1/2 games out of 12.
This year they have been competitive in 8 out of 8.

-Nebraska was the first game after Hazell was fired, and team rallied around Parker (which also showed the potential of the defense). Still we managed to score only 14 points.

-Started the Iowa game with 3 consecutive 3-and-outs and trailed 35-7 at halftime. The second half points were window dressing while the Iowa starters discussed their plans for the evening on the sideline

-Against IU our offense put up 267 total yards and scored 24 points, aided by 4 interceptions.

-What can I say about the Northwestern game except 45-17

What you see as silly mistakes or blowing a game I see as part of the growing process. A team that's gone 9-39 and a fourth year head coach don't know yet how to finish close games. That's more of a finished product than Year 1 of a rebuild.

IMO everyone is disappointed that that the offense is not clicking, especially after the early season flashes. To me, this disappointment sucks but reminds me of the bigger picture. What is the team, coaching staff included, learning through these trials? Brohm may need to learn how to win games in different ways than what he may be used to. I think that is a good thing long term. I saw some really solid adjustments offensively between the Rutgers and Nebraska games. Between those two games, they probably lost one more than they should have. And before this season is over they are probably going to win one shouldn't. But at some point the receivers are going to have to do something.