Michigan State Observations
- Thread starter Boiler Addict
- Start date
I’d rather listen to my ex call the game ..
“these teams both ****in suck dude, can we just go to pandora.. this is stupid.”
MSU's blocking was poor - poor technique. It was cleaned up to a degree that was absolutely NOT expected against UM. D- blocking versus IU. A- versus UM. Maybe it was the bye.
And IU played excellent defense against MSU. Plain excellent. DBs handled the outside speed better than anyone else this season. And McFadden is underrated. He was great. IU was coming off a bye versus MSU. IU has had a ridiculously tough schedule and bad luck. But I have no sympathy because I don't think the flaccid IU football fans deserve Tom Allen.
MSU is much better than it showed against IU. Not sure it is as good as it was against UM. MSU is a hard team to figure.
This would have more impact if Nebraska didn't destruct every. Single. Week.
Frost is nearing 5 for 20 in one score games, I believe. I have never seen anything like it.
Another stat I just saw is interesting. MSU is dead last in the B1G in total yardage allowed, but more middle of the pack in TDs allowed at 17. And they've given up the 2nd most FGs. Someone else - FDB maybe - mentioned them as bend and not break. Looks like it.
I guess there is degrees of everything right? Have any of their self destructions been almost a whole half of 0 points on THIRTY NINE YARDS on 19 plays? Before their garbage time drive where brohm was clearly trying to kill the game .. they averaged 2.0 yards per play for almost an entire half.
contrast that with a second half where they went 7-7 vs Michigan state before losing in OT. They got 230 some yards. Or a second half where they couldn’t catch Michigan but gained 295 yards …
They got 39 before garbage time. That’s not “well you know they were functional but they choked on a last drive..” that’s “they couldn’t do ANYTHING.”
and that’s only cause they guessed wrong and thought they had to focus on Martinez. Lambert realized that he couldn’t outrun our defense and focused on the run game in the second half. Or Nebraska might have been held to 10-ish points
I hit the jackpot! My wife encourages me with game time reminders, drinks beer and watches the games with me. She'll even help with all the contributions to tailgate stuff when we meet up with others. She is a UW-M grad and still loves the Boilers! I might have digressed on this conversation, but admit I'm a lucky bastard.
Last edited:
Have to be at least tied in the turnover battle and get 24 to have a shot to win in regulation… hoping for all black uniforms and helmets, good weather and a big crowd
The replay reversal of the fumble near the goal line was not wrong. His entire shin was on the ground. He was down. Questionable calls? That is how UofM use to win all the time before replay, now that replay holds refs accountable, they have not won a Big Ten championship ever since. Let that sink in. The calls that were reversed were reversed because they were wrong on the field. That is what replay is for. There is video evidence to support it.
Lol yes as Purdue fans we know that replay will always vindicate us. Like the first TD Minnesota scored this ye.. oh wait
A real angel! You lucky SoB!
Have to disagree on the strip sack. The views made available on the broadcast didn't provide anything indisputable. He was probably down, but that isn't the standard for replay. That said, the booth may have had angles we weren't shown.
Not sure if people know, but any part of your body that is down outside your hands and feet means you are down. This includes your ankle or wrist.
Thorne's leg was laying on the ground and his ankle/shin was clearly touching the ground and he had control. If it was only about his knee, its a fumble. People focused on the knee, but it was his ankle/shin.
Also, I do not believe that replay officials just make shit up without video evidence. Conspiracy fans might think they do, but I dont.
It was one of those reviews where the fans of each team are going to see what they want to see.
As an impartial observer I thought the call on the field should have stood. There was no clear video evidence that the QB still had firm possession of the ball when his shin touched the ground. In fact it appeared to me the ball had started to slip.
As an impartial observer I thought the call on the field should have stood. There was no clear video evidence that the QB still had firm possession of the ball when his shin touched the ground. In fact it appeared to me the ball had started to slip.
Spot on. They will defend the call for their benefit no matter what. No point in giving them a response. We have no reason to argue the call, we just are telling them what we saw. I was not rooting for either team. If I had to guess, they'll say no holding or interference on that Michigan 4th down throw to the WR as well.
To overturn a call, you need indisputable visual evidence that it was the opposite of what was called on the field. No point arguing about a shin or knee, the DE did a great job of grabbing the left wrist of the QB and pulling it away while they were standing, the QB's other hand had the tips of his fingers on the ball, he lost control of the ball. If you super slow mo it from the sideline view where the DB is blocking the view for most of the action, you'll see it. No way the ref had indisputable visual evidence to overturn the call.
Not impressed with Spartan fans already. I don't care about if Michigan use to get calls years ago and haven't won a conference championship since X. Diversion. Call a spade a spade and bring value to this discussion of the teams playing this weekend, instead of rationalizing something irrelevant.
I am a Spartan fan and I agree with you on the fumble play. I watched it once I got home from the game. Do I "think" he was down with control? Yes... Do I "know" that he was down with control? No. By definition, the play probably should have stood as called, unless they have different angles than they had on TV.
That being said, I'm not going to feel bad or apologize for UM getting the raw end of the deal for once. They have been gifted plenty over the years.
I do disagree with you on the 4th down non-PI call. I don't think that was PI. A hand on the hip doesn't constitute PI. I don't think the UM player was hinderer enough to prevent him getting to the ball. It wasn't a particularly a well thrown ball that was likely uncatchable regardless of the MSU player. I'll give you that it looked and sounded awkward, but that was more because of the collision of the two MSU players. It certainly wasn't PI based on how the rest of the game was being officiated with regard to PI.
The one that I'm surprised UM fans aren't complaining about more is the 2nd 2 point conversion. That wasn't even reviewed and I think it was very close to not being a catch.
I don't think any of the other calls/reviews were even close to disputable. However, I did see the UM line not get called for holds for doing the same thing that MSU was getting called for. Their line was good, but benefited from the officials refusing to call holding on them.
With regard to this week; I think most reasonable MSU fans are in agreement that it's a game that we could lose if we lose even a little bit of focus. Our A game vs Purdue's A game, I think we win by 5-7 points. However our B/C game vs your A game, we likely won't come out with a win. It seem like this is the biggest game of the year, but I guess when you're undefeated, the next game is always the biggest game of the year.
I think you caught a big break with Nailor's injury last week. If he can't go, that allows coverage to be rolled to Reed which should restrict what we can do on offense a little. Your D is playing really well, but our Offense isn't Iowa or Wiscy. We can actually throw the ball. You won't be able to load up the box or drop 8 into coverage and just defend again the run or just defend against the pass. You're going to have defend both, which can lead to big plays if one guy is out of position or blows an assignment.
I don't know what to say about our defense. Statistically we are terrible against the pass. However, using the "eye test" we don't appear to be that bad when I watch it. We aren't blowing a ton of coverages. Our guys are always around the receivers, they just seem to be a 1/2 step late. Close enough to prevent big plays, but not close enough to knock down the pass. It's weird. Advanced metrics sort of point to that as well. They are more more favorable to our defense than the traditional stats, like pass yards/gm. Prior to last week, our D had been on the field for more plays than any other D, and face significantly more pass plays than others. That is because we tend to give up a high percentage 3rd and 5+, and our offense's tendency to score quickly. Yet, they don't seem to tired and almost always stiffen in the red zone. Certainly part of it is schematic, but it's hard to put a finger on why people are able to pass so well against us. That being said, for all the yards we have given up, you would think our scoring D would be awful. But its not.
Key's for Purdue:
1. win the turnover battle (obviously)
2. Make us go 10+ plays to score. I don't think we've had many 10+ play drives without some sort of self inflicted penalty that usually kills us.
3. Along with point 2, try to build a fence to stop walker. Don't worry about trying to get tackles for loss, just make sure you limit the gains to 2-4 yards. All it takes is for one guy to knife in, miss a tackle, and walker will hit the unmanned gap for a huge gain.
4. Provide time for your QB by any means necessary. Freeze the backers with misdirection, leave a TE in to max protect. Whatever it takes. If you give him time, he'll find an open wr. Even in 2 or 3 man routes.
5. Be prepared for the long haul. This MSU team is the best conditioned team I've ever seen. We keep coming and coming and coming. Hitting harder in the 4th than we do in the 1st. We really live up to Tucker's "Relentless" mantra. We want to wear you down because we think we are tougher and can go longer than you can.
As an MSU fan, I hope you do none of the above. I look forward to the game
Last edited:
Thanks for the insider view. I'm not expecting a W, but I wasn't expecting a road win against NEB.
You've probably seen reviews on our defense. It is fast sideline to sideline and solid as long as they maintain assignments and wrap. They've been doing that quite a few games with exception of WI. Going back to your 4th Qtr comment, if MSU gets the 3-4 yarders consistently in the run game early, it will likely lead to larger gains in the latter part of the game. "IF" our offense cannot sustain some drives as well, it will be concerning as well strictly lean on passing to try to win. If O'Connell, gets a pick INT in the second half, then it tends to go bad relatively quick.
As of late, our Special Teams (Kicker) has become unreliable. That plays a sizable role into MSU advantage as well.
Best of luck, but I hope your team doesn't win. I look forward to the game as well.
Insightful analysis. I noticed #3 was a trend for Michigan on Saturday. And credit to Walker, he had the vision and speed to make them pay.
Pretending you know more than the replay official and head official who make the call together is always funny to me.
winners win—loser cry about the refs.
Pretending that you've never complained about the refs is funny.
Their basketball coach has a PhD in complaining about referee calls
wow... long post.
With an unusual moniker like "thomanje", you wouldn't be related to a "wolegib", would you?!
I only ask because the post lengths are eerily similar....
However, yours are more coherent, there's a certain "readability" there, and your points actually make sense! 😉(this is a bit of "local" humor!)
Appreciate the effort in your response.
I agree, I think the Nailor injury doesn't help, but Mosley seems capable. You have 3 receivers with 20+ catches and averaging 15+ yds/reception. It's the style/design of play. Purdue's pass attack is very different. Bell is averaging <15 yds/reception and 4 others with 20+ receptions is <10 yds/reception.
What we have going for us on offense is our primary RB is back from injury. I think nearly every Purdue fan was happy to see him. He really helps the offense function, running, play action, pass protection, catching out of the backfield, etc. Purdue is still not a good running team, but it provides the balance Purdue needs to keep defenses respecting the run.
OL hasn't played much or great together, medical retirements have impacted our depth and talent over the past couple years. It seems like communication / trust is still being developed, defenses have had success with stunts, twists and delayed blitzes.
Last thought on Purdue offense, a recurring theme in the last couple years is redzone offense struggles. Purdue can move the ball but settle for FG's or worse, no points in the redzone (due to turnover on downs, turnover, missed FG). I'd guess if Purdue kicks 3 or more field goals, MSU will win. Purdue's offense, which should be the calling card is struggling to score points, ranks 100+ in the nation.
Stop the run, make it a two possession game early and it could be a long day for the Boilermakers.
#1-3; Agree. Purdue's tackling has been good but not great lately. Interesting how it goes Saturday.
#4 As mentioned before, Purdue's run game and game score will really impact this. I generally feel OK about the protection. Not really impressed with any of our TE's blocking though.
#5 Purdue's focus this off-season was "to finish" and compared to previous years, it seems to be working.
Against Nebraska, Purdue put drives of 7, 6 and 6 minutes together. I was impressed. Part of a good defense is good offense. I have a feeling there will be lots of possessions in this game due to the way these teams are built.
Just a general question: Mel Tucker. Good pedigree/resume. Seems to be a good recruiter. When he was at Colorado he flipped a Purdue committed 4 star DB. I know MSU went 2-5 last year. Bad offense. Bad defense. 100+ in the nation. Then a ton of transfers later, this season is 8-0 and offense and defense is top 30. Bad season last year? Lightning in a bottle this year? Seems like a little bit of both. Thoughts?
I agree, I think the Nailor injury doesn't help, but Mosley seems capable. You have 3 receivers with 20+ catches and averaging 15+ yds/reception. It's the style/design of play. Purdue's pass attack is very different. Bell is averaging <15 yds/reception and 4 others with 20+ receptions is <10 yds/reception.
What we have going for us on offense is our primary RB is back from injury. I think nearly every Purdue fan was happy to see him. He really helps the offense function, running, play action, pass protection, catching out of the backfield, etc. Purdue is still not a good running team, but it provides the balance Purdue needs to keep defenses respecting the run.
OL hasn't played much or great together, medical retirements have impacted our depth and talent over the past couple years. It seems like communication / trust is still being developed, defenses have had success with stunts, twists and delayed blitzes.
Last thought on Purdue offense, a recurring theme in the last couple years is redzone offense struggles. Purdue can move the ball but settle for FG's or worse, no points in the redzone (due to turnover on downs, turnover, missed FG). I'd guess if Purdue kicks 3 or more field goals, MSU will win. Purdue's offense, which should be the calling card is struggling to score points, ranks 100+ in the nation.
Stop the run, make it a two possession game early and it could be a long day for the Boilermakers.
#1-3; Agree. Purdue's tackling has been good but not great lately. Interesting how it goes Saturday.
#4 As mentioned before, Purdue's run game and game score will really impact this. I generally feel OK about the protection. Not really impressed with any of our TE's blocking though.
#5 Purdue's focus this off-season was "to finish" and compared to previous years, it seems to be working.
Against Nebraska, Purdue put drives of 7, 6 and 6 minutes together. I was impressed. Part of a good defense is good offense. I have a feeling there will be lots of possessions in this game due to the way these teams are built.
Just a general question: Mel Tucker. Good pedigree/resume. Seems to be a good recruiter. When he was at Colorado he flipped a Purdue committed 4 star DB. I know MSU went 2-5 last year. Bad offense. Bad defense. 100+ in the nation. Then a ton of transfers later, this season is 8-0 and offense and defense is top 30. Bad season last year? Lightning in a bottle this year? Seems like a little bit of both. Thoughts?
Man, I wish I had the answer to that question. Im sure the MSU Admin does too, because they are going to have to back up the money truck to keep him.
My current belief is that it's about 80% Tucker (and staff, it's not just Tucker. Huge upgrades at WR coach, RB coach and OC are really paying off) and 20% good fortune this year. Isnt it funny though, that good fortune tends to happen to people that work the hardest. Tucker has this team putting the work in. Good fortune and hard work can only take you so far and we are still limited by talent issues at OL, as well as experience issues at CB and one of the S positions.
I put almost no stock into what happened last year. He was hired late due to the late retirement of Dantonio. He had 3 days of Spring ball before it was canceled and then he had to try to install a new offensive and defensive system over zoom. Im betting there were players on the team that he couldn't even name last year. He just had absolutely no time with them. Just extremely tough circumstances last year. Too tough in my opinion.
I'm solidly on board with Tucker, or as we say "Tuck Comin". If I was in charge, I'd pay whatever it takes to keep him. I think he is the real deal and eventually will get us to the top. However as I previously said, this year's success has had a little more good fortune than usual. I predicted 6-6 for the season, up to 9-3 if everything went perfect. Im not going to move the goal post. I still think we could end up with 3 losses this year and I'd still be thrilled with the job he has done.
Last edited:
Also, as an aside, everybody brings up the transfers. ESPN seems to be unable to have a story on us without bringing up "40 new players" (which is a bit of an exaggeration). However, if you look at the two deeps, there aren't that many transfers on them. They include a RB transfer, a LT transfer, a LB transfer and a couple CB transfers. There are a few more on 3rd string.
Undoubtedly Walker and Crouch are making the biggest differences, but the rest aren't as pronounced as people would like you to believe, other than increasing depth and competition. The vast majority of the guys you will see on the field will be Dantonio recruits or Tucker freshman
Makes sense.
Dantonio was a good coach and recruited well. The team had talent when he left. Dantonio had MSU ranked the last 10 years straight. Went to 9 bowls in those years, 92 wins in those last 10 years.
I question why Mel Tucker really didn’t get his head coaching opportunity until Colorado. And off all places, Colorado? That part is really confusing. He’s 49 now, if he was so good, what took so long with all his resume and connections?
As for the money, Tucker is already making good money. $5.5M? Top 15 in pay in the country already I believe. Huge increase from what Colorado was paying him.
Frankly, as an outsider, I cannot connect the dots why he should be paid much more at this point. That’s why I’m a big fan of incentives. Incentivize the heck out of his contact! Have to show you can run a program, not just win some games in one year, if that makes sense.
The flip side, he takes another job that pays him $2 million more, MSU has to find a new coach. Sometimes it’s easier to pay than to start the process all over again.
"Deserve" is an interesting word. Im not sure any coaches deserve how much they make, but they make it nonetheless.
My point is that LSU, USC, etc. have no issue paying him $8 million to steal him. MSU has the money to keep him (as do all big ten schools), its just a matter of dedicating those resources.
$2 million more to a coach could lead to hundreds of millions more to the university in the long run. For example, MSU is trying to raise $30 million in donations to update facilities. Reports say they have received over $10 million between Saturday afternoon and today. Those donations (primarily one major one) don't come in without us being 8-0.
I'm not sure why a school like MSU would risk losing that over $2 million
For the record, my prediction was 6-6 if the defense was improved.
Here is the link to a thread with some of our predictions:
https://purdue.forums.rivals.com/threads/purdue-prediction.212691/#post-3065287
Now, if they go 7-5 does that make me a bad fan for underestimating them or a pragmatist for not setting up high expectations and fueling potential backlash against the coaching staff (who are still building a program from ashes) if those expectations are not met?
At least we knew more than the dynamite kid.
Didn't say it was a conspiracy. But unless there was another angle, we caught a break. It is a fallacy to say there has to be a conspiracy if there is a bad call. And I'll take that break with no apology.
Agreed. The "transformed roster" and portal angles are red flags for lazy journalism.
The year end AP & coaches rankings matter to 125+ teams who are not part of the post season invitational called a "playoff."
I just posted at least twice in this thread agreeing that the reversal was incorrect. But nice generalization about MSU fans, anyway. I'm sure Purdue fans have extraordinary qualities of logic and detachment not seen anywhere else in the conference.
I agree with you.. it seems that whenever a team loses their board goes up for grabs. If more people knew what to expect this would happen less and more fans would credit the other team after a loss.For the record, my prediction was 6-6 if the defense was improved.
Here is the link to a thread with some of our predictions:
https://purdue.forums.rivals.com/threads/purdue-prediction.212691/#post-3065287
Now, if they go 7-5 does that make me a bad fan for underestimating them or a pragmatist for not setting up high expectations and fueling potential backlash against the coaching staff (who are still building a program from ashes) if those expectations are not met?
At least we knew more than the dynamite kid.
when we lose you don’t see me on here MF-ing the entire operation because I knew we’d have games where we looked like we did against Wisconsin and Minnesota. It usually is people who were saying we’d do much better than 5-7/6-6 who start throwing everyone under the bus. We get 1 more win and I don’t care if we go 1-3 and look like crap.. they will have exceeded my expectations 😁😁😁
Similar threads
