1. This isn't the 90s Bulls. I've given up on "greater meanings" in terms of most singular sporting events. Most things are different from game to game until you see a pattern over a quarter or half of a season.
So I'm not going to overreact. I also don't want to under react. But let's point out a few things about Purdue's outstanding performance today regarding Nebraska:
a) They didn't have their best player, starting QB and leader. As long as I can remember, good or bad, Purdue has always been better against QBs who struggle to keep a play alive/be a threat to move the pocket/be a dual threat. A QB who can run or pass and keep plays alive is out? Regardless of opponent you can almost deduct 7 from the spread right off the bat.
b) Their pass defense is near the bottom of college football.
c) Because they were starting a QB who had attempted 18 passes, Purdue was able to start the game with a 3 DT alignment. If you can do that and cover the pass against Nebraska, that's a dream scenario.
The danger of looking for a greater permanent meaning would come when Northwestern and Iowa do not allow us to do c and are not as weak in regards to b.
Did I see a shift today? Yes! Purdue played a damn good game for what I've seen in the last 31 games.
2. They were aggressive.
a) Shoop, up until the score was 42-23, was aggressive. He must have figured out that if he's aggressive and loses, Burke doesn't have the balls to fire him anyway. I still think he has to go, and I still think that he doesn't know how to spread the field with his receivers... but if nothing else, this shows you that if you just change the OC to a competent aggressive OC.. with no other changes we'd already be much better. Does that mean I want no other changes? Not sure yet.
Now, Shoop has this thing he goes into. He hates doing his job for 60 minutes. He gets up a score on Marshall or tied with Bowling Green and he wants the game to be over right there. He plays not to lose and thinks he can run an entire quarter out. He appeared to have gotten out of that, but up 42-23, I totally felt in the offense that he decided THIS margin really is enough! This is NOT 3 points or 7 points! This is 19! I really can pack it in and hope the game is already won.
And then Nebraska held our offense to like 2 positions in 2 minutes sandwiched around a Nebraska TD. And thank god after that he ditched his non offense.
b) Uh, so anyone want to go back to when we were giving a mile long cushion underneath and tell me that we had to do that? Because today, we took a couple of senior corners and Clark, put them up in the receivers faces, took the underneath away and basically said, "if you beat us over the top you beat us." The result was how many interceptions? Exactly.
3. Other than a totally unnecessary and completely asinine roughing the passer call where either Replogle or Panfil had to push the QB down about 2 years after the play was over, I didn't see any of the idiot plays today. So props there. I thought Yancey could have laid out for that ball and I saw a drop, but overall, no playing like morons today.
By the way on Yancey not laying out, there needs to be a qualifier. That's terrible when you lose. But the point of a whole game is that when you do enough and make enough plays to win, then you're forgiven for a play like that. That's just how it works. Want a pass for not laying out for a ball? Make big play after big play down the sideline in a 55-45 win.. period.
4. If I was AD:
a) Shoop would go. Anything he could do here would be too little too late. Maybe if we ran the table and averaged 45 I'd consider it, but I really doubt that.
b) Hazell would go and I would hire Babers. That said, not sure the current AD can sell Babers. The reason why Hazell probably still has to go is that next year would be his last year, correct? That would mean this spring you either commit longer term or fire him. So I'd probably fire him strictly due to that circumstance. If I'm off a year, and please let me know, then I'd consider keeping him IF he fixes his staff big time.
c) If Hazell stays, I'd only keep Hudson if he COULD SELL ME on a really good DB coach who is going to fix this pass defense.
5. Blough did it. Let me ask you all this....
When was the last time a new QB came in and started and looked good with no film on him? All the time right? When was the last time any QB here came in, looked good, looked worse as coaches scouted him, AND THEN actually looked as good as Blough today on the other side? Curtis Painter?? Maybe Kyle Orton.
6. I always thought we'd beat Illinois. Today does nothing to adjust that. If we beat Indiana, I'll be impressed a "we're very slightly doing something we shouldn't be favored to do" kind of way. If we were to then get a win against either Iowa or NU, I'd be really impressed and call it a change of direction. If we run the table I'd be ecstatic.
My prediction?
3-9
everyone fired unless the only reason they aren't is because Burke is a moron.
So I'm not going to overreact. I also don't want to under react. But let's point out a few things about Purdue's outstanding performance today regarding Nebraska:
a) They didn't have their best player, starting QB and leader. As long as I can remember, good or bad, Purdue has always been better against QBs who struggle to keep a play alive/be a threat to move the pocket/be a dual threat. A QB who can run or pass and keep plays alive is out? Regardless of opponent you can almost deduct 7 from the spread right off the bat.
b) Their pass defense is near the bottom of college football.
c) Because they were starting a QB who had attempted 18 passes, Purdue was able to start the game with a 3 DT alignment. If you can do that and cover the pass against Nebraska, that's a dream scenario.
The danger of looking for a greater permanent meaning would come when Northwestern and Iowa do not allow us to do c and are not as weak in regards to b.
Did I see a shift today? Yes! Purdue played a damn good game for what I've seen in the last 31 games.
2. They were aggressive.
a) Shoop, up until the score was 42-23, was aggressive. He must have figured out that if he's aggressive and loses, Burke doesn't have the balls to fire him anyway. I still think he has to go, and I still think that he doesn't know how to spread the field with his receivers... but if nothing else, this shows you that if you just change the OC to a competent aggressive OC.. with no other changes we'd already be much better. Does that mean I want no other changes? Not sure yet.
Now, Shoop has this thing he goes into. He hates doing his job for 60 minutes. He gets up a score on Marshall or tied with Bowling Green and he wants the game to be over right there. He plays not to lose and thinks he can run an entire quarter out. He appeared to have gotten out of that, but up 42-23, I totally felt in the offense that he decided THIS margin really is enough! This is NOT 3 points or 7 points! This is 19! I really can pack it in and hope the game is already won.
And then Nebraska held our offense to like 2 positions in 2 minutes sandwiched around a Nebraska TD. And thank god after that he ditched his non offense.
b) Uh, so anyone want to go back to when we were giving a mile long cushion underneath and tell me that we had to do that? Because today, we took a couple of senior corners and Clark, put them up in the receivers faces, took the underneath away and basically said, "if you beat us over the top you beat us." The result was how many interceptions? Exactly.
3. Other than a totally unnecessary and completely asinine roughing the passer call where either Replogle or Panfil had to push the QB down about 2 years after the play was over, I didn't see any of the idiot plays today. So props there. I thought Yancey could have laid out for that ball and I saw a drop, but overall, no playing like morons today.
By the way on Yancey not laying out, there needs to be a qualifier. That's terrible when you lose. But the point of a whole game is that when you do enough and make enough plays to win, then you're forgiven for a play like that. That's just how it works. Want a pass for not laying out for a ball? Make big play after big play down the sideline in a 55-45 win.. period.
4. If I was AD:
a) Shoop would go. Anything he could do here would be too little too late. Maybe if we ran the table and averaged 45 I'd consider it, but I really doubt that.
b) Hazell would go and I would hire Babers. That said, not sure the current AD can sell Babers. The reason why Hazell probably still has to go is that next year would be his last year, correct? That would mean this spring you either commit longer term or fire him. So I'd probably fire him strictly due to that circumstance. If I'm off a year, and please let me know, then I'd consider keeping him IF he fixes his staff big time.
c) If Hazell stays, I'd only keep Hudson if he COULD SELL ME on a really good DB coach who is going to fix this pass defense.
5. Blough did it. Let me ask you all this....
When was the last time a new QB came in and started and looked good with no film on him? All the time right? When was the last time any QB here came in, looked good, looked worse as coaches scouted him, AND THEN actually looked as good as Blough today on the other side? Curtis Painter?? Maybe Kyle Orton.
6. I always thought we'd beat Illinois. Today does nothing to adjust that. If we beat Indiana, I'll be impressed a "we're very slightly doing something we shouldn't be favored to do" kind of way. If we were to then get a win against either Iowa or NU, I'd be really impressed and call it a change of direction. If we run the table I'd be ecstatic.
My prediction?
3-9
everyone fired unless the only reason they aren't is because Burke is a moron.
