Talkin' 'bout Purdue!

[Mavric]

It's stunning that Nebraska had a 62-38 pass-run ratio in that game. I can't believe they went with 22 passes to 4 runs after Purdue scored to make it 42-16.

This is true.

However, it also ignores much of how the game got to be 42-16 in the first place.

 

[AFhusker]

Makes one wonder how NU outscored Purdue 79-21 in those two Armstrong wins versus the 55-44 loss this past season. Perhaps it has something to do with 39 attempts over two games versus 48 attempts during one.

That said, I don't think Fyfe was terrible, as much as I think he was put in a terrible position.

30 of those passes came in the second half, which Nebraska trailed by at least two touchdowns for a large majority of the time. Pretty sure if we were up 14 (2014) or 21 (2013) points going into half, Fyfe wouldn't have needed to throw the ball that many times. You can't just look at three years history and say that the stats prove we should've run more - completely different circumstances. And that's an actual fact.

You know it is frowned upon by using facts and common sense to disprove the "run the ball 80% of the time" crowd wrong in this forum.

 

[cm husker]

It's not just about a % of plays. It's about HOW you run the ball. And what I've seen from this staff so far is pretty unimaginative.

 

[teachercd]

The Purdue game lives on!

 

[AFhusker]

It's not just about a % of plays. It's about HOW you run the ball. And what I've seen from this staff so far is pretty unimaginative.

The defense and the situation also dictates HOW we run the ball. We don't have the 1990's quality OL or RB's anymore (shocker) so we can't run the ball every play and be successful. So when the other teams decide to take the run away from us, (which was every teams game plan last year) knowing that our QB is turnover prone, they take that chance. It leads to some big plays by TA, and it leads to some turnovers, but it is taking what the defense is giving you. It is going to be that way until we get better play at QB/OL/RB. Hopefully that comes soon and we will be able to score TD's anyway we want, but are not there yet.

As for the Purdue game, when NU fell behind so quickly with a back up QB, they could do two things, the first is to concede defeat and run the ball and the clock out. They way they could get out of town while pretty much giving up any chance of a comeback. The second is to pass the ball and try to make a comeback. The down side is that with a backup QB, the chance of more turnovers is higher than just running the ball.

I myself would rather give myself a chance to win than literally running out the clock and conceding defeat, but to each their own.

 

[AFhusker]

The Purdue game lives on!

It always will until Riley becomes successful here. If he fails, then it will be brought up like the Kansas game is for Callahan.

 

[teachercd]

The Purdue game lives on!

It always will until Riley becomes successful here. If he fails, then it will be brought up like the Kansas game is for Callahan.

Man...was that the one where KU put up 70?

 

[TheSker]

As for the Purdue game, when NU fell behind so quickly with a back up QB, they could do two things, the first is to concede defeat and run the ball and the clock out. They way they could get out of town while pretty much giving up any chance of a comeback. The second is to pass the ball and try to make a comeback.

Running the ball is conceding defeat? Against Purdue's vaunted run defense?

Pinball football is soooo Callahan v.2 it's not even funny.

 

[The Dude]

I'm glad we conceded defeat when UCLA went up early.

 

[AFhusker]

I'm glad we conceded defeat when UCLA went up early.

They were two different games with two different QB's. It is easier to run against a team that had a DL that averaged 250lbs than it was against teams who's DL weren't ravished by injures. If anything that shows that the coaching staff took what was given to them. But a lot on here just want to complain just to complain.

 

[The Dude]

Eh? Purdue had -by far- the worst rush defense in the conference.

 

[BRV920]

Pretty sure somebody posted in another thread that Purdue's DL was about the same size as UCLA's. The difference is that we didn't abandon the run after we got down.

 

[teachercd]

They mythology of the Purdue game grows...I remember some dude posting how Purdue even had a higher star ranking across the board over Nebraska as an attempt to explain that loss.

I am gonna rewatch the game right now...

 

[cm husker]

I'm glad we conceded defeat when UCLA went up early.

They were two different games with two different QB's. It is easier to run against a team that had a DL that averaged 250lbs than it was against teams who's DL weren't ravished by injures. If anything that shows that the coaching staff took what was given to them. But a lot on here just want to complain just to complain.

Purdues DL was too good to run against? That's the argument you're going with?

 

[Elf]

Pretty sure somebody posted in another thread that Purdue's DL was about the same size as UCLA's. The difference is that we didn't abandon the run after we got down.

Our defense played a FAR better game against UCLA than it did against Purdue. The defense gave up 55 points to the Boilermakers, why isn't that the issue that we talk about? We also gave up 183 rushing yards and 274 yards through the air.