• The KillerFrogs

Rivals: Here are 10 things you need to know after Purdue’s 34-13 loss to TCU

Wexahu

Full Member
We won...but against a middle of the road big 10 team that was depleted by injuries.

Imagine what would happen if we had to play a big 10 team at full strength. If this was your first post regarding the big 10, nobody would care. When it is your 1,000th, we all get it.

Right, and some of you think that is proof that we have a really good if not great team. That is some really weird logic if you think I am the one propping up the Big 10 by what I said. And I imagine if we played one of the better Big 10 teams at full strength it would have been a more difficult game. Duh.

It was just a desperate reach by you. That's ok, you're not the first.
 

Mean Purple

Active Member
Knee jerk reactions are funny. Now since we beat Purdue everyone should think we are a great football team? Still a lot to prove before anyone should think we have a "great" team. We played a middle-of-the-pack Big 10 West team who was missing about 5 starters, including their QB and best defensive player, and we beat them in convincing fashion. What does that mean? I'm not sure but I'm not willing to call us a great team, or even a "good" team yet until we play a few more games.

BTW, responding to VAFroggie, not you as i agree with your point.
yeah, watching the media and fans the last few days (not just the game we played, but many of the games played) and some of the reaction is a little early for sure. There is a lot of football left to play. Texas looks good, but they have played one power 5 team, and lost. OU's big game so far was Houston, not UCLA. We'll start seeing where we are at over the next couple of weeks. I think our conference will be pretty competitive. But until someone knocks off OU, hard to say who is in the running with them.
 

Mean Purple

Active Member
Right, and some of you think that is proof that we have a really good if not great team. That is some really weird logic if you think I am the one propping up the Big 10 by what I said. And I imagine if we played one of the better Big 10 teams at full strength it would have been a more difficult game. Duh.

It was just a desperate reach by you. That's ok, you're not the first.
I don't think folks automatically think we are great on that win. I think pretty much most folks here see the need for improvement on the passing game. Opinions vary on what that is (qb vs rcvr issues). I know Purdue had a starting qb out, bu the back up was recruited for a reason and he actually made a heck of an effort. Having the starter may not have made too much difference because our secondary had guys covered up really well.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
I don't think folks automatically think we are great on that win. I think pretty much most folks here see the need for improvement on the passing game. Opinions vary on what that is (qb vs rcvr issues). I know Purdue had a starting qb out, bu the back up was recruited for a reason and he actually made a heck of an effort. Having the starter may not have made too much difference because our secondary had guys covered up really well.

Fair enough. But you have to admit the combination of repeatedly hammering home the point that the Big 10 sucks - especially the Big 10 West (or "sux" I should say) and then all of the sudden thinking we're all that for beating a beat up middle-of-the-pack at best Big 10 West team is some strange logic.

For what it's worth, I think the conference bashing is a little ridiculous and kind of pointless. Every league has good teams and bad teams every year. Some years leagues are a little down, some years they are a little up.
 

Mean Purple

Active Member
Fair enough. But you have to admit the combination of repeatedly hammering home the point that the Big 10 sucks - especially the Big 10 West (or "sux" I should say) and then all of the sudden thinking we're all that for beating a beat up middle-of-the-pack at best Big 10 West team is some strange logic.

For what it's worth, I think the conference bashing is a little ridiculous and kind of pointless. Every league has good teams and bad teams every year. Some years leagues are a little down, some years they are a little up.
oh, come on, Wex, all in good fun!
but, that said,
agreed, but I'm not gonna stop using the term :)
 

Mean Purple

Active Member
Oh, I know. I actually wasn't sure it was you who used that term but I thought it was.
Also, and I got caught in meetings all day, but did you see the end of the Mich State game?
I saw the guy rally up and thought it was a penalty, but they did not call on the retry. Then I hear this morning that he PAC 12 office released a statement saying they missed the call.
No telling if the guy would have made it on the 3rd kick, or if they would have won in overtime, but that is just another total screw up on a call by the PAC 12 crews to make more heads spin. they had some doozies last year.

And I am waiting for this new improved Mich State offense they were claiming in the offseason. Frustrating game to watch.
 

Palliative Care

Active Member
Our fans are really not all thinking how great we are now that we beat Purdue. (Well some maybe but eventually they will sober up.)

They are relieved that we played better than in the first game but despite scoring 39 and 34 points in our first two games we are not on an offensive level with the best in our league. Actually we are far from say having an offence or a QB like OU. Still improvement is a good thing.

It is also a good thing that we are not playing the top teams in the Big 12 for awhile. Our offense really needs the work.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
Also, and I got caught in meetings all day, but did you see the end of the Mich State game?
I saw the guy rally up and thought it was a penalty, but they did not call on the retry. Then I hear this morning that he PAC 12 office released a statement saying they missed the call.
No telling if the guy would have made it on the 3rd kick, or if they would have won in overtime, but that is just another total screw up on a call by the PAC 12 crews to make more heads spin. they had some doozies last year.

And I am waiting for this new improved Mich State offense they were claiming in the offseason. Frustrating game to watch.

Did not see the game but saw the highlight at the end. The main thing I noticed was Herm Edwards giving an overly dramatic, overly enthusiastic and overly fake sympathetic handshake to Dantonio as only Herm Edwards can do, and Dantonio looking at him like he wanted to punch him in the face. I don't blame him either, Edwards is pretty full of himself.
 
Knee jerk reactions are funny. Now since we beat Purdue everyone should think we are a great football team? Still a lot to prove before anyone should think we have a "great" team. We played a middle-of-the-pack Big 10 West team who was missing about 5 starters, including their QB and best defensive player, and we beat them in convincing fashion. What does that mean? I'm not sure but I'm not willing to call us a great team, or even a "good" team yet until we play a few more games.

BTW, responding to VAFroggie, not you as i agree with your point.
Yep, knee jerk reactions are funny. Like your over-reaction to him using the word "great."

I understood it as him recommending that Purdue players use the term "great" when describing the team they lost to. It only makes them look better for saying that.

As a player, who would you rather lose to...a great team, or a crappy team?
 

MN Frog

Active Member
For those that played football, what part of the offense is easier to improve on as the year goes by? A stagnant running game or a sub par passing game? I presume a passing game would be the easier of the two to improve but curious of others more informed opinions.
 

Mean Purple

Active Member
For those that played football, what part of the offense is easier to improve on as the year goes by? A stagnant running game or a sub par passing game? I presume a passing game would be the easier of the two to improve but curious of others more informed opinions.
May be a better question to ask a coach. They just see more. At least that you understood when you put a helmet on.
That said, there are some variables involved. Obviously, qb, line play, rcvr play, backs. And they can impact both passing and running.
If I'm a rcvr and don't hold my block, or even make my block, out on the edge, kinda hard to say it is a running back issue on that play. If a qb throws one off the back foot and it sails high, kinda had to pin on rcvr ... unless the rcvr is not working for the ball. (Cause some qb's can throw with both feet off the ground ... won't be the most accurate ... but can't expect everything to land in your hand like a soft butterfly.)

I realize that does not answer your question, just thinking out loud. I would say it depends on the situation. As for postions that improve better ... qb and offensive line. Lines always seem improve and gel as they go along.
 

Purp

Active Member
Here's the thing about this game. Both teams had injuries. To my knowledge, none of Purdue's significant injuries were on their OL or DL. The lines are where they got their arses handed to them for 60 minutes. That wouldn't have been any different with their QB or other injured guys playing.

I understand why Purdue fans would talk about injuries. It's the most predictable thing in the world, especially since their QB was one of them. If both teams had been 100% healthy, though, there's no reason to think we wouldn't have still won by 3 or 4 TD's.
I think Lorenzo Neal is a starting DT for them who was out for injury. I'm sure he would have helped a little, but I'm not sure even he would have made a huge difference. He's good, but not Blacklock/Bethley good.
 

tcumaniac

Full Member
I agree with why they are saying that and, if their starting QB was playing, it would have been a closer game.

However it highlights our depth.

We played a freshman QB, they played a redshirt freshman QB.

CBs out: Lewis, Daniels, Wallace
LBs out: Montreal Wilson, Ben Wilson
WRs out: Taye Barber, Mikel Barkley

That is four starters.

We played a freshman 4 th string CB, a freshman 3rd string LB, and a few guys who are allegedly wide receivers.
“Liked” for the “allegedly wide receivers” part.
 

LVH

Active Member
For those that played football, what part of the offense is easier to improve on as the year goes by? A stagnant running game or a sub par passing game? I presume a passing game would be the easier of the two to improve but curious of others more informed opinions.

Stagnant running game because passing offense is so dependent on everyone being on the same page, which means you have to have good continuity. That continuity is built up over time, over summer offseasons and practices.
 

Froggish

Active Member
For those that played football, what part of the offense is easier to improve on as the year goes by? A stagnant running game or a sub par passing game? I presume a passing game would be the easier of the two to improve but curious of others more informed opinions.

I’m no expert but I did coach high school football many years ago..The easier one to improve really depends on your personnel. However, typically when your struggling to do one or the other it’s because your OLine is struggling with principles or technique. I always say that if you’ll improve the play up front many of your problems everywhere else will typically resolve themselves. Having said that, if the talent isn’t there, your just going to struggle no matter what...
 

Froglaw

Full Member
Scru them:

"TCU was like a Big 10 team".

WTH: No TCU is like a Big 12 team that eats mid-level Power Five teams and spits them out.

Geez, Wisconsin, Oregon, Ole Miss, Cal, Stanford, etc.

That really twists my pretzel.
 
Top