Ohio State (4-1, 7-1) at Purdue (3-1, 4-3) Postgame

[Brutus Buckeye]

Minnesota was the most recent example of a team that played OSU tough, then went out and completely laid an egg the following week. 

[boilerbanger]

I am not buying that example, how about maybe OSU just isn't as good as you hope they are.  I would want someone who watched the Neb vs Minn to give a more accurate account of what went down before laying a blanket statement like that out there.  Weak sauce there.

[Brutus Buckeye]

 how about maybe OSU just isn't as good as you hope they are.

Oh yeah.
Purdue pounded that point home repeatedly on Saturday. Prison style.

[TyphonInc]

OK. Here is my frustration; comparing Meyer to Tressel:

If you can claim there are 4 types of outcomes for a game this is the order I enjoy them.
1) A Close Win
2) A Close Loss
3) A Blowout Win
.
.
.
10th) A Blowout Loss

Under Tressel I recall the majority of games being close wins, several blowouts, and the occasional close loss. I really liked Tressel Ball.

Under Meyer the majority of games are blowout wins, when it's a loss it's blowout loss, with the occasional close game. I don't like OSU Football under Meyer. It feels like if they can't blow a team out they give up, and I hate that "giving up" feeling way more than losing.

[Hawkinole]

Purdue is a growing concern in the Western Division. I don't think they are the same team they were early.

[jhetfield99]

The answer to your question is HELL YES.  Having played this game and coached it, nothing is more certain than the “ emotional” part of it.  Denying this would seem like teams could just play on paper.
How many times do we see it?  Was Auburn really better than Bama last year?  Was Iowa really 55-24 better than OSU last year.  It’s why the transitive property doesn’t work at all.
It has nothing to do with how “ good a team is”.  It is about what they are capable of, both good performance and bad.
 That’s why night time road games heavily favor the home team.
Most teams are capapble of Super crisp performances. It usually comes from the gut....a game you have circled on your calendar, where you actually respect that the opponent is really good but you are so focused and intense, it carries you to another level.
It’s like Patterson of TCU said after losing to OSU- something to the effect that this was the game they prepared for all summer and fall, and playing well and losing will be hard to come back from. I think PSU ha that night game white out circled as well, because of how they lost to OSU last year.
Purdue looked amazing last night, and it wasn’t a fluke, great coaching and highly motivated team and atmosphere. But that will likely be the best game they play all year.
Why do you think teams that meet twice often have different outcomes.
Make no mistake...in college football the variance between a team’s best and worst is quite wide, and mostly impacted by emotional factors and atmosphere.  

Gene Keady has one of my all-time favorite quotes about sports.  It applied here when Purdue crushed OSu.  It applied when Purdue gave us 31 in the 1st half to a Northwestern squad that would lose it's next 3.
"It's not who you play, it's when you play them."

[jhetfield99]

I also thought that part of what caused a problem for Ohio State was that all of those stalled drives were early in the game.

Purdue was up 7-0, OSU only managed a FG. Purdue was up 7-3, OSU got to the red zone and missed a FG. Purdue finally extended to 14-3, halftime.

Purdue gives OSU the ball to start the 2nd, they drive to the red zone and only manage a FG, now down 14-6. Purdue responds with a TD, 21-6. OSU drives to the 2 yard line on the next drive, but turns over on downs, still 21-6.

At this point, OSU starts getting one-dimensional, because time is ticking and they need to start scoring. That made them tight and easier to defend, and allowed Purdue to spend time focusing on rushing Haskins.

But those first four trips to the red zone only gave 6 points, and in that time period Purdue only managed 21 of their eventual 49. Had OSU, say, made their three FG's and then gotten a TD on that 4th & goal from the 2 yard line, we're looking at a 21-16 game.

I think if you go into the 4th quarter at 21-16 rather than 21-6, this endgame plays out much differently. But down 21-6, Purdue was feeling confident and OSU was feeling desperate.

Great line up.  Those pass break ups in the endzone by former walkon Blackmon were absolutely HUGE.
In addition in the stands so many times we were yelling 'what the hell is Urban doing?'  They didn't truly go down field until they were down 3 scores with around 10 mins remaining.  And on D, their set ups on both of those trap draws by DJ Knox was pathetic.
I really liked a couple of the times I noticed them putting a safety and then LB on Rondale Moore.  ummm yep, GREAT call there!!
Nick Holt and Brohm were 2 moves ahead the entire game.  I really have no clue what film Urban and his staff were watching this week.  This isn't being cocky, this is flat out serious.  What the hell was OSU doing out there X and O wise?  Was the staff burnt out?  3 consecutive years of having a 29+ pt loss says something is up.  Urban didn't get blown out at Florida like this, did he?
Purdue had way more want to in this game and super atmosphere to back it up, but OSU craps 4 and 5 star athletes, this shouldn't happen.  While not half of their starters, about half of this Purdue team is made up of 4 consecutive 12th place or lower recruiting classes under Darrell Hazell.  I kept screaming "are we playing Nebraska" to the chagrin of a couple of Buckeyes within earshot each time OSU made absolutely crippling dumb penalties.
We'll see if Purdue can stay humble and go win at place they haven't since I think 2006, and haven't beaten with a winning record since I think Saban coached them when Tiller went 3-0 vs the king.

[medinabuckeye1]

Way upthread I asked how Ohio State managed to throw for ~500 yards and only score 20 points.  Much of the discussion here has focused on Ohio State's difficulties converting chances to points and The OZone (tOSU fan site) has an article that really puts this in perspective.  

They consider a first down inside the opponent's 40 to be what they call a "scoring chance".  In the game Saturday night Ohio State had one TD without a first down inside Purdue's 40: Ohio State's first TD came on 2nd and 1 from the 32 after a first down on the Purdue 41.  Purdue had three TD's without a first down inside tOSU's 40: their fourth TD was a 42 yard run, their sixth TD was a 43 yard pass, and their final TD was a pick-6.  

That is a pretty glaring 21-7 advantage for Purdue in TD's without a first down inside the opponent's 40 but the Buckeyes could easily have made up for that if they had been able to capitalize on their scoring chances:

• Purdue had four drives that included a first down inside the tOSU 40:  On those four drives they scored four TD's.  
• Ohio State had SEVEN drives that included a first down inside the PU 40:  On those seven drives they:

• Made a FG from the PU 6
• Missed a FG from the PU 15
• Made a FG from the PU 6
• Lost the Ball on Downs at the PU 2
• Punted after gaining ZERO yards on a three-and-out from the PU 37
• Scored a TD on 4th and 5 from the PU 34 after having a first down at the PU 39
• Ran out of time at the PU 17

Even the ONE TD that Ohio State did score on a "scoring chance" only happened because it was late in the game and the Buckeyes were down 35-13.  In a normal situation the Buckeyes (or any team) would either punt or try a 51 yard FG when facing 4th and 5 at the opponent's 34.  

That is just abysmal.  I also think that @bwarbiany 's point is spot on.  The drive where Ohio State lost the ball on downs at the PU 2 started with 23:36 to go in the game and ended with a little under 20 minutes to play.  That was the Buckeye's fourth (and last) trip inside the PU 15.  They only got six points out of those four trips inside the PU 15 and thus trailed 21-6 with just over a quarter to play.  Had the Buckeyes scored a TD and two FG's on the first three then it would have been 21-13 heading into that drive and the Buckeyes would have obviously kicked the easy FG on 4th and Goal from the PU 2 to make it a 21-16 game.  

Ohio State has got to get the Redzone issues fixed on both sides of the ball.  I don't know that they can, but if they do, they can get back to being a contender and this game will be nothing but a blip.  If they can't, they'll struggle with just about every game remaining.  

[medinabuckeye1]

Expanding on the above (as if that wasn't a long enough post):  Through the loss on downs at the PU 2, each team had seven drives not counting tOSU's one-play 27 second possession at the end of the first half.  Purdue had three TD's and their other four drives were:

• A one first down drive of 23 yards to the PU 40.  
• A three-and-out to the PU 45.  
• A three-and-out to the PU 42.  
• A one first down drive of 32 yards to the tOSU 41.  

Ohio State's seven drives to that point were:

• A three-and-out to the tOSU 24.  
• A two first down, eight play drive of 33 yards to the PU 42.  
• A three first down, six play drive of 48 yards to the PU 6 for a FG.  
• A two first down, nine play drive of 32 yards to the tOSU 39.  
• A five first down, 16 play drive of 83 yards to the PU 15 for a missed FG.  
• A three first down, 10 play drive of 69 yards to the PU 6 for a FG.  
• A four first down, 11 play drive of 73 yards to the PU 2.  

Those last three really stand out to me.  In total those three drives were 12 first downs, 37 plays, 225 yards . . . and three points.  Ugh.  You just can't afford to come up empty on scoring chances like those.  

[FearlessF]

very similar to Purdue's win in Lincoln

Huskers with 259 rushing and 323 passing.  just didn't get the ball into the endzone.

1 INT, 0 for 1 on FGs, 0 for 3 on 4th down, 

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you think OSU ever gave up in the 4th? It had been a 1-2 score game for so long and then snowballed so fast.
I guess I'm asking for a fan's evaluation of the team's "rise to the occasion" or "self-preservation" skills to-date. From here, they appear to be lacking. But I could be mistaking other circumstances (e.g., injuries) for that.

[MaximumSam]

There was some fluky stuff in the game - Purdue had that weird fumble that turned 3rd and 6 into a first down and led to a touchdown.  Purdue faked a field goal that later turned into a touchdown.  OSU had two roughing calls that turned Purdue punting situations into later touchdowns.  And Purdue had a pick six.  That coupled with OSU not being able to score in the red zone turned a close statistical game into a wide score.

[MaximumSam]

Do you think OSU ever gave up in the 4th? It had been a 1-2 score game for so long and then snowballed so fast.
I guess I'm asking for a fan's evaluation of the team's "rise to the occasion" or "self-preservation" skills to-date. From here, they appear to be lacking. But I could be mistaking other circumstances (e.g., injuries) for that.

I think it's more they can't run the ball and don't play very sound defense, which is a poor combination for gentle fourth quarters.

[Cincydawg]

Upsets often result from 5-6-7 pivotal plays that went to the underdog while the favorite can't connect on critical plays in the RZ.

Being so unable to run the ball stands out to me though.