Second viewing thoughts and grades: Purdue

Addazio didn't think effort or overconfidence was an issue. I can't speak to the team mood, but I don't feel like the effort was great. Plenty of missed tackles. Plenty of drops. Some Oline breakdowns and even a potential TD where the announcers called out Sweeney for lack of effort. It was a frustrating game to watch back because I think BC should have dominated that game. We have more talent. We just didn't show it on Saturday.

Offense: D

I don't think Loefler did Brown any favors, but AB was not great Saturyday. Not adjusting on the batted ball. Missing some open men. A few bad throws. He also has running lanes that he is not taking. Perry was fine but what can you make of garbage time?

While those around him did not have their best game, neither did Dillon. Purdue often had nine guys in the box, so Dillon would approach the hole only to see three guys waiting a few yards back. Instead of running into them, he would try to bust it outside. That didn't work. He does have the speed or change of direction to make something of those broken plays. He needs to hit those holes hard, get his three yards and wear the defense down. Eventually one or more of those first reads will become something more. Levy was fine. Glines was fine.

The WRs and TEs didn't help Brown much. Smith had a drop. Sweeney did. White did. In a game when nothing can get going one or two drops is a huge momentum killer. Lewis had some nice moments. None of them blocked all that well, especially the Tight Ends.

The OLine still struggled when trying to pull off the stretches. Purdue shot right through. They were much better with the simple power stuff. The counters weren't as effective as they had been against Wake. They also all need to work on getting the DLine's arms down.

I don't feel like Loeffler called a very good game. Why not stick with what was working early in the year? There is too much variety in the run game without enough consistency or quality. Give Brown easier decisions and get him out of the pocket.

Defense: C-

We have two great DEs, but are really hurting inside. Once again there is no pressure up the middle and teams are running right at them. I don't know why Smith is not playing at his previous decent level. They are rotating guys in but no one is really stepping up. Karafa is ok, but he is not collapsing the pocket or disrupting the running game.

The LBs got killed in the passing game. They were confused on crossing routes and often looked a step slow. I don't know if Strachan has the speed needed to cover slot guys. When nothing was happening, they decided to give McDuffie more snaps and he looked good.

The DBs missed a lot of tackles. Neither Harris nor Denis had their best games. I feel for Sebastian. Purdue clearly targeted him and avoided Cheevers. Sebastian needs help or maybe some of the younger guys need more snaps.

The D had some nice moments but couldn't get off the field or adjust. When a player is getting burned over and over like Sebastian, where is Reid and staff making an adjustment?

Special Teams: B

It was a shame to waste Walker's big day. He did his part to set up the offense and was aggressive and sure handed.

BC's punting was good, with good placement on most occasions.

BC's punt and kick coverage was fine.

The missed PAT was not a factor in the final score, but that needs to be cleaned up as soon as possible.

Overall: C-

The play was lackluster, the adjustments questionable and the schemes were problematic. But do you want to know two signs that show Purdue is well coached and BC might not be? Not only did they plan and prepare their DLine to bat down Brown's balls, but they also got our guys to jump offsides repeatedly. Clearly Purdue saw something in scouting BC. Clearly they added a wrinkle to take advantage. And clearly their guys executed those game- and opponent-specific assignments.

Talent is always going to be primary. Addazio has more talent than Purdue and might be a better recruiter and developer than Brohm. But those little things. The little details. Those are the things that always make a difference in one or two games a year.

I think all of BC's offensive problems are fixable. I am hoping some areas of the D can mature quickly. But I also hope that Addazio figures out the right combination of coaching and managing so that he can avoid these sorts of games in the future.

When it goes bad it goes really bad for BC

Beyond the winstreak snap or losing to a winless team, there was also frustration in getting blown out. BC wasn't even in position to win once Purdue scored in the second half. It speaks to lack of adjustments and game management issues. But it is also a pattern for Addazio and even for BC. In Addazio's 34 losses at BC, 16 have been by 14 or more points. Equally frustrating was that this was Addazio's 11th loss at BC when scoring less than 14 points.

Why does losing by one point vs 20 matter? When you play close games, more of them are going to go your way. When you are not in it, the whole stadium might as well go home...especially given Addazio's comeback record.

Unfortunately for BC fans, this isn't all that new. TOB -- the last BC coach to make it to six seasons -- also had a bad blowout record. Through his first six seasons at BC, he had 17 blow out losses. (As a glimmer of hope, he only had four more blowout losses in his final four seasons at BC.) Maybe it will get better for Addazio. Or maybe we will just start winning again and blowouts won't be on my mind.


Here is Addazio after the game.

Boilermakers burst BC's bubble

Exposed is a strong word, but that is sort of how it feels. Purdue made BC one dimensional on offense or one dimensional on D. At least the Special Teams played better.

It will take a lot for BC to get ranked again. Addazio will have to spend a lot of time regrouping.

Second viewing thoughts and grades as soon as I can get to them.

In-game comments post: Purdue

Another road test. Can BC keep its strong start going? We will find out.

Leave your thoughts and comments below.

You can also follow me on Twitter.

BC-Purdue preview

Can you call a Big Ten road game, a trap game? That's what this feels like. I know Purdue is 0-3, but they lost their first game by four, their second by one and their last by three. That's bad luck. They could just as easily be 3-0. I hope BC is ready and not taking this for granted.

What's on my mind (not totally related to this game) 
This might have been more important in the BC blogging and message board world, than the fanbase at large, but earlier this week The Heights published an article that said Addazio was calling the plays in the beginning of last year before handing it over to Loeffler. Then the O took off. BC -- via Sports Information -- said the article wasn't true and The Heights took it down. I don't know if the contents of the article are true. I can't even link to it now since the Heights pulled it. My bigger concern and complaint is that the Athletic Department even has to fight these sorts of battles with the student newspaper. I am all for accuracy, but too often BC coaches (past and present) are worried about perception and credit. My suggestion to them is to stop paying attention to what is being said and written about them and focus on the players and the game. You work in one of the true objective professions where your success is measured in a public way. Don't get caught up in what the crowd thinks. It is not productive. Just win and watch how little the message boards, blogs and twitter even matter. Don't worry about credit. If you truly want to recognize the difference makers between winning and losing, shine more light on the players. They never get enough credit. I know Sports Information is just doing their job, but come on, let one Heights article fade away and worry about promoting the Purdue game.

Three Simple Keys
1. Be stubborn with the run. I imagine, like everyone else, Purdue is going to sell out to stop the run. BC needs to keep pounding it anyway. Good things will happen and we will break some big plays. I also want to see BC run so they can control the tempo and clock. Last week our D was worn out and tired. Purdue will try the same thing if we don't control the clock.
2. No Special Teams mistakes. This is obvious but still important.
3. The DLine needs to win upfront. I don't care if Purdue runs one play or 100. Our DTs need to step up and keep them from running wild.

Gambling Notes
-- Brohm is 4-5 at home while at Purdue
-- BC is 1-7 on the road against Big Ten schools
-- Addazio is 19-6 in non-conference games at BC
The current line is BC-6.5

Scoreboard Watching
Notre Dame-Wake Forest. I know Addazio praised Wake, but I don't think they are that good. How they play against the Irish will tell us if we beat a good team or got fortunate that mistakes didn't hurt us because Wake was so weak.

Factoid
With the game, BC will have now played 10 of the 14 Big Ten schools. We have yet to play Nebraska, Wisconsin, Illinois and Minnesota.

I hope to see... 
Dillon used in the passing game. People will be expecting the play action. Now on his release get him the ball as a pass catcher. It will lead to big plays.

BC is in trouble if...
Zach Allen doesn't have a big game. I know he is the focus of protection, but we still need him to make plays and get them off schedule.

Overall
I think this will be another shootout. I think like last week, BC gets a lead and then it goes back and forth for much of the game. There will be a late turnover that helps BC close it out in the 4th quarter.
Final Score: BC 38, Purdue 30

Some times and scheduling stuff

A short little collection of important times and dates for Football and Basketball...

We now know the start time for the Purdue Football game this fall. It will be noon on one of the ESPN family of networks. It seems like we play less often at noon than we used to. This game is going to be a must win.

BC Basketball will play Minnesota as part of the ACC/Big Ten Challenge. The game will be at Conte. BC also added a road game at Texas A&M to the schedule.

Half empty or half full? BC schedules two game series with Purdue

I am glad BC scheduled a two-game series with Purdue. I've been complaining about soft scheduling and the flimsy excuses for our recent schedules, so I view booking a Power 5 team as the right step. Doing it in advance (the series is for 2018 and 2020) also solidifies BC's Power 5 requirement for the next few years (Notre Dame is scheduled for 2017 and 2019). Great news! Congrats to Brad Bates for booking the series! We get to play and Big Ten team we've never faced! Give us all ya got, Boilermakers!

Yet for all the excitement, there is still a sense of cynicism in this series. Right now Purdue is a very bad team. Arguably better than BC, but still bad. We have no idea what they will be like in 2018 or 2020, but the odds are they won't be great. It will take a long time for Darrell Hazell or more likely his successor, to become good again. Maybe it will be by 2018, but unlikely. Even if Hazell is fired next year, 2018 will only be Year 2 of the new coach's tenure. Purdue's situation certainly factored into the scheduling. Addazio and Bates used their first Power 5 matchup not as a chance to test the team or excite their fanbase, but to win a game. They are not the first to schedule like this and won't be the last but that doesn't make it fun.

When BC scheduled the USC series, they were still a dynasty. When we finally played them, we caught them in a down cycle and went 1-1. But we still were able to rally around playing and beating the Trojans. Even if we go 2-0 against Purdue, I don't see the series providing any residual benefit beyond meeting the Power 5 mandate. It is a wasted opportunity. Few will get excited about a trip to West Lafayette. While good academically, Purdue is not considered a peer school. Indiana is not a focal point in recruiting.

I hope the series with Purdue is great. I also hope this is just the first step in more exciting scheduling. And I hope BC wins and I hope I am wrong about BC's motivations in scheduling.