MSU was up 21-0 on its opening possession, and went three and out.
Can anyone remember the play selection for those three plays?
The second-down play was Monty Madaris's drop over the middle.
On third down, Cook missed badly on a pass over the middle and Purdue dropped an interception at about the 35-yard line. If that guy had intercepted the pass, he would have had a real good chance to return it for a touchdown.
Up 21-0, in those conditions, after a scare like that, 96 pct of the coaching staffs in America would say, "Okay, let's not help them come back. We're running the ball well. Let's buckle it down and keep it on the ground as much as possible."
I understand that philosophy, and it carried over to three third-and medium run plays that weren't successful. In retrospect, should MSU have thrown beyond the sticks on one or two of those plays? Hindsight being 20/20, perhaps so.
But that near pick-six and the second-down drop, both of which were influenced by the conditions, had an impact on play calling the rest of the way.
If MSU had tried to throw more, the clock wouldn't have run as much and MSU might not have driven for the field goal drive in the fourth quarter, and Purdue might have had enough time for one more drive at the end. So throwing the ball more might have backfired somewhere along the way. We can't assume that throwing the ball more would have automatically resulted in first downs.
Can anyone remember the play selection for those three plays?
The second-down play was Monty Madaris's drop over the middle.
On third down, Cook missed badly on a pass over the middle and Purdue dropped an interception at about the 35-yard line. If that guy had intercepted the pass, he would have had a real good chance to return it for a touchdown.
Up 21-0, in those conditions, after a scare like that, 96 pct of the coaching staffs in America would say, "Okay, let's not help them come back. We're running the ball well. Let's buckle it down and keep it on the ground as much as possible."
I understand that philosophy, and it carried over to three third-and medium run plays that weren't successful. In retrospect, should MSU have thrown beyond the sticks on one or two of those plays? Hindsight being 20/20, perhaps so.
But that near pick-six and the second-down drop, both of which were influenced by the conditions, had an impact on play calling the rest of the way.
If MSU had tried to throw more, the clock wouldn't have run as much and MSU might not have driven for the field goal drive in the fourth quarter, and Purdue might have had enough time for one more drive at the end. So throwing the ball more might have backfired somewhere along the way. We can't assume that throwing the ball more would have automatically resulted in first downs.
