2017 Weekly Boiler Stat Summaries: Week 1, v. Louisville (@ Lucas Oil Stadium)

This year, I'm going to be debuting a new feature of a weekly summary, by the numbers, of the previous weekend's Purdue football game. It may also include general musings on the season and/or thoughts about the next opponent. Starting with the opener in Indianapolis against the Louisville Cardinals...

Overall Performance

In a game where Louisville was favored heavily, Purdue nearly shocked the Cardinals. Alone (and not including the fact the Boilers lost the game towards the end rather than Louisville winning it) that is impressive for a team with few expectations for this season. But comparing the performance of the Boilers to the expectation of points scored by (Football Outsider's Offensive S&P+) and against (Defensive S&P+) by last year's Louisville squad something rather interesting reveals itself...

Figure 1, Score Compared to 2016 S&P+ for Louisville (1,2)

...Purdue played significantly better than an average team would have been expected to. Note for this analysis defensive points are calculated as the points allowed by the defense minus those the defense scored (i.e. the 28 allowed points minus the points from the pick six) and the offensive points include those resulting from an offense drive. Purdue not only allowed over 10 points under that expected of an average defense (against the 10th rated offense), but the Boilermaker offense performed about as expected for an average offensive, against a defense that was rated 19th. While a single game (particularly one with a combined 7 turnovers) is a rather small and fluky sample size, it gives some level of optimism for competitive play moving forward (3).  

Louisville, and their 10th rated offensive returning electric Heisman trophy winner Lamar Jackson would have been expected to run away on offense, with Coach Brohm's Boilers, lacking talent in the receiver corps and still installing their offense, struggling to keep up. Instead, the Boilers kept up with Louisville. Louisville had the ball 14 times (excluding their final possession, a QB kneel) and the Boilers matching those 14 possessions. With their 28 points, Purdue averaged 2 points per possession; Louisville only barely out paced that at 2.07 points per possession (3).

Lorenzo Neal's Ejection Hurt

Purdue led the Cardinals 21-13 with 6:05 remaining in the third quarter when on a 1st and 10, a hit on Lamar Jackson from defensive tackle Lorenzo Neal was called, probably erroneously, a roughing the passer penalty. On a review by the officials, it became a targeting call, as Neal's helmet hit Jackson in the jaw, and reared his head back. Neal was ejected. While I'm not sure the roughing the passer was the right call, I do believe with targeting calls in cases of doubt the call should be made, as it incentives placers and coaches to do as much as possible to avoid hits to the head, concussions, and long term brain damage.

Before this point, the Purdue defense was playing well, having allowed 1.44 plays per drive (see Figure 2). While Neal didn't register any defensive stats, his presence on the interior of the defensive front disrupted Louisville and contributed to a strong run defense (the Cardinal running backs managed only 41 yards on 11 carries on the day) and a prominent pass rush (4).

Figure 2, Purdue's Defensive Per Drive Performance Before And After Neal's Ejection (3) 

Once Neal left the game, Louisville spread its wings on offense, scoring 16 points in five drives, averaging 3.2 points per drive. Neal is going to be an anchor for the Boilermaker defense thin on the line; hopefully he can stay on the field.

The Quarterback Controversy That Shouldn't Be

And of course, for yet another year, there is a question about quarterbacks. Both junior David Blough and sophomore Elijah Sindelar played, each facing the Louisville defense on seven drives. 

Figure 3, Average Performance of Purdue's Offense During Each QB's Drives (3)

Both quarterbacks led the Boilers to 2 touchdowns, with an identical average of 2 points per drive. Blough's drives were a play longer, on average, than Sindelar. In terms of yardage, however, the offense was playing better with Blough at the helm. Blough's offenses has significantly longer drives by yardage, and more yards per play. Please note yardage excludes those gained by penalties, which helps to explain some of the difference, as Sindelar's first touchdown drive began in Louisville territory (at their 36) and had 15 yards gained via a pass interference penalty (3). However, the offense was more productive at moving the ball with Blough taking the snaps. Looking at each player's passing stats, Blough had a significantly better day in most statistical categories, as seen in Figure 4. 

Figure 4, Passing Statistics for Blough and Sindelar (4,5,6).

Sindelar's accuracy was dreadful, with an under 50 percent completion percentage. This accounts for a large portion of his awful 3.81 yards per attempt, but even when he completed the ball, Blough's passes gained more yardage (9.72 v. 7.87). Sindelar, given shorter passes, struggled in his accuracy. Blough was entrusted with more deep throws, which netted him greater yards per completion and attempt. He was also more accurate, with a completion percentage of 69.23% compared to Sindelar's 48.39%. Given some blatant drops by receivers in the deep passing game, this is even more remarkable. 

The greater success on individual plays and more deep passes help to explain why ESPN's QBR, which is based on efficiency on a play by play basis, has Blough rated more highly. Remarkably, Blough still takes this crown despite his additional interception. But since the play calling gave him more risky (read: deeper) play calls, including the trick play (on which Blough seemed to have no choice but to throw to a double-covered receiver) that his second interception occurred on, it is not surprising that despite being more accurate Blough had more picks. 

Yes, Blough has been prone to interceptions. However, Sindelar was not particularly successful outside of very short passes, while Blough was. In the long term, there is obviously room for improvement in Blough's game. However, he is currently the better choice as a passer, not to mention his greater running ability.

That Ohio state university OSU Fans Think We Might Confuse Theirs For..

Upcoming this Friday, Purdue will host Ohio, because something needs to be on TV on a Friday night. Anyways, the Bobcats will play Purdue under permanent lights, because FINALLY. Anyway, Ohio throttled dreadful FCS Hampton 59-0 last Saturday. Dreadful meaning out of 254 Division I (FBS and FCS) football schools, Sagarin ranks Hampton 226th (7). So in terms of drawing conclusions for this week's match-up... one game against a team like Hampton should not be taken into consideration. So, last year's numbers...

Ohio's offense wasn't great. Or even good. They were 115th in S&P+, expected to score 21.5 points against an "average opponent." For reference, last year, Purdue was 94th, expected to score 25.1 points. Their passing offense, rated 89th, was slightly less bad than a 115th rated rushing offense. If the Purdue defense can play the Bobcats like they did Louisville, there will be some very happy Boilermakers around (1).

On defense, however, the MAC runner up Bobcats were pretty average, rated with an S&P+ of 28.8 (compared to 2016 Purdue's 34.0), good for 61st in the nation (Purdue was 99th). They were 27th against the rush while 69th against the pass (2). Purdue did well in a test against a much better defense in Louisville. While rushing the ball may again be much less than stellar, if the passing game can be as effective as it was Saturday in Indianapolis, the Boilers should be poised to do well on Friday.

This week is not a test of can Purdue be good. It is a test of can they be consistent, something Hazell failed to do and Brohm succeeded to do at Western Kentucky. Only time will tell...

BOILER UP! 

References:
(1) http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaaoff2016
(2) http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadef2016
(3) http://www.espn.com/college-football/playbyplay?gameId=400935238
(4) https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/boxscores/2017-09-02-purdue.html
(5) http://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/3116188/david-blough
(6) http://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/3791146/elijah-sindelar
(7) http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm