Purdue, after losing winnable games against Nebraska and
Rutgers, came up with a definitive 29-10 win against Illinois. There were a lot
of good things coming out of the game. The defense played very well, and the
rushing attack played the kind of game needed for Purdue to compete with inconsistent
play from the passing game. Unfortunately, David Blough suffered a dislocated
angle, broken fibula, and ligament damage, which will end his solid season. To cheer
yourself up, here are some numbers about the rest of the team [1,2].
Running Away With It
Not too surprising given Purdue’s depth at running back, the
rushing attack has been the strength of Purdue’s offense. But Jeff Brohm’s
instincts in play calling have traditionally been to rely on the passing game;
on the season, Purdue has passed on 53.3% of plays which is above the FBS
average of 47.4% of plays. In 2016 Western Kentucky passed on 52.4% of plays.
Passing the ball is likely where Brohm is comfortable. Against Illinois Purdue
was a very different team, passing on 38.8% of plays after a game against
Nebraska where 43.9% of plays were passes. This was successful on Saturday with
the Boilers averaging 6.21 yards per play, compared to a season average of 5.62
yards per play and an average allowed by Illinois of 5.62 yards per play [1,3,4,5,6].
 |
| Figure 1: Purdue Individual Rushing Statistics v. Illinois [1,3] |
Despite the added workload, the Boilers were still rather
efficient running the ball against the Illini with 5.37 yards per rush,
compared to a season average of 5.41 yards per rush and an average allowed by
Illinois of 5.05 yards per rush. Individual performances were pretty solid as
well, with four players beating the FBS average of 5.10 yards per rush. Just a
reminder, unlike in official NCAA statistics, sacks are not counted as rushes
during this analysis and are instead counted towards passing statistics [1,3,4].
I Don’t Always Throw The Ball, But When I Do, I Prefer To Do It
Efficiently
With the play calling slanted in the direction of the
rushing attack the Illini defense became less focused on stopping the pass,
which led to the Boilers being significantly more efficient in the passing
game.
 |
| Figure 2: Purdue Individual Passing Statistics [1,3] |
On the year, Purdue had averaged 5.80 yards per dropback compared to the FBS average of 6.53 yards per dropback. Against Illinois, the Boilers blew that out of the water by averaging 8.04 yards per dropback – which would rank 12th in FBS if averaged over the season. Protection for the quarterbacks was a big part of that performance: the Boilers only allowed 3.70% of dropbacks to end in a sack, compared to their season average of 6.63% (FBS average: 6.00%). While the Illinois defense is not a strong pass rushing unit, averaging a sack on 5.49% of opponent’s dropbacks, this is still a step forward for a struggling part of Purdue’s offense [3,4].
Illinois Is Bad At
Football
Purdue’s defense has been pretty decent this year, and that
performance continued against a particularly terrible Illinois offense. The
Illini had averaged 4.84 yards per play, against the Boilermakers the Illini
managed a miserable 4.03 yards per play [1,4].
 |
| Figure 3: Illinois Individual Rushing Statistics [1,3] |
The strength of Purdue’s defense has been its ability to
stop the run, which continued Saturday. Compared to Illinois’s 4.60 yards per
rush (FBS average: 5.10) over the season, the Illini were not far off on
Saturday. However even with how horrible the Illini rushing offense is, that is
still a decent performance by Purdue’s defense. Most important was Purdue’s
ability to contain Cam Thomas, who only managed 5.18 yards per rush compared to
his season average of 8.7 yards per rush. Given the dangers of mobile
quarterbacks, the ability to contain a quarterback who has been very effective
in the run game is an asset for the Boilermakers going forward [1,3,4,7]
 |
| Figure 4: Illinois Individual Passing Statistics [1,3] |
Purdue has not been effective rushing the passer over the
course of the season, averaging a sack on only 5.23% of dropbacks (FBS average:
6.21%). However, Purdue was living in the Illini backfield, averaging a sack on
a whopping 15.63% of their dropbacks. Michigan State, who has the highest sack
rate in country, has averaged a sack on 12.5% of dropbacks this season. While a
single game is a small sample size and Illinois is not great at pass
protection, allowing a sack on 9.46% of dropbacks, those are very impressive
numbers for a struggling Boiler pass rush unit. This helped to make the Illini
dreadful in the passing game, managing only 3.94 yards per dropback compared to
their season average of 5.06 yards per dropback (FBS average: 6.53). Illinois
is a not very good team on offense, but the Boilermakers made them look downright
awful [1,3,4].
B-Word Update
 |
| Figure 5: Purdue Win Distribution [8] |
My cautious optimism has reminded me Southwest Airlines has Dr Pepper as a soda option, which other airlines do not; this may be helpful wherever you travel this holiday season, whether to post season football or visiting family.
Is Northwestern Good?
I Have No Idea.
Northwestern is the strangest 6-3 team you will see. After
starting the year with an unimpressive win against 120th in S&P+
Nevada and then getting throttled by 86th Duke, they have gone 5-2
with three overtime conference wins in the past three weeks. And those two of
those three teams are Iowa and Michigan State, who rank 35th and 22nd
in S&P+ respectively. Are the Wildcats good? Or just very, very lucky [9]?
 |
| Figure 6: Northwestern Team Statistics [4,9] |
 |
| Figure 7: Purdue Team Statistics [4,8] |
On defense, the ‘Cats have a sharp set of claws, allowing only 5.15 yards per play (FBS average: 5.59). They have held opponents to an incredible 3.90 yards per rush, which is over a yard less than the FBS average of 4.95 yards per rush. So far, the best rushing defense Purdue has faced was Michigan, who are only slightly better than the Wildcats with 3.59 yards per rush. With a Boilermaker squad that managed a paltry 4.60 yards per rush against Michigan, compared to a season average of 5.42 yards per rush, the passing game is going to have to step up. Luckily, the Wildcat defense is merely slightly above average at stopping the pass, allowing 6.16 yards per dropback (FBS average: 6.30). The Wildcats have struggled getting at the passer, with a sack on only 4.59% of dropbacks (FBS average: 6.21%). Elijah Sindelar will have time in the pocket to try and improve on his 5.6 yards per dropback; with the game likely on his shoulders, Sindelar will need to step up to keep the Boilermaker offense moving [4,8,9,10].
The Purdue defense has an easier task than the offense as
the ‘Cats have struggled on offense, with a measly 4.49 yards per rush (FBS
average: 5.10), 5.83 yards per dropback (FBS average: 6.53), and 5.23 yards per
play (FBS average: 5.78). They have relied on the arm of Clayton Thorson to
move the ball, passing on 54.78% of plays. Thorson has not exactly had the
power of Mjölnir with only 5.7 yards per dropback. He has also thrown 11
interceptions and 10 touchdowns, with a completion percentage of 60.7%. The strong
Boilermaker rushing defense should put the game in the hands of Thorson once
again, which may not be the worst thing even with a less-than-stellar Boilermaker
pass defense that has allowed 6.59 yards per dropback (FBS average: 6.30) [4,9].
S&P+ is pretty down on the Wildcats, ranking them only
64th and favoring the Boilers 26.9-24.7 in Evanston. Their struggle
with offense efficiency is a major contributing factor, even with a good defense.
And with three overtime wins, they have been lucky more than anything since
overtime is usually a 50-50 proposition. I am a little down on the Boilermakers
compared to S&P+, particularly when the strength of Purdue’s offense will
be matched to the strength of Northwestern’s defense and our less-effective
quarterback will be playing. I would be shocked if the score is as high as
S&P+ predicts; my guess is it will be a tough defensive game where the
winner may score under 20 points. But hey, it probably won’t end regulation at
0-0 so we have that on Wake Forest and Virginia Tech [9].
Boiler Up!
References
[1] http://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore?gameId=400935401
[2] http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20171106/AP/311069694
[3] http://www.espn.com/college-football/playbyplay?gameId=400935401
[4] http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs
[5] https://www.footballstudyhall.com/pages/2016-western-kentucky-advanced-statistical-profile
[6] http://speakwithdata.blogspot.com/2017/11/2017-weekly-boiler-stat-summaries-week.html
[7] https://www.footballstudyhall.com/pages/2017-illinois-advanced-statistical-profile
[8] https://www.footballstudyhall.com/pages/2017-purdue-advanced-statistical-profile
[9] https://www.footballstudyhall.com/pages/2017-northwestern-advanced-statistical-profile
[10] http://speakwithdata.blogspot.com/2017/09/2017-weekly-boiler-stat-summaries-week_27.html
Comments
Post a Comment