Well it was nice while it lasted.

[ams66]

I work near the stadium. The other day they were blasting crowd noise over the PA, I thought WTF is that about but maybe it was practice with noise to prepare for it. Guess they weren't as prepared as they needed to be.

 

[4IUSox2]

For a moment I thought maybe that might be the better option in this game. Frankly, I just think if we had had a veteran duel threat QB, instead of Rourke, that would make us less vulnerable on offense. OSU and Michigan made us look one dimensional and the defense won the Michigan game and would’ve given us a punchers chance in this one if our special teams hadn’t made mistakes. Right now we have a playoff level defense, but not offense.

How ‘bout just running the ball more, even down 21-7? When IU ran the ball, they at least weren’t losing big chunks of yards like on sacks of KR, giving us no chance. Getting 3-5 yards per carry > negative sack yards. Between Rourke’s sack yards and Evans’ minus 20 or so, that had to be at least minus 50, right?

 

[OpenWheels]

Box score says minus 23 on Evans, minus 33 on sacks of Rourke. At one point I saw minus 44 on Rourke.

Cig has said since last winter Rourke throws it away so you don't get way behind... With untouched rushers he didn't even have time for that.

I kept wishing we'd run more. But they make the big bucks for a reason. But it just went south.

 

[Stuffshot]

Even with that poor protection, if Evans catches the snap at end of first half, then doesn’t have a shitty punt to start the 2nd half with shitty coverage for a return Td, it’s a 14-7 game. IU could then run the ball. IU D has played well. Only gave up 14 so far. Way to go punt team!!

What pisses me off is that our offensive coaches did not seem to try any trickery whatsoever. The formations seemed routine and predictable. Our play-calling looked like they were content to just beat their heads against the wall.

Shouldn't we have tried some run/pass options or even simple rollouts?