And in that corner… The Purdue Boilermakers


It’s the first of the rivalry trophy games for Notre Dame, with Purdue and the Irish set to battle for the Shillelagh Trophy. (Not to be confused with the Jeweled Shillelagh…) With a new head coach and a new program direction in West Lafeyette, the college football world will be getting their first close look at new head coach Darrell Hazell, who comes over from Kent State after an eleven win regular season and an appearance in the GoDaddy.com Bowl.

With us to break down the match-up from Purdue’s perspective is Travis Miller from SBNation website Hammer & Rails. Travis has been kind enough to do this with me for about five seasons running, so we’ve had some great discussions in the past and he’s always done a great job breaking down Purdue.

There’s a ton to learn about a team that’s rebooted its program after saying goodbye to Danny Hope. (Including a great take on the dynamics of the Purdue-Notre Dame relationship.) Before we head to Ross-Ade Stadium this weekend and get a look at the World’s largest bass drum, let’s here what Travis has to say about the Boilermakers’ chances this weekend.

I asked, he answered. We all enjoyed and learned:

1) It’s been a rocky start to the Darrell Hazell era, but let’s not get to the on-field product just yet. After a tough run with Danny Hope, assess Hazell’s work as a program builder / salesman.

I have been a big fan of Hazell so far, at least in terms of everything off the field. He has gotten four recruits that look like excellent pieces to build around in Drue Tranquill (whom Notre Dame is after), Gelen Robinson (the brother of Michigan basketball player Glenn Robinson and son of the one-time Purdue great), David Blough (Elite 11 QB out of Texas that is suspiciously like Drew Brees), and Denzel Ward (monster offensive tackle). Hazell has also preached accountability and discipline, which were both lacking under the Hope regime.

I always felt people turned on Hope a little too quickly. His first season Purdue was 5-7, but they were legitimately a handful of plays and stupid mistakes from being 10-2. Unfortunately, those mistakes were never fixed and Purdue never grew beyond that point. It got to the point where people forgot the good of that year because the team never grew.

So far, Hazell has said and done all the right things in the buildup to the season. Unfortunately, the play on the field has been pretty bad.


2) Now for the on-field product. It’s been pretty ugly, with Cincinnati sticking it to the Boilermakers followed up with Purdue just sliding by Indiana State. Talk me through the first two games and what you’ve seen. 

I think what is more disturbing about Cincinnati is that they blew out Purdue, then lost by 24 points to an Illinois team that has looked far worse for the past two seasons. Against the Bearcats Purdue tied it 7-7 just before halftime, then gave up a late first half drive for a TD. Cincinnati used halftime effective as a defensive stop and scored on the opening drive of the second half thanks to a huge 3rd and 9 conversion that went for 40 yards and changed the entire complexion of the game. Suddenly it was 21-7 and Purdue had had the ball for one play, a kneel down. The offense then went three-and-out, the defense got a stop, but Rob Henry threw a pick six. Effectively, in five offensive plays for Purdue they went from being tied to down three touchdowns.

Against Indiana State the offense was just awful. The Sycamores stuffed a first half 4th and 1 near midfield, then stuffed Purdue three times on first and goal from the 1 to hold for a field goal. Late in the half Purdue against got a first and goal from the one and was again stuffed three times, only ran out of time to get the field goal unit on the field.

Things are very, very bad when an FCS stuffs you seven times in a row when you need one yard. The defense looked far better, but the offense continued to be out of sync and showed nothing of the power run game we expected. I fear we are Michigan State without the benefit of having an excellent defense. Purdue’s defense can be good, but it is not good enough to save the offense being as bad as it is right now.


3) Rob Henry is a guy that’s been in and out of the lineup for what seems like forever. What have you seen from him in the first two weeks of the season?

I think he is losing confidence because the offensive line in front of him has been pretty bad. Against Cincinnati he was running for his life all day. Against Indiana State he was better, but still not great. In John Shoop’s offense there is not a lot of room for improvisation and Henry is a more mobile quarterback. He won the job, however, straight up over two very talented freshmen that are probably better fits for a pro-style offense, so I am willing to give him some more time. If the offense continues to flounder on Saturday night you might see redshirt freshman Austin Appleby.


4) There’s talent back on the defense with Ryan Russell, Bruce Gaston, and Ricardo Allen anchoring the unit. What kind of changes were made to the defense in the coaching transition? How stout of a challenge are the Irish in for on Saturday?

I think the defense can be a very good unit and for most of the Indiana State game it was pitching a shutout. I was pleased with the way Joe Gilliam played in the middle even though the linebackers are still a large question (and why we’re so excited for Tranquill and Robinson in next year’s class). Purdue also lost starting safety Landon Feichter to a broken leg against Indiana State, moving sophomore Anthony Brown tot hat spot.

For Purdue to have a shot the defensive line needs to be as successful as it was last year at disrupting the Irish offense. They need to be able to get into the backfield as well as contain the run because the linebackers are still suspect.

Unfortunately, with as bad as the offense has been playing and as strong as Notre Dame’s front seven is, they may have to pitch a shutout to give us a chance.


5) Last week, we wasted a whole bunch of time talking about rivalries, scheduling priorities, and just about everything else that’s a product of college football’s realignment. As a Purdue fan, how do you view Notre Dame? How do you look at the delicate dance that Jack Swarbrick manages with ACC commitments and too many Big Ten obligations?

We view Notre Dame as our biggest football rival, quite honestly. It is always a bigger game because no matter where it is played, it is a guaranteed chance to be on national TV against a “name” team. With Indiana’s program being historically inept (Purdue leads that series 72-37-6) most Purdue fans simply expect to win vs. the Hoosiers. Against Notre Dame any victory raises eyebrows. Even Purdue’s last win, in 2007, drew attention because the Irish were in the midst of a historically bad season.

It also helps that it is an in-state rivalry that has been played every year since 1946. When you combine that with the perception of reversible jacket fans in Indiana (Indiana basketball and Notre Dame football fans) it just feels more natural. I know Notre Dame fans don’t view Purdue as much of a rival because of the historical dominance, but there is a history there of Purdue pulling of some shockers. Twice Purdue has beaten Notre Dame when they have been ranked No. 1 and once when they were No. 2.

It will be interesting to see what Morgan Burke, not Jack Swarbrick does going forward. The shift to a nine game Big Ten schedule in 2016 means that as of now, Purdue would alternate with six home games in even numbered years and 8 home games in odd numbers years because of the Notre Dame series and the alternating Big Ten schedule. Another shift, to Indiana hosting the Old Oaken Bucket games in the same years that Purdue goes to Notre Dame, could also be a factor.

Purdue is not giving up a guaranteed two home games in the non-conference season, so does it choose to keep Notre Dame and a pair of MAC-level teams or does it drop the Irish in favor of other home-and-home deals? As it looks right now, Purdue only has six home games in 2016 when it comes to South Bend (four Big Ten games, Cincinnati, and Nevada) and seven in 2017 (Five Big Ten, Notre Dame, Eastern Kentucky) with an open date. If Burke and Swarbrick can agree to switch years that teams host the series can likely go on for awhile, but who blinks and agrees to play two straight road games? Or, do they agree to a one-year (say 2016 or 2017) neutral-site game at Lucas Oil Stadium like the 1984 game at the old Hoosier Dome?


6) On paper, this game doesn’t look kind for the Boilermakers. Yet they played the Irish tough last season and don’t seem to be that much worse on paper than last season. (Am I wrong?) What needs to change for Purdue to be victorious?

The offense has to show signs of being able to actually move the football. We expected a strong running game because of what Hazell ran at Kent State, where Dri Archer and Trayion Durham each rushed for over 1,200 yards last year. Purdue has two almost identical players in Akeem Hunt and Brandon Cottom. Cottom has been strangely missing from the offense and Hunt has been contained because the offensive line is struggling so much in front of him.

Yes, the defense gave up 42 points (really 35 because of the pick-6) at Cincinnati, but that was more the game getting out of hand than them being dominated from the start. They were much better against Indiana State, but they should have been given the competition. I think the defense can play well enough to keep Purdue in it, but the offense has to show a complete turnaround from what it has shown so far. If it continues to struggle as it has in the first two weeks (and struggling against an FCS opponent is not a good sign) Notre Dame wins easily.


You can find more from Travis at the excellent Hammer & Rails site and from him on Twitter @HammerandRails.

Go for two or not? Both sides of the highly-debated topic

during their game at Clemson Memorial Stadium on October 3, 2015 in Clemson, South Carolina.

Notre Dame’s two failed two-point conversion tries against Clemson have been the source of much debate in the aftermath of the Irish’s 24-22 loss to the Tigers. Brian Kelly’s decision to go for two with just over 14 minutes left in the game forced the Irish into another two-point conversion attempt with just seconds left in regulation, with DeShone Kizer falling short as he attempted to push the game into overtime.

Was Kelly’s decision to go for two the right one at the beginning of the fourth quarter? That depends.

Take away the result—a pass that flew through the fingers of a wide open Corey Robinson. Had the Irish kicked their extra point, Justin Yoon would’ve trotted onto the field with a chance to send the game into overtime. (Then again, had Robinson caught the pass, Notre Dame would’ve been kicking for the win in the final seconds…)

This is the second time a two-point conversion decision has opened Kelly up to second guessing in the past eight games. Last last season, Kelly’s decision to go for two in the fourth-quarter with an 11-point lead against Northwestern, came back to bite the Irish and helped the Wildcats stun Notre Dame in overtime.

That choice was likely fueled by struggles in the kicking game, heightened by Kyle Brindza’s blocked extra-point attempt in the first half, a kick returned by Northwestern that turned a 14-7 game into a 13-9 lead. With a fourth-quarter, 11-point lead, the Irish failed to convert their two-point attempt that would’ve stretched their lead to 13 points. After Northwestern converted their own two-point play, they made a game-tying field goal after Cam McDaniel fumbled the ball as the Irish were running out the clock. Had the Irish gone for (and converted) a PAT, the Wildcats would’ve needed to score a touchdown.

Moving back to Saturday night, Kelly’s decision needs to be put into context. After being held to just three points for the first 45 minutes of the game, C.J. Prosise broke a long catch and run for a touchdown in the opening minute of the fourth quarter. Clemson would be doing their best to kill the clock. Notre Dame’s first touchdown of the game brought the score within 12 points when Kelly decided to try and push the score within 10—likely remembering the very way Northwestern forced overtime.

After the game, Kelly said it was the right decision, citing his two-point conversion card and the time left in the game. On his Sunday afternoon teleconference, he said the same, giving a bit more rationale for his decision.

“We were down and we got the chance to put that game into a two-score with a field goal. I don’t chase the points until the fourth quarter, and our mathematical chart, which I have on the sideline with me and we have a senior adviser who concurred with me, and we said go for two. It says on our chart to go for two.

“We usually don’t use the chart until the fourth quarter because, again, we don’t chase the points. We went for two to make it a 10-point game. So we felt we had the wind with us so we would have to score a touchdown and a field goal because we felt like we probably only had three more possessions.

“The way they were running the clock, we’d probably get three possessions maximum and we’re going to have to score in two out of the three. So it was the smart decision to make, it was the right one to make. Obviously, you know, if we catch the two-point conversion, which was wide open, then we just kick the extra point and we’ve got a different outcome.”

That logic and rationale is why I had no problem with the decision when it happened in real time. But not everybody agrees.

Perhaps the strongest rebuke of the decision came from Irish Illustrated’s Tim Prister, who had this to say about the decision in his (somewhat appropriately-titled) weekly Point After column:

Hire another analyst or at least assign someone to the task of deciphering the Beautiful Mind-level math problem that seems to be vexing the Notre Dame brain-trust when a dweeb with half-inch thick glasses and a pocket protector full of pens could tell you that in the game of football, you can’t chase points before it is time… (moving ahead)

…The more astonishing thing is that no one in the ever-growing football organization that now adds analysts and advisors on a regular basis will offer the much-needed advice. Making such decisions in the heat of battle is not easy. What one thinks of in front of the TV or in a press box does not come as clearly when you’re the one pulling the trigger for millions to digest.

And yet with this ever-expanding entourage, Notre Dame still does not have anyone who can scream through the headphones to the head coach, “Coach, don’t go for two!”

If someone, anyone within the organization had the common sense and then the courage to do so, the Irish wouldn’t have lost every game in November of 2014 and would have had a chance to win in overtime against Clemson Saturday night.

My biggest gripe about the decision was the indecision that came along with the choice. Scoring on a big-play tends to stress your team as special teams players shuffle onto the field and the offense comes off. But Notre Dame’s use of a timeout was a painful one, and certainly should’ve been spared considering the replay review that gave Notre Dame’s coaching staff more time to make a decision.

For what it’s worth, Kelly’s decision was probably similar to the one many head coaches would make. And it stems from the original two-point conversion chart that Dick Vermeil developed back in the 1970s.

The original chart didn’t account for success rate or time left in the game. As Kelly mentioned before, Notre Dame uses one once it’s the fourth quarter.

It’s a debate that won’t end any time soon. And certainly one that will have hindsight on the side of the “kick the football” argument.



Navy, Notre Dame will display mutual respect with uniforms

Keenan Reynolds, Isaac Rochell

The storied and important history of Notre Dame and Navy’s long-running rivalry will be on display this weekend, with the undefeated Midshipmen coming to South Bend this weekend.

On NBCSN, a half-hour documentary presentation will take a closer look, with “Onward Notre Dame: Mutual Respect” talking about everything from Notre Dame’s 43-year winning streak, to Navy’s revival, triggered by their victory in 2007. The episode will also talk about the rivalries ties to World War II, and how the Navy helped keep Notre Dame alive during wartime.

You can catch it on tonight at 6:30 p.m. ET on NBCSN or online in the same viewing window.

On the field, perhaps an even more unique gesture of respect is planned. With Under Armour the apparel partner for both Notre Dame and Navy, both teams will take the field wearing the same cleats, gloves and baselayers. Each team’s coaching staff will also be outfitted in the same sideline gear.

More from Monday’s press release:

For the first time in college football, two opponents take the field with the exact same Under Armour baselayer, gloves and cleats to pay homage to the storied history and brotherhood between their two schools. The baselayer features both Universities’ alma maters on the sleeves and glove palms with the words “respect, honor, tradition” as a reminder of their connection to each other. Both sidelines and coaches also will wear the same sideline gear as a sign of mutual admiration.​

Navy and Notre Dame will meet for the 89th time on Saturday, a rivalry that dates back to 1927. After the Midshipmen won three of four games starting in 2007, Notre Dame hopes to extend their current winning streak to five games on Saturday.

Here’s an early look at some of the gear: