COLUMBUS, Ohio – No. 5 Indiana lost its first game of the season Saturday at No. 2 Ohio State, 38-15.

The Hoosiers entered the game with the nation’s second-highest scoring offense, but they generated just 151 total yards and finished with a season-low 15 points. Ohio State sacked Indiana quarterback Kurtis Rourke five times, and he completed just 8-of-18 passes for 68 yards, no touchdowns, no interceptions and one fumble.

Here’s everything Rourke said after the game.

On if it was the first time Indiana had used a silent count…

Rourke: “In game, yeah, but we practiced it all week. So it wasn’t anything that was new to us.”

On what Ohio State was doing to be so impactful when blitzing…

Rourke: “They brought some good blitzes and timed it up well. Just had some good plays called and executed better.”

On what it couldn’t repeat from a successful first drive for the rest of the game…

Rourke: “I think we just executed better, at a lot higher level that first drive. We were able to take advantage of looks in plays that we had, then we didn’t execute down the stretch after that as well as we want to. In games like this, you have to.”

On what made Ohio State’s blitzes successful…

Rourke: “It’s all stuff that we’ve seen before. I gotta do a better job of recognizing them and knowing where to go with the ball. As an offense, just be able to learn from a game like this and make sure it doesn’t happen.”

On the team’s mentality after a loss, knowing there’s still plenty to play for…

Rourke: “A loss is never fun, but the good news is that we’ve got another game next week, a big game, a rivalry game. So take 24 hours, then get ready for Purdue.”

On frustration over uncharacteristic mistakes…

Rourke: “You gotta be close to perfect to beat a team like this, and we’re gonna have a chance to play a lot of similar teams like this. So knowing that we can’t have these mistakes and we gotta be on our game for the whole game, it’s a learning opportunity. But gotta be able to move on now and not have any more learning opportunities.

On if any of the mistakes surprised him, given Indiana’s veteran roster…

Rourke: “I wouldn’t think so. I think it’s just attention to detail. I always look to myself, knowing that there’s some plays I want to have back, some throws that I need to have in order for this team to move the ball down the field. There’s a lot of opportunities that I’m upset at myself and knowing that it won’t happen again. Those are mistakes that can’t continue, especially at this time of the season.”

On if there are parts of the offense Indiana has to junk after they didn’t work…

Rourke: “I don’t think so. Just gotta trust that moving forward we’re gonna handle it. I whole heartedly trust the offensive line, tight ends and receiver group and running backs. So my mindset doesn’t change, that I don’t need to do anything differently because I’ve been sacked a couple times. Biggest thing is I gotta protect the ball when I’m getting hit. That’s something I need to work on. It’s happened a couple times this year.”

On the frustration of playing behind the sticks so much…

Rourke: “Yeah, it’s hard to win games when you have second and third and long. You gotta capitalize on those. So even going back to Michigan week, we gotta make sure we don’t put ourselves in those tough situations, because it’s hard to win games, like I said.”

On the difficulty of facing many third and long situations…

Rourke: “It’s tough, especially with a defense that’s as talented as they are. Like I mentioned, it’s difficult to convert on third and long, especially a good defense. But we had an opportunity to convert, and we weren’t able to. So that’s pointed at us as well. We’re gonna be in those situations, and we’re gonna need to be able to capitalize better than we did today.”

On if Indiana has done enough this season to show it’s one of the best teams in the country…

Rourke: “Yeah, I hope so. We trust ourselves against anybody, and we look forward to hopefully an opportunity to get a rematch at some point. But just knowing that next week is the big game and we gotta go handle Purdue, and then take it one game at a time.”

For everything to know about this epic matchup, including how the result will impact the CFP picture, go here.

Here are the highlights from Columbus!

LOS ANGELES (KABC) — Millions of packages move across the country every single day. Many of those go through the FedEx facility in Indianapolis. That’s where they can get taken – not by thieves but by local law enforcement.

“I am just totally stunned that this can happen in America,” California jewelry wholesaler Henry Cheng told Eyewitness News about how he had tens of thousands of dollars seized by another state.

He didn’t want to be identified on camera because he says robbers often target him to steal his merchandise. In this case, he sold items to a client in Virginia. The client sent him $42,000 in a FedEx package. It was stopped in Indianapolis.

“The next thing I know is the police and the prosecutor is forfeiting my money, saying that based solely on suspicions, they didn’t even name the crime that I’ve committed, because I know I have not committed any crime,” Cheng said.

The practice of civil forfeiture is legal and common. It allows local governments to seize property suspected to be involved in criminal activity. Property can be seized without a conviction or charges.

Cheng called police and the prosecutor’s office in Indianapolis and says they wouldn’t give him a reason why the money was taken. He showed authorities the receipt for the sale. He was told it didn’t matter.

“You can get your money back, but you got to go to court,” Cheng said he was told.

A public interest law firm called the Institute for Justice took up the case and filed a lawsuit.

“Civil forfeiture really is one of the greatest threats to property rights in the nation today,” said Sam Gedge, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice. “It lets governments across the nation take people’s cash, their cars, their homes, without ever convicting them of a crime, without charging them with a crime.”

The Indianapolis FedEx hub is the second largest in the United States, and attorneys claim law enforcement in Indiana is using that to profit because it can keep a large part of the money.

In the affidavit for probable cause, it states one of the reasons the parcel was deemed suspicious and pulled for inspection is simply because it was shipped to California.

“So they describe California as a quote, a source state, a source state for drugs,” Gedge said.

The affidavit in this case adds several other reasons for the package being suspicious: the seams were secured with tape, it was dropped off at a FedEx shipping center. It also states that it contained $100 bills, $50 bills and $20 bills. It claims those denominations are consistent with illegal activities.

“They simply say that there’s been, quote, a violation of a criminal statute. They don’t tell you what criminal statute. They don’t tell you what violation and really it is just a numbers game,” Gedge said.

A numbers game that adds up to a lot of money. Gedge says the prosecutors’ office in Marion County, Indiana has stopped more than 130 packages over the last two years and seized about $2.5 million.

“Oftentimes, to travel to Indiana, if you live in California, to try to litigate a civil forfeiture action, it may very well cost more to hire a lawyer to defend yourself than the amount of money at stake,” Gedge said.

Now after several lawsuits and questions from Eyewitness News and others, Cheng is getting back his money.

“The state came back and said ‘OK, now that we know the full story we’re willing to give the money back,’” Gedge said.

Gedge adds that the government always knew the full story. Nothing changed in the last few months. He said the evidence was always there.

“For people who are willing to lawyer up and spend months filing in the courts and incurring all this time and resources trying to defend their property, sometimes the government just gives up, but of course, a lot of people can’t afford to do that,” Gedge said.

“A lot of people don’t have the good fortune to have free lawyers, and for those people, the government tends not to be quite as ready to give people’s property back,” he added.

Attorneys say the return of the money will not end the case. They counter-sued with a class action lawsuit over the constitutionality of the process used to seize and forfeit assets.