Luke Campbell commits

[boiler800]

to Purdue. Another Ohio player for this years small class and another OL to go with Powell. It sounds like some more commits will be rolling in very soon. Before somebody goes off on a tangent about the star ratings, let's not forget that our coaching staff will not accept the commitments of players who aren't high on the wish list this early. due to the small overall size of this years class. I should add that the only opinions of our recruits that really matter are those of our coaching staff.

 

[KentuckyBoiler]

For this being a smaller class (around 15 or so), if we keep these number of verbals coming in, we are going to be close to filling up the class before the season starts, which would be a rarity for us for the last few years. We always have a big push for recruits after the season ends, but that might not be as big of deal this year for the 2016 class.

With Etling transferring, do we sign a QB this year now? If we don't QB will be big for 2017. Do we have any shot at Hunter Johnson of Brownsburg in the 2017 class?

 

[boiler800]

Hunter Johnson has visited Purdue 3-4 times, but I have a gut feeling Michigan leads. We are also very high on QB Beau English.

 

[lbodel]

to Purdue. Another Ohio player for this years small class and another OL to go with Powell. It sounds like some more commits will be rolling in very soon. Before somebody goes off on a tangent about the star ratings, let's not forget that our coaching staff will not accept the commitments of players who aren't high on the wish list this early. due to the small overall size of this years class. I should add that the only opinions of our recruits that really matter are those of our coaching staff.

Sorry, but whether or not it's the case, to state "the only opinions of our recruits that really matter are those of our coaching staff" is quite defensive.

He's an ok pick-up. But again, this class isn't looking much different from our previous.

 

[ghostoffatjack]

Back to the age old chicken and egg question, when we start winning on the field prospects with higher star ratings will be interested in attending or when we start signing recruits with higher star ratings the wins will follow!

All I can say, as most would. regarding the ratings of the high school recruits we attract. IF can win with them on the field who cares..... if we cannot win with them get a coach who can do one or the other!

 

[Summy1]

As mentioned, until we start winning games, we will continue to get these 3 star prospects. We seem to pick up guys who want to come to a power 5 program instead of a mid major. I prefer picking up players that are being recruited by other power 5 programs.

 

[boiler800]

Sorry, but whether or not it's the case, to state "the only opinions of our recruits that really matter are those of our coaching staff" is quite defensive.

He's an ok pick-up. But again, this class isn't looking much different from our previous.

I'm sorry, but without a Rivals ranking at this point (for Campbell) I expected some guys to come out swinging. Since his commitment has been accepted 7 months before signing date, this means that he is a high priority for our coaches and that's all that matters. I'm happy that the coaches are filling our class with the guys they want. I'm defensive because some folks like to judge these recruits solely upon the number of stars from Rivals. Our coaches are judging by other criteria, and the coaches criteria is all that matters.

 

[BoilerGrad02]

I'm sorry, but without a Rivals ranking at this point (for Campbell) I expected some guys to come out swinging. Since his commitment has been accepted 7 months before signing date, this means that he is a high priority for our coaches and that's all that matters. I'm happy that the coaches are filling our class with the guys they want. I'm defensive because some folks like to judge these recruits solely upon the number of stars from Rivals. Our coaches are judging by other criteria, and the coaches criteria is all that matters.

To a certain extent I agree with your statement. Going after them early is different that January plan Bs and Cs.

But I don't care about stars at all. What I do think is telling, like most on here, is other offers. Now I know that Rivals isn't 100% accurate with who has offered, and there certainly are outliers, but if other P5 conference coaches don't see a reason to offer these players early it's pretty ridiculous to think Hazell and his staff are just that much better at identifying talent (especially since they've had problems identifying it on their own team).

After watching one of the sloppiest games Purdue has ever played against a Northwestern team they had 2 weeks to prepare for and lose to an IU team with offense and defense game plans that were completely unimaginative and basic I think the idea that Hazell is some kind of great football mind is hard to argue right now.

This season will be very telling in regards to Hazell's talent as a coach. I can honestly say that I'm hoping he succeeds but wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't.

 

[nat100]

to Purdue. Another Ohio player for this years small class and another OL to go with Powell. It sounds like some more commits will be rolling in very soon. Before somebody goes off on a tangent about the star ratings, let's not forget that our coaching staff will not accept the commitments of players who aren't high on the wish list this early. due to the small overall size of this years class. I should add that the only opinions of our recruits that really matter are those of our coaching staff.

He's 4-20. His opinion is open to questioning

 

[boiler17]

that's all that matters

hahaha. Holding on a little tight aren't we?

 

[boiler800]

To a certain extent I agree with your statement. Going after them early is different that January plan Bs and Cs.

But I don't care about stars at all. What I do think is telling, like most on here, is other offers. Now I know that Rivals isn't 100% accurate with who has offered, and there certainly are outliers, but if other P5 conference coaches don't see a reason to offer these players early it's pretty ridiculous to think Hazell and his staff are just that much better at identifying talent (especially since they've had problems identifying it on their own team).

After watching one of the sloppiest games Purdue has ever played against a Northwestern team they had 2 weeks to prepare for and lose to an IU team with offense and defense game plans that were completely unimaginative and basic I think the idea that Hazell is some kind of great football mind is hard to argue right now.

This season will be very telling in regards to Hazell's talent as a coach. I can honestly say that I'm hoping he succeeds but wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't.

This year will certainly be a telling year. I believe our OL will come together and be a great unit this year, I believe our multi-paced Offense will give us an advantage, I believe our QB's will get rid of the ball quicker as they did all spring, I believe having many tall receivers who can go up and get the ball will give us the home run ball threat, and I believe our stable of RB's will produce a lot of yards running behind this OL. Do you think Jake Replogle is one of our better players on "D"? Well, Jake said I wouldn't want to play against this Offense. and Jake is in a far better place to judge this Offense than any of us fans. While we all see things differently, you can count me as somebody who sees vast improvement this year and one who can't wait for the Marshall kickoff. BOILER UP 2015 FOOTBALL!

 

[nat100]

hahaha. Holding on a little tight aren't we?

He doesn't like opinions that aren't uber positive

 

[boiler17]

So then the three of us agree that players say that sort of thing every year, and is independent of if the team is good or not, but that's one of those things none of us says, cause it would not be positive?

 

[boiler17]

can't wait for the Marshall kickoff

With you here

 

[boiler800]

So then the three of us agree that players say that sort of thing every year, and is independent of if the team is good or not, but that's one of those things none of us says, cause it would not be positive?

I don't remember anybody (from our "D") saying anything close to that recently, about our "O". Nobody. Nadie. I thought it was significant coming from a player the caliber of Jake Replogle. Since he said something very positive about our "O", it seems to be written off as something players say every year...when in fact no defensive player has said anything close to this in the Hazell era. If Jake had instead said: "I would love to play against this "O" all the time" the flood gates would open up on here. Some people like to dwell on negative crap, while I prefer to look for the positive. I find a quote like this to be a great sign of things to come.

 

[boiler17]

I don't remember anybody (from our "D") saying anything close to that recently, about our "O". Nobody. Nadie. I thought it was significant coming from a player the caliber of Jake Replogle. Since he said something very positive about our "O", it seems to be written off as something players say every year...when in fact no defensive player has said anything close to this in the Hazell era. If Jake had instead said: "I would love to play against this "O" all the time" the flood gates would open up on here. Some people like to dwell on negative crap, while I prefer to look for the positive. I find a quote like this to be a great sign of things to come.

Fine, fine, just stop yelling.

Im about 99% Russel said he was glad he didn't have to play against this oline last year. Further, no player for a team would say I would love to go against our crappy offense. Be realistic.

Im pretty sure that the wide receivers/defense complimented Etling a lot last year preseason too.

Its hard to remember that though, cause its usually coaches in print. But seriously, every team ever compliments themselves in the offseason.

I like Jake and everything, but hes not a good player yet. I do feel he is at particular disservice though due to scheme. Not that the scheme is necessarily bad, but its meant to allow LBs to shine more than line types.

 

[Bigohh]

I'm sorry, but without a Rivals ranking at this point (for Campbell) I expected some guys to come out swinging. Since his commitment has been accepted 7 months before signing date, this means that he is a high priority for our coaches and that's all that matters. I'm happy that the coaches are filling our class with the guys they want. I'm defensive because some folks like to judge these recruits solely upon the number of stars from Rivals. Our coaches are judging by other criteria, and the coaches criteria is all that matters.

 

[Bigohh]

What really matters is W/L record. If the coaching staff can make winners out of 2-3 star players, that is great. If you believe that Purdue is going to win against teams that have 4-5 star players, I have some ocean front property in AZ for sale that I would like to talk to you about. If it were easy to turn the program around, anyone could do it. I am just not sure we have the right people in place in the athletic dept. to make any progress.

 

[boiler800]

Since 2008 we've beaten OSU and UM a couple times each. That certainly is 2 teams full of 4-5 star recruits. Look, there are just a lot of people on here who don't like, or have lost confidence in this staff. Last year we beat 2 bowl teams, which was a big improvement over the year before. As long as this is the coaching staff, I hope they are successful in signing the guys who they have targeted on their recruiting board as high priority. I have a lot more faith in their plan than others on here. You guys put together a lynch mob and a negative blitz on here after 2013, and you see no positive. Last year we signed 2 Mr Footballs, a group of stud LBers, a stud FB, Eddy Wilson, 2 6'4" fast JC WR's, a a great corps of OL. Even with 2 Mr. Footballs you aren't happy. You have your opinion, and I've got mine. This team is on it's way up in everyway. BOILER UP 2015 FOOTBALL!

 

[Bigohh]

Since 2008 we've beaten OSU and UM a couple times each. That certainly is 2 teams full of 4-5 star recruits. Look, there are just a lot of people on here who don't like, or have lost confidence in this staff. Last year we beat 2 bowl teams, which was a big improvement over the year before. As long as this is the coaching staff, I hope they are successful in signing the guys who they have targeted on their recruiting board as high priority. I have a lot more faith in their plan than others on here. You guys put together a lynch mob and a negative blitz on here after 2013, and you see no positive. Last year we signed 2 Mr Footballs, a group of stud LBers, a stud FB, Eddy Wilson, 2 6'4" fast JC WR's, a a great corps of OL. Even with 2 Mr. Footballs you aren't happy. You have your opinion, and I've got mine. This team is on it's way up in everyway. BOILER UP 2015 FOOTBALL!

Since 2008 we've beaten OSU and UM a couple times each. That certainly is 2 teams full of 4-5 star recruits. Look, there are just a lot of people on here who don't like, or have lost confidence in this staff. Last year we beat 2 bowl teams, which was a big improvement over the year before. As long as this is the coaching staff, I hope they are successful in signing the guys who they have targeted on their recruiting board as high priority. I have a lot more faith in their plan than others on here. You guys put together a lynch mob and a negative blitz on here after 2013, and you see no positive. Last year we signed 2 Mr Footballs, a group of stud LBers, a stud FB, Eddy Wilson, 2 6'4" fast JC WR's, a a great corps of OL. Even with 2 Mr. Footballs you aren't happy. You have your opinion, and I've got mine. This team is on it's way up in everyway. BOILER UP 2015 FOOTBALL!

 

[Bigohh]

Believe me when I say I really hope you are correct and right on with your prediction. Nothing would make me happier than to see a return to winning football and bowl appearances. I just do not think it will happen under the current athletic administration.

 

[lbodel]

As mentioned, until we start winning games, we will continue to get these 3 star prospects. We seem to pick up guys who want to come to a power 5 program instead of a mid major. I prefer picking up players that are being recruited by other power 5 programs.

I would not agree with that really. Did you know Tiller's first real recruiting class was ranked and one of the top in the Big Ten? He took over a program where a 3 win season was pretty good.

I just don't think Hazell and his staff are very good recruiters. Sometimes it's a head coach that matters, but a lot of times it has to do with an assistant (I am in the DC area and when Maryland hired a new offensive coordinator and lead recruiter, their recruiting suddenly became legit).

I've said it time and time again. There's a lot that goes into a football program being successful, particularly one that has some disadvantages, like us having a losing program right now. It's like our basketball program - is Matt Painter as good of a recruiter as Thad Motta? Absolutely not. But are there things that Painter just kicks ass at? Absolutely. And that's why Purdue's successful.

Now, Painter and his staff are certainly better recruiters, but that's what I'm trying to say about Hazell and his staff. The systems we run are very complex and not that creative. You look at Tiller coming in - he came in and took the same players that just had a 3 win season and installed a creative system utilizing the skills that the players had and had good success with it. Now, as the talent level increased over the next few years, it really came together and Purdue became more consistent and well-rounded.

I just can't look and see something to point out that says "wow, this staff is really doing a good job..." or "they are really impressive with instilling this....", etc.

That's the problem with this football program - what's something new, revolutionary, intuitive, etc. that's been done? Our football program has been very vanilla. You can't be vanilla when you're a program like Purdue. You have to do something that everyone else isn't doing.

 

[boiler800]

I would not agree with that really. Did you know Tiller's first real recruiting class was ranked and one of the top in the Big Ten? He took over a program where a 3 win season was pretty good.

I just don't think Hazell and his staff are very good recruiters. Sometimes it's a head coach that matters, but a lot of times it has to do with an assistant (I am in the DC area and when Maryland hired a new offensive coordinator and lead recruiter, their recruiting suddenly became legit).

I've said it time and time again. There's a lot that goes into a football program being successful, particularly one that has some disadvantages, like us having a losing program right now. It's like our basketball program - is Matt Painter as good of a recruiter as Thad Motta? Absolutely not. But are there things that Painter just kicks ass at? Absolutely. And that's why Purdue's successful.

Now, Painter and his staff are certainly better recruiters, but that's what I'm trying to say about Hazell and his staff. The systems we run are very complex and not that creative. You look at Tiller coming in - he came in and took the same players that just had a 3 win season and installed a creative system utilizing the skills that the players had and had good success with it. Now, as the talent level increased over the next few years, it really came together and Purdue became more consistent and well-rounded.

I just can't look and see something to point out that says "wow, this staff is really doing a good job..." or "they are really impressive with instilling this....", etc.

That's the problem with this football program - what's something new, revolutionary, intuitive, etc. that's been done? Our football program has been very vanilla. You can't be vanilla when you're a program like Purdue. You have to do something that everyone else isn't doing.

 

[boiler800]

You did a great job of articulating and laying out your case in an easy to understand manner. Well said. I believe a lot of the things you are talking about will surface this year...especially offensively.

 

[lbodel]

You did a great job of articulating and laying out your case in an easy to understand manner. Well said. I believe a lot of the things you are talking about will surface this year...especially offensively.

Yes, but half of my point is that we haven't done anything in 2.5 years - and we're hoping to see "some" success now? Of course in the 3rd year, you should see some improvement. However, you have to look at the overall strategy and ceiling.

We can't just sit on our hands and hope things will get better. We're not pushing the envelope on anything and that's why there is literally no excitement from our fan base. What is new, exciting, different, etc. there to look forward to? The excitement around here tells you the answer.

 

[boiler800]

Well all I can say is that you must not have followed the offense this spring because I thought it was very different and exciting. I loved that the line was pass blocking for the first time in years, and they also opened holes for our RB's, and we had a lot more receivers making plays, and our QB's were making their reads and releasing the ball faster than we've seen in years, and the way in which this offense plays at multiple tempos will give us an advantage---and this alone is very different and exciting. I think we watched two different offenses this spring. . Does nobody else see these things? Do you see all these things I'm talking about as negatives? or more of the same? You can't say Etling got beat up from no pass protection, then watch this vastly improved pass blocking this spring and tell me it's the same. Come on fellas, it's one or the other.

 

[nat100]

Well all I can say is that you must not have followed the offense this spring because I thought it was very different and exciting. I loved that the line was pass blocking for the first time in years, and they also opened holes for our RB's, and we had a lot more receivers making plays, and our QB's were making their reads and releasing the ball faster than we've seen in years, and the way in which this offense plays at multiple tempos will give us an advantage---and this alone is very different and exciting. I think we watched two different offenses this spring. . Does nobody else see these things? Do you see all these things I'm talking about as negatives? or more of the same? You can't say Etling got beat up from no pass protection, then watch this vastly improved pass blocking this spring and tell me it's the same. Come on fellas, it's one or the other.

Are you taking all this from the spring game?

Be wary of making judgments when it is practice. One side of the ball coming off as world beaters can be as much an indictment of the other side as a positive.

 

[boiler800]

Are you taking all this from the spring game?

Be wary of making judgments when it is practice. One side of the ball coming off as world beaters can be as much an indictment of the other side as a positive.

The spring game is all we have to go on. You're right it could be a terrible defense, but, how else do we form opinions this early other than from spring practice? There is nothing else to go on.

 

[boiler17]

The spring game is all we have to go on. You're right it could be a terrible defense, but, how else do we form opinions this early other than from spring practice? There is nothing else to go on.

I thought the line played average and certainly had plenty of bad downs. Nor did I see anything especially different in the O. scheme. Anyone else out there have an opinion?

 

[nat100]

I dont base too much on the spring game. The rosters are unbalanced and its an exhibition for the fans.

 

[boiler17]

I dont base too much on the spring game. The rosters are unbalanced and its an exhibition for the fans.

This more than anything. Especially with how Haz does it where its all mismatched. None of us saw 2013 coming based off that spring game.

 

[BigTimeAt69]

I would not agree with that really. Did you know Tiller's first real recruiting class was ranked and one of the top in the Big Ten? He took over a program where a 3 win season was pretty good.

I just don't think Hazell and his staff are very good recruiters. Sometimes it's a head coach that matters, but a lot of times it has to do with an assistant (I am in the DC area and when Maryland hired a new offensive coordinator and lead recruiter, their recruiting suddenly became legit).

I've said it time and time again. There's a lot that goes into a football program being successful, particularly one that has some disadvantages, like us having a losing program right now. It's like our basketball program - is Matt Painter as good of a recruiter as Thad Motta? Absolutely not. But are there things that Painter just kicks ass at? Absolutely. And that's why Purdue's successful.

Now, Painter and his staff are certainly better recruiters, but that's what I'm trying to say about Hazell and his staff. The systems we run are very complex and not that creative. You look at Tiller coming in - he came in and took the same players that just had a 3 win season and installed a creative system utilizing the skills that the players had and had good success with it. Now, as the talent level increased over the next few years, it really came together and Purdue became more consistent and well-rounded.

I just can't look and see something to point out that says "wow, this staff is really doing a good job..." or "they are really impressive with instilling this....", etc.

That's the problem with this football program - what's something new, revolutionary, intuitive, etc. that's been done? Our football program has been very vanilla. You can't be vanilla when you're a program like Purdue. You have to do something that everyone else isn't doing.

Tiller's first recruiting class, that included many future stars for us including one guy named Drew Brees, was ranked dead last in the Big10.

His 2003 class was his best ranked class ever.

 

[BigTimeAt69]

Here are some of the high ranked stud recruits we landed in 2003...

QB
Scott Carroll
Bill Foran
Grant Walker

WR
Byron Williams
Anthony Harris
Cole Sefrig #6 in Indiana
Kyle Ingraham
Jake Cunningham

TE
Garrett Bushong 4 star #4 in Michigan

OL
Nick Fincher
Ryan Mobley
Pat Oxley

DE
Doug Van Dyke 4 star #2 in Michigan
Jamaal Jones

LB
Josh Ferguson
Shaun Richardson

CB
paul long

Players who actually contributed

Kniko K
Kyle Ingraham
Ray Edwards
Bernard Pollard
Stanford Keglar


Tiller's top class ever. #3 in the BIG. Top 20 in nation and look at how many misses were on it. Those were all 4 star and highly ranked 3 stars with multiple offers.


My point is this. Let's see how it plays out. Rankings aren't always the best indicator

 

[BigTimeAt69]

Class absolutely killed us from a depth and attrition standpoint

 

[nat100]

lets not warp history to make our point. Only 15 of the 26 in the class were rated 3 stars or higher. Richardson and DVD never made it to campus.

Several you have as "studs" on that list were 2 stars.

FYI - Keglar was a 3 star.

Who is kniko?

 

[Minnesota_Boiler]

Ahh, did you mean Scott Carroll at QB? Scott Campbell played in the late '70s - early '80s.

Here are some of the high ranked stud recruits we landed in 2003...

QB
Scott Campbell
Bill Foran
Grant Walker

WR
Byron Williams
Anthony Harris
Cole Sefrig #6 in Indiana
Kyle Ingraham
Jake Cunningham

TE
Garrett Bushong 4 star #4 in Michigan

OL
Nick Fincher
Ryan Mobley
Pat Oxley

DE
Doug Van Dyke 4 star #2 in Michigan
Jamaal Jones

LB
Josh Ferguson
Shaun Richardson

CB
paul long

Players who actually contributed

Kniko K
Kyle Ingraham
Ray Edwards
Bernard Pollard
Stanford Keglar


Tiller's top class ever. #3 in the BIG. Top 20 in nation and look at how many misses were on it. Those were all 4 star and highly ranked 3 stars with multiple offers.


My point is this. Let's see how it plays out. Rankings aren't always the best indicator

 

[BigTimeAt69]

lets not warp history to make our point. Only 15 of the 26 in the class were rated 3 stars or higher. Richardson and DVD never made it to campus.

Several you have as "studs" on that list were 2 stars.

FYI - Keglar was a 3 star.

Who is kniko?

I was looking at article first that some reason put Niko Koutouvides on it.
Right after posting i found the rivals list.
I was mistaken on pollard and Keglar. I know Keglar was bumped from a 2 to a 3.

Also forgot to mention Dustin Keller! Lowly 2 star wide receiver.

You're correct tho some were two stars on Rivals. Sorry was going through an article not from Rivals. May have been scout

 

[nat100]

Niko was 2000 right?

2003 had Edwards and Pollard. They were great players, but they were divisive in the locker room. IMO, their attitudes were an issue more than the talent level of that class.

 

[BigTimeAt69]

Niko was 2000 right?

2003 had Edwards and Pollard. They were great players, but they were divisive in the locker room. IMO, their attitudes were an issue more than the talent level of that class.

Believe that's correct. He was a 2 star recruit. I remember that. We may have been his biggest and only power5 offer

 

[KentuckyBoiler]

It looks like Mr. Campbell has been moved to a 3 star on Rivals. I believe previously that he was not ranked.