This weeks commitments have silenced the critics.

[boiler800]

The was a lot of negative noise coming from some folks very recently, but now we have silence. This weekend should bring more good news and more silence. I hope this means the naysayers are seeing things in a more positive light. There is none so blind than they who will not see! BOILER UP!

 

[boiler17]

Man you sure are worked up. You've got to be BoilerWizard . Not silenced. Just busier than I would like. Definitely not hiding behind the internet. What does that even mean? I'm a coward if I don't give my personal info to strangers?

The LB is a nice, not great, but solidly good commit. I see 3 players in this class that look okay, the rest by ranking and competitive offers I'm not sure why we offered. Recruiting is inexact, and I have no problem being patient before forming an opinion. Its a little early to jump to conclusions here, isn't it?

You might consider listening to a contrary opinion without rallying the troops. Its way too easy to divide boards like this, and take on characteristics of political campaigns where making your point becomes more about mudslinging and sounding catchy than just discussing elements of the team for its own sake.

But if you really want to, get all am political radio on it, be my guest...

 

[nat100]

The was a lot of negative noise coming from some folks very recently, but now we have silence. This weekend should bring more good news and more silence. I hope this means the naysayers are seeing things in a more positive light. There is none so blind than they who will not see! BOILER UP!

Commits are nice, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. He still has to prove himself on the field

Being positive is great, but this type of post will just attract negativity.

 

[BigTimeAt69]

Man you sure are worked up. You've got to be BoilerWizard . Not silenced. Just busier than I would like. Definitely not hiding behind the internet. What does that even mean? I'm a coward if I don't give my personal info to strangers?

The LB is a nice, not great, but solidly good commit. I see 3 players in this class that look okay, the rest by ranking and competitive offers I'm not sure why we offered. Recruiting is inexact, and I have no problem being patient before forming an opinion. Its a little early to jump to conclusions here, isn't it?

You might consider listening to a contrary opinion without rallying the troops. Its way too easy to divide boards like this, and take on characteristics of political campaigns where making your point becomes more about mudslinging and sounding catchy than just discussing elements of the team for its own sake.

But if you really want to, get all am political radio on it, be my guest...

The LB is nice, not great...

Dude just go root for Ohio State because the players you want are not the type of player Purdue will be landing this year. It's going to be players like the very close to 4star linebacker we just landed

 

[boiler800]

Commits are nice, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. He still has to prove himself on the field

Being positive is great, but this type of post will just attract negativity.

I sure don't mean to attract negativity, actually the silence seemed to be a positive sign. Sorry if I've offended anyone, I only wish you saw the class as I do. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[nat100]

I sure don't mean to attract negativity, actually the silence seemed to be a positive sign. Sorry if I've offended anyone, I only wish you saw the class as I do. Nothing more, nothing less.

Recruits look good so far. This is what it should have been the prior 2.

Now he needs to pick it up on the field

 

[pboiler18]

Man you sure are worked up. You've got to be BoilerWizard . Not silenced. Just busier than I would like. Definitely not hiding behind the internet. What does that even mean? I'm a coward if I don't give my personal info to strangers?

The LB is a nice, not great, but solidly good commit. I see 3 players in this class that look okay, the rest by ranking and competitive offers I'm not sure why we offered. Recruiting is inexact, and I have no problem being patient before forming an opinion. Its a little early to jump to conclusions here, isn't it?

You might consider listening to a contrary opinion without rallying the troops. Its way too easy to divide boards like this, and take on characteristics of political campaigns where making your point becomes more about mudslinging and sounding catchy than just discussing elements of the team for its own sake.

But if you really want to, get all am political radio on it, be my guest...

You really are that jaded aren't you?

The 3 best D players we have had recently...all were 3 stars, all from Indiana and all have good NFL careers right now. These are exactly the types of kids Purdue needs to get better in the long term.

4 stars are nice, but our last one might get booted from the team and the one before that just left the program.

 

[nat100]

You really are that jaded aren't you?

The 3 best D players we have had recently...all were 3 stars, all from Indiana and all have good NFL careers right now. These are exactly the types of kids Purdue needs to get better in the long term.

4 stars are nice, but our last one might get booted from the team and the one before that just left the program.

Robinson won't get booted but it is a mess

 

[boiler17]

You really are that jaded aren't you?

Haha, possibly. I agree with you on the LB. Hes the kind of kid I want, but they don't all turn out to be Ryan Kerrigans. That's a bit extreme. Yes, we have had a bad go of it with 4 stars, and yes I would like more of them. However, if youre going to hold me to anything, please hold me to wanting recruits with multiple offers from the 15th to 40th rated teams in the country. Aside from position needs and personal preferences for things like a tall secondary, its really all I care about in terms of recruiting.

And Im not being jaded about this. This staff identified Tranquill early on, and I think they might be good talent identifiers which is part of but not all of recruiting.

Dude just go root for Ohio State

Please read the above 69,

Saying go root for Ohio State is a bit of a jump.

800,

Your last post clarifies things a bit for me. Go nuts on the optimism. My posts here aside, but I am just as enthusiastic in the stadium as you are here.

Recruits look good so far.

This class seems very similar to the previous ones to me. Good LB, Good OL, and lots of diamonds in the rough. Are you looking at stars when you say this?

 

[nat100]

Stars and offers from other p5 schools. This is better so far

This is the range Purdue will always recruit in unless we have an absolute All star recruiter

 

[boiler800]

Haha, possibly. I agree with you on the LB. Hes the kind of kid I want, but they don't all turn out to be Ryan Kerrigans. That's a bit extreme. Yes, we have had a bad go of it with 4 stars, and yes I would like more of them. However, if youre going to hold me to anything, please hold me to wanting recruits with multiple offers from the 15th to 40th rated teams in the country. Aside from position needs and personal preferences for things like a tall secondary, its really all I care about in terms of recruiting.

And Im not being jaded about this. This staff identified Tranquill early on, and I think they might be good talent identifiers which is part of but not all of recruiting.


Please read the above 69,

Saying go root for Ohio State is a bit of a jump.

800,

Your last post clarifies things a bit for me. Go nuts on the optimism. My posts here aside, but I am just as enthusiastic in the stadium as you are here.



This class seems very similar to the previous ones to me. Good LB, Good OL, and lots of diamonds in the rough. Are you looking at stars when you say this?

Haha, possibly. I agree with you on the LB. Hes the kind of kid I want, but they don't all turn out to be Ryan Kerrigans. That's a bit extreme. Yes, we have had a bad go of it with 4 stars, and yes I would like more of them. However, if youre going to hold me to anything, please hold me to wanting recruits with multiple offers from the 15th to 40th rated teams in the country. Aside from position needs and personal preferences for things like a tall secondary, its really all I care about in terms of recruiting.

And Im not being jaded about this. This staff identified Tranquill early on, and I think they might be good talent identifiers which is part of but not all of recruiting.


Please read the above 69,

Saying go root for Ohio State is a bit of a jump.

800,

Your last post clarifies things a bit for me. Go nuts on the optimism. My posts here aside, but I am just as enthusiastic in the stadium as you are here.



This class seems very similar to the previous ones to me. Good LB, Good OL, and lots of diamonds in the rough. Are you looking at stars when you say this?

boiler17 we just disagree but it's great to know that you're just as enthusiastic in the stadium! The thing that I find to be very positive about this class is that it is filling up with recruits that the coaches have identified as priorities. I believe this coaching staff are good recruiters and I trust their judgement more than a Rivals ranking any day. BOILER UP!

 

[Grad2009DPT]

I agree, I am surprised Hazell is getting these commits considering his record. I will say that he had a nice first recruiting class before the season started, then half way through the season the top 5 players jumped ship after seeing what he does on the field. We all agree Hazell does just about everything well every day except for 12 Saturdays in the fall he is at his worse. Where some coaches suck at everything else but some how are the best on those 12 Saturdays. I still hope he can learn to be better at winning games, but he has had 24 opportunities that shows it is unlikely to happen. Once again I think this class so far is looking like a good class, unfortunately it does nothing to help Purdue win games this year.

 

[boiler17]

boiler17 we just disagree but it's great to know that you're just as enthusiastic in the stadium! The thing that I find to be very positive about this class is that it is filling up with recruits that the coaches have identified as priorities. I believe this coaching staff are good recruiters and I trust their judgement more than a Rivals ranking any day. BOILER UP!

Kudos. I appreciate the dissention, its the main reason I participate here.

Also glad to hear recruiting looks better. I don't put in enough effort to know who has what offer other than just checking rivals, and I know they aren't accurate all the time, so I will take the collective word for it. Rechecking the current commits does seem a little better than the previous years but not as good as Hopes last or Hazells first before the wheels fell off both classes. However, a step forward is a step forward.

I hope it signifies the team and staff finally getting on the same page. I really don't mind the losses anymore, I just want to see a team try hard, and do the boiler statue outside justice.

 

[rbaggie]

I agree, I am surprised Hazell is getting these commits considering his record. I will say that he had a nice first recruiting class before the season started, then half way through the season the top 5 players jumped ship after seeing what he does on the field. We all agree Hazell does just about everything well every day except for 12 Saturdays in the fall he is at his worse. Where some coaches suck at everything else but some how are the best on those 12 Saturdays. I still hope he can learn to be better at winning games, but he has had 24 opportunities that shows it is unlikely to happen. Once again I think this class so far is looking like a good class, unfortunately it does nothing to help Purdue win games this year.

I sure disagree here. I think perhaps we will see more acceptable Saturday coaching. I don't see a big X O problem, but lets just watch this year and see how it works now. More of his influence and systems installed, more of his players...you could be right, but Oh well, I am anxious for this season to see of its starting to work.

 

[boiler17]

I don't see a big X O problem

Remind me again, what do you see the problem as? I think the majority of our problem is an X O problem.

 

[BoilerFan#35]

We need to land better WRs. I think Deangelo Yancey may be the only current WR on our roster that chose us over another high major program.

 

[boiler800]

We need to land better WRs. I think Deangelo Yancey may be the only current WR on our roster that chose us over another high major program.

We're getting some in this class, and I believe Terrance Landers is set to announce very soon. Landers has been a long time target, and he's 6'4" with good speed. Although our JUCO's didn't have big school offers, I think we were very lucky to land them. They're both 6'4" and also have good speed, and Mahoungou has 4 years to play 3.

 

[rbaggie]

Remind me again, what do you see the problem as? I think the majority of our problem is an X O problem.

Bigger, Faster, Stronger, more experience, higher game IQ. Just now bending the curve up.

 

[rbaggie]

If you are going to run with the big dogs, you need some big mean dogs of your own.

 

[nat100]

We need to land better WRs. I think Deangelo Yancey may be the only current WR on our roster that chose us over another high major program.

Monteroso and Marshall had p5 offers

 

[SDBoiler1]

If you are going to run with the big dogs, you need some big mean dogs of your own.

rbaggie,

Do you ascribe to the philosophy that Lou Holtz espoused: "It's not the Xs and Os, but the Jimmys and the Joes"?

 

[BoilerGrad02]

rbaggie,

Do you ascribe to the philosophy that Lou Holtz espoused: "It's not the Xs and Os, but the Jimmys and the Joes"?

I think that philosophy is much more true in regards to defense.

I've seen plenty of good coaches create offense with an innovative system and putting less talented players in advantageous positions.

The top defenses in the country are almost always teams littered with top rated defensive players. There is only so much a coach can do on defense with lesser talent. A shutdown corner and a DE that just blows up offensive tackles isn't something a system creates as much as it is the natural talent and ability of the player. Technique can be improved and there will always be guys who fly under the recruiting radar but the expression I've always heard is.

"On offenses it's the Xs and Os, on defense the Jimmys and Joes".

 

[rbaggie]

I don't think Lou Holtz said it (don't think I have quoted him before) but where I grew up in football I heard this:
"If you open up the barn door and big fast horses don't run out, its gonna be a long season."
I do like Lou. I think both factors are important. I think there is a minimum level of competency from players that is necessary in order for a system to work. I will say, very solid quarterback play may have helped last year. As a defensive coordinator, last year, there were areas to exploit. I would have worked to jam and shut down the running game. Force Purdue to sustain long drives to score. Overplay and out physical the WR (beat the poop out of them off the ball. The occasional long run would just have to be dealt with. coach pursuit angles hard that week.
There were areas that could have exploited the defense too. Influence block DE's into deep backfield with QB stepping up to throw (kinda easy last year at times). Jimmys and Joes are important. Now with a third year of coaching I think the page may be turning and everyone may get on same playsheet. QB and DE are obvious keys for me this season.

 

[GoFightWin!]

Purdue's class is currently 12th in the Big Ten.

 

[boiler800]

Purdue's class is currently 12th in the Big Ten.

By who? You? Nice first post, full of uplifting information! Purdue's class will rank low simply by the small numbers of recruits, but the quality of our commits is heading upward. There is a positive trend in our recruiting.

 

[boiler17]

QB and DE are obvious keys for me this season.

Agree.

However, I do think we have huge problems with X's and O's. I'm optimistic since the staff has been around a little while they wont constantly be subbing out skill players looking for production. Even if they get the right guys in the right spots on both sides of the ball in the offseason, they need to get a lot better at scheming against the weakness of the opponent and making in game adjustments. Defensively, we lose track of the best player on the other teams offense too much, and have guys out of position offensively like running Posey/Monteroso across the middle into zone coverage to get killed by a LB or on running downs having some of our less effective blockers on some of the defenses better tacklers.

 

[boiler17]

Oh and I have nothing against Lou Holtz, but Im thrilled hes off of TV. Not only was his professionalism amongst the worst Ive ever seen by using most anything as a 10-20 second transition to talk about ND, but its been 2-3 years since the man could speak with reasonable enunciation. We all get old, and I hope he has a great sunset years.

 

[rbaggie]

Purdue's class is currently 12th in the Big Ten.

Welcome! Enjoy the board!

 

[rbaggie]

Oh and I have nothing against Lou Holtz, but Im thrilled hes off of TV. Not only was his professionalism amongst the worst Ive ever seen by using most anything as a 1ing0-20 second transition to talk about ND, but its been 2-3 years since the man could speak with reasonable enunciation. We all get old, and I hope he has a great sunset years.

Lou was a very good coach, and for awhile an interesting commentator....but I agree mostly.
I hear what you are saying, but I haven't seen overall that scheme or specific calls are the issues. I thought they eliminated a lot of "shows" last year that tipped off teams that scout well. I think receivers missed option routes or line reads that got their blocks knocked off too. Just thinking the whole tone and product could be much improved this year. Success however can be a thin slice away from disaster in this game. Ready for Marshall here though!

 

[GoFightWin!]

By who? You?

By the national website that created the board that you're currently posting on.

You weren't exactly an honor roll student, were you?

 

[boiler800]

Each recruit has a certain number of points based on their rating, and then all the points are totaled up to provide the team rankings. Highest total is first, lowest is last. I'm guessing here, but there are probably only 1 or 2 other schools with less than 10 recruits, which puts Purdue in the bottom 3 based on Rivals rating system. Whoever signs the most recruits is always rated higher than those with the fewest. When all is said and done in February, Purdue will sign 15-16 and everybody else will sign 21-25, which assures Purdue to be ranked in last place(or close), but it does not mean they have the worst class.

 

[boiler17]

I think receivers missed option routes or line reads that got their blocks knocked off too.

I wondered a lot about that last year. It was the only thing I could think of to explain why Knauf and Anthrop did a good job getting open when everyone else had guys all over them. The downs I watched of other receivers didnt seem to do anything terrible except Yancey, seemed like a lot of the same routes over and over again. Especially from the TEs. It also makes me wonder if the coached don't slow things down so athletes can pick them up better. I don't know though, because a lot of my gripes are uber basic, and its hard for me to imagine what they do game plan for if they aren't focused on stopping Illinois RB or MSU's top receiver, both of whom I forget the names for but are illustrations of what I was saying above. Why we would play them as easy as we did is beyond me, and obviously something Im stuck on.

Ready for Marshall here though!

Yeah, I struggle this time of year.

 

[boiler17]

By who? You? Nice first post, full of uplifting information! Purdue's class will rank low simply by the small numbers of recruits, but the quality of our commits is heading upward. There is a positive trend in our recruiting.

I stand by my cynicism and all from yesterday, but fight the good fight here. You keep on all the people that look up our recruiting rankings and reflexively call the staff bad recruiters, and I will ward off the ones that say we have a tough schedule.

Pretty sure theres gonna be a ton of both.

 

[SDBoiler1]

I don't think Lou Holtz said it (don't think I have quoted him before) but where I grew up in football I heard this:
"If you open up the barn door and big fast horses don't run out, its gonna be a long season."
I do like Lou. I think both factors are important. I think there is a minimum level of competency from players that is necessary in order for a system to work. I will say, very solid quarterback play may have helped last year. As a defensive coordinator, last year, there were areas to exploit. I would have worked to jam and shut down the running game. Force Purdue to sustain long drives to score. Overplay and out physical the WR (beat the poop out of them off the ball. The occasional long run would just have to be dealt with. coach pursuit angles hard that week.
There were areas that could have exploited the defense too. Influence block DE's into deep backfield with QB stepping up to throw (kinda easy last year at times). Jimmys and Joes are important. Now with a third year of coaching I think the page may be turning and everyone may get on same playsheet. QB and DE are obvious keys for me this season.

rbaggie,

I quoted Lou Holtz because I've actually heard him say that quote on ESPN a few times.

Totally agree about QB play. For Purdue, QB play is often the determinant of successful football seasons (or not). When Purdue has been good historically, our QB play has been good to excellent. Now the past two seasons we have not had good or excellent QB play, in general. Is that on the QBs or on the offensive scheme or on some combination of both?

What you laid out is exactly what teams did to Purdue as the season wore on, especially after the MSU and Minnesota stretch. Shut down the run game. Jam Purdue's WRs on the line. Make Purdue have to execute long drives in order to score. Yup, you may give up a long Hunt or Mostert run, but you'll take that occasional breakdown, when you know the rest of the team is so scoring challenged. On top of that, since Purdue could not typically sustain long drives and eat up TOP, their defense would wear down late in the first half and into the second half.

Agree completely on the DEs, too. Russell was disappointing, and the other side was inexperienced and probably not physically ready to play big minutes. Purdue often had DEs out-of-position and biting on fakes. I like the idea of Hudson giving the DEs personal attention. Coach Carter is good, but handling DTs is one thing, DEs entirely another.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Each recruit has a certain number of points based on their rating, and then all the points are totaled up to provide the team rankings. Highest total is first, lowest is last. I'm guessing here, but there are probably only 1 or 2 other schools with less than 10 recruits, which puts Purdue in the bottom 3 based on Rivals rating system. Whoever signs the most recruits is always rated higher than those with the fewest. When all is said and done in February, Purdue will sign 15-16 and everybody else will sign 21-25, which assures Purdue to be ranked in last place(or close), but it does not mean they have the worst class.

I often look at average stars, and by that measure, at least on Rivals.com, Purdue is doing better than recent years. One of our OL recruits has not been evaluated yet. I like a number of the players committed so far, especially the latest one in Colin Miller. We needed WRs and DBs, and we're getting some. I really hope we get Landers. We still badly need TEs, DTs, and DEs (above and beyond Miller, who I think will be a DE/hybrid outside LB). For years, Purdue has had some trouble recruiting good DTs (bigger run stoppers, yet guys who are somewhat athletic and have good footwork).

 

[rbaggie]

rbaggie,

I quoted Lou Holtz because I've actually heard him say that quote on ESPN a few times.

Totally agree about QB play. For Purdue, QB play is often the determinant of successful football seasons (or not). When Purdue has been good historically, our QB play has been good to excellent. Now the past two seasons we have not had good or excellent QB play, in general. Is that on the QBs or on the offensive scheme or on some combination of both?

What you laid out is exactly what teams did to Purdue as the season wore on, especially after the MSU and Minnesota stretch. Shut down the run game. Jam Purdue's WRs on the line. Make Purdue have to execute long drives in order to score. Yup, you may give up a long Hunt or Mostert run, but you'll take that occasional breakdown, when you know the rest of the team is so scoring challenged. On top of that, since Purdue could not typically sustain long drives and eat up TOP, their defense would wear down late in the first half and into the second half.

Agree completely on the DEs, too. Russell was disappointing, and the other side was inexperienced and probably not physically ready to play big minutes. Purdue often had DEs out-of-position and biting on fakes. I like the idea of Hudson giving the DEs personal attention. Coach Carter is good, but handling DTs is one thing, DEs entirely another.

I like Hudson with DE's a lot. I am looking for more offensive balance which so the defense has to play us a little more base, or just let us get off the line.

 

[lbodel]

You really are that jaded aren't you?

The 3 best D players we have had recently...all were 3 stars, all from Indiana and all have good NFL careers right now. These are exactly the types of kids Purdue needs to get better in the long term.

4 stars are nice, but our last one might get booted from the team and the one before that just left the program.

Why does everyone treat recruiting in black and white?

First off, you can't make some blanket statement that we don't want 4 stars because we always have problems. We've had plenty of them that were great players in college and went onto have great NFL careers. Also, the fact that you used Etling as a reason is hilarious - his career was bungled by the coaching staff. No wonder he left. And if we got a class full of 4 stars, you wouldn't be worried, geesh.

Secondly, there are varying degrees of recruits. Most of our recruits may be rated as 3 stars - but don't have any offers from hardly any (if any) major programs. Then there are 3 star players that have a handful of major programs. But you also cannot look at it in black and white - some teams have classes of 25-30 players. The guy who is our top 3 star player may be other team's lower-priority recruit. A football team has 85 scholarships - you aren't going to have all starter/"priority" players on your team.

Third, this class is going to be small. We have a few good recruits and still a number of questionable ones. Purdue's recruiting class is still 12th in the Big Ten by points and 9th by average stars. That's still not gonna get it done.

The fact that people are "trash talking" about how great our recruiting class is have really been drinking kool-aid and have low expectations. This class is no different than Hope's best class. It's just simply not good enough for a Big Ten caliber program. Do we have some good recruits? Absolutely. We've had "good recruits" in almost every class.

 

[lbodel]

Each recruit has a certain number of points based on their rating, and then all the points are totaled up to provide the team rankings. Highest total is first, lowest is last. I'm guessing here, but there are probably only 1 or 2 other schools with less than 10 recruits, which puts Purdue in the bottom 3 based on Rivals rating system. Whoever signs the most recruits is always rated higher than those with the fewest. When all is said and done in February, Purdue will sign 15-16 and everybody else will sign 21-25, which assures Purdue to be ranked in last place(or close), but it does not mean they have the worst class.

Yes, but let's keep in mind people celebrated Hope's big class that was ranked like 6th or 7th - because it was so large. Not because of the quality. So you can't have it both ways.

And you can also look at average stars, were Purdue is still in the bottom half currently.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Yes, but let's keep in mind people celebrated Hope's big class that was ranked like 6th or 7th - because it was so large. Not because of the quality. So you can't have it both ways.

And you can also look at average stars, were Purdue is still in the bottom half currently.

Surely you can distinguish between bottom half and rock bottom. Admit it or not, Purdue's recruiting does seem to be on a positive upswing. Right now, we need to take the positives when we get them with this program. Hopefully, we can continue to climb out of our hole, become relevant again, and stop losing to IU.

 

[boiler800]

The coaches are landing their top targets and in my opinion that is more important than some guys opinion from Rivals. If you want to go by stars, we've got 8 three stars, and 1 two star. As for Hope's class with so many signees, I have always based my optimism on if the coaches are signing their A list targets. So far this class is 100% A list commits. Hope never did anything close to that. he usually signed a bunch of B and C targets from Florida to fill the class at the end. I feel more confident when the class is the guys the coaches like best.