We have seen nothing in Hazell's first 2 seasons that shows he is capable of being a Power 5 head coach. He presents himself well and I hope the light bulb goes off this year and he is able to turn it around. I am starting to wonder if Burke is doing his best to roll out the red carpet for Hazel no matter what, not because Hazell has earned it to this point but instead to give the perception of he has done everything he can do to help the coach. 1. in hope of getting fans to stop blaming him for the troubles in football. 2. so when he does fire Hazell, he is able to look better in the eyes of the new coach he will try to bring to Purdue. I think some of Burkes blind commitment to Hazell is more to impress the next guy than just to keep Hazell happy.
Thought about Burke's commitment to Hazell
- Thread starter Grad2009DPT
- Start date
Hope you're right. I think CDH has one more year to show us something. It takes 3 years to start building your program, and 3 years in, Hazell needs at least as many wins overall this year as he had combined in his 1st 2 years (4) and maybe double what he has so far in league play (1) to show that he is capable of leading this team.
Burke did show a similar commitment to Hope and then turn on him very quickly. Its probably just how he has to talk.
I dunno though, theres something about what he says that makes me think we are sink or swim with this Burke and Hazell.
I dunno though, theres something about what he says that makes me think we are sink or swim with this Burke and Hazell.
If hazell fails, I can't imagine how Burke would be allowed to hire the next coach.
He didnt really show Hope commitment. He was searching for replacements behind the scenes during his third year.
Burke kept saying all that stuff about how frustrating it was to watch the team in practice, and 'clearly the team is in the right hands' because they looked so much better under Hope's guidance than Tillers, but that injuries stopped it from showing up on the field, and Hope's firing certainly caught Hope himself off guard.
I still think you have to make those types of comments about a current head coach no matter what. 99% of what I get from Burke is in print, so maybe it would be different if I were hearing him speak, but he sure sounds all jacked up when the topic of 'does he believe in Hazell' comes up. Then again, he hasnt renewed his contract to help with recruiting. Maybe thats why we are getting all these low level 'A list' guys, cause Hazell cant show them anything but the university will be there by the time they show up?
I still think you have to make those types of comments about a current head coach no matter what. 99% of what I get from Burke is in print, so maybe it would be different if I were hearing him speak, but he sure sounds all jacked up when the topic of 'does he believe in Hazell' comes up. Then again, he hasnt renewed his contract to help with recruiting. Maybe thats why we are getting all these low level 'A list' guys, cause Hazell cant show them anything but the university will be there by the time they show up?
The ship is sinking fast. If the A. D. isn't careful, he may go down with it. I hope by the end of this season & into next season, I'm wrong about he direction of this team, but nothing I see in front of me, leads me to believe the direction is changing any time soon. I hope I'm wrong on all counts, but doubt it. If we don't beat ISU, we may not win a game all season. Zero for 2015 would be grounds for a new coach.
Just beat IU, please!
I am hardly in a panic mode after 2 seasons. If you can't see signs of change, you aren't looking. It may be appropriate to get worried after the end of season 3. I am excited for the season to begin.
If we take a step forward to say 5 or so wins, I think a lot of the heat is off Hazell and Burke. Not that this is a great sign that this team is going to be competing for a BIG championship anytime soon, but I would take it as a positive step forward, meaning that in year 4 we have rebuilt the depth in the program, are back bowling and are on our way to being competitive in the conference as a whole.
The big factor in this though is $.
Purdue's athletic department is getting KILLED by the lack of revenue from football.
A 5 win season would most likely not add much to the revenue (especially when there aren't a lot of big names coming to Ross-Ade). And depending on who the wins were against, I'm not sure it would really generate much going into the next year.
Can Purdue take 2 more years of this type of revenue from football? I'm not sure. Obviously Hazell may have Painter to thank if attendance is strong with men's basketball over those years - however, even maxing out basketball revenue is a fraction of what football can generate (50,000 seats vs. 15,000).
I don't disagree....but nuking the past 3 years of progress put us further behind. I mean, realistically....how are we going to be able to hire a coach that can come in and win 7-8 games with A. our talent baseline and B. the fact that we would have just fired 2 coaches in the span of 7 years?
A long, slow build is what we are and were in for from the start. We are well on our way...and blowing this up in year 3 or 4 with positive trending results would be disastrous. That said, if we take a backslide this year...we should definitely start making arrangements to escort this guy and his cronies out of town....if they make positive progress...why should we blow that up?
Again....who could we bring in or what could we do to bring the gate draw immediately up besides win? And what could we do/afford to buy that would make this happen? At this point, the only answer is to grow this program organically and start winning again...
Well, obviously there are a lot of hypotheticals.
This season could go a number of directions and a lot depends on how good some of the "on the fence" teams will be. We have some very tough games. Marshall is obviously supposed to be decent, but they're still a lower tier type of conference - I'm not sure it's a team we will just be dominated by. Also, it's the first game of the season - these games can really go either way and not necessarily dependent on who is better in the long run. It would not be inconceivable to have 3 non-conference wins. But it's not necessarily a sign of progress either - 2 of them are games a Big Ten team of any caliber should win.
Going into the Big Ten, Minnesota and Illinois are two home games - Minnesota is supposed to be decently good, but they are always hit and miss and Illinois is supposed to be decent at best. Northwestern is kinda like a Minnesota - just depends on what team shows up. And then you have IU at home, who isn't supposed to be good.
So we could easily win 5 games against 5 teams who aren't that great. But it's hard to say how other teams will pan out. And it's obviously hard to say who we would beat and who we'd lose to (i.e. losing to Indiana State but beating an 7-5 Iowa team - isn't probably going to be impressive).
I really don't like playing the "number of games" argument. But I will say to your other point - generating excitement has more to do with just wins. I've mentioned this example before - Painter's first season we had a horrible record, yet attendance increased because the team busted its butt and really played some good teams hard. A lot of excitement has to do with recruiting. They may not be on campus yet, or may not have seen them play in a Purdue uniform, but excitement about recruiting generates interest.
There's just literally 0 buzz about Purdue football right now. And that effects everyone - if you have a coaching staff pumping up things and the energy can be seen - that's not something only fans see, but recruits. I've said it time and time again, but there are not many things that this program has done to push the envelope. Is it something one person is responsible for? No, it's not just the football program, but the athletic department.
This season could go a number of directions and a lot depends on how good some of the "on the fence" teams will be. We have some very tough games. Marshall is obviously supposed to be decent, but they're still a lower tier type of conference - I'm not sure it's a team we will just be dominated by. Also, it's the first game of the season - these games can really go either way and not necessarily dependent on who is better in the long run. It would not be inconceivable to have 3 non-conference wins. But it's not necessarily a sign of progress either - 2 of them are games a Big Ten team of any caliber should win.
Going into the Big Ten, Minnesota and Illinois are two home games - Minnesota is supposed to be decently good, but they are always hit and miss and Illinois is supposed to be decent at best. Northwestern is kinda like a Minnesota - just depends on what team shows up. And then you have IU at home, who isn't supposed to be good.
So we could easily win 5 games against 5 teams who aren't that great. But it's hard to say how other teams will pan out. And it's obviously hard to say who we would beat and who we'd lose to (i.e. losing to Indiana State but beating an 7-5 Iowa team - isn't probably going to be impressive).
I really don't like playing the "number of games" argument. But I will say to your other point - generating excitement has more to do with just wins. I've mentioned this example before - Painter's first season we had a horrible record, yet attendance increased because the team busted its butt and really played some good teams hard. A lot of excitement has to do with recruiting. They may not be on campus yet, or may not have seen them play in a Purdue uniform, but excitement about recruiting generates interest.
There's just literally 0 buzz about Purdue football right now. And that effects everyone - if you have a coaching staff pumping up things and the energy can be seen - that's not something only fans see, but recruits. I've said it time and time again, but there are not many things that this program has done to push the envelope. Is it something one person is responsible for? No, it's not just the football program, but the athletic department.
Yeah, that's what you guys need.
Another MAC flavor of the month with absolutely no proven longterm record of success.
3 wins or less this year, I'd have P J Fleck on speed dial.
As David Spade says "Buh Bye"
well we could have made a change at OC and brought in a young innovative coach that would shake things up and create some buzz. But that would require a staff and admin that aren't completely tone deaf to anything new.
The offense this year will be same old same old....
I agree. Sad part is, I think the D could be pretty salty. At least good enough to keep a team that scores 4-5 TDs a game actually in games.
Our offense can't do it. I don't necessarily think it's on the field personnel either. We'll be more consistent from the QB spot. Have a good OL with depth, get better play from the WRs (B. Marshall can really play) and I think Knox and Green will be more consistent 4-5 yard a touch guys.
At the end of the day though, we'll still be running Shoops tired and conservative scheme.
Good post.I understand why so many fans are frustrated right now,but I am looking forward to this year with an open mind.
It seems to me Hazell is trying to build things the right way with offensive and defensive line development and depth...increasing size and strength to be able to stack up with other BIG10 programs, which at a program like Purdue will take time. We played a ton of young guys the last few years. As long as the teams show improvement each year, i'm not sure what else you can ask for at this point. It's not like we are Ohio State or Michigan where 4 and 5 star recruits don't need much coaxing to show up. Hazell doesn't have the luxury of Drew Brees walking through the door as Joe Tiller had which helped with Tiller's teams quick rise in wins. And Brees wasn't exactly a prized recruit that Tiller landed at the time.
College football is so much about QB play. If one of the current QB's breaks out and becomes a stud in the next year or two, there is no reason Purdue couldn't jump up in win total considering we play in the weaker BIG10 division and Hazell ends up looking like a good coach. We improved last year...I don't see any reason we won't be improved this year which to me is all you can really ask at this point.
College football is so much about QB play. If one of the current QB's breaks out and becomes a stud in the next year or two, there is no reason Purdue couldn't jump up in win total considering we play in the weaker BIG10 division and Hazell ends up looking like a good coach. We improved last year...I don't see any reason we won't be improved this year which to me is all you can really ask at this point.
We ALL hope you are right. Time to correct history, Joe Tiller arrived at Purdue in 1997 and immediately converted a safety named Billy Dicken to Quarter back. The 1997 season led to a bowl game and Drew Brees became a starter in '98. I watched as Brees delivered a very promising performance the 1/2 half at USC, only to fall to Carson Palmer on a very Hot August Saturday in Watts. Joe Tiller brought a scheme for football that the big10 that enabled undersized players to compete with bigger teams. Basketball on Grass. It drove a revolution in the Big 10. Purdue was always at a size disadvantage, See Rose Bowl of 2001 as an example.
It appears that Hazel does not have a scheme to deal with the talent deficit. He also doesn't appear to be very good at recruiting either.
More revisionist history correction....
Billy Dicken was a QB in 94, converted to safety and then converted back in 96...a year before Tiller got here. I think he played a decent amount of snaps in both years.
This myth that Tiller created a QB out of nowhere is just that. That said, Dicken was good for us...but he WAS a QB and Coletto converted him to Safety and then drug him back to the QB spot in 1996.
I would go with one of the three Bs:
Craig Bohl-hiring a guy from Wyoming worked once before
Brock Spack-knows Purdue and his FCS team would have killed us last year
Bo Pelini-I like cats
I guess that is my point. Hazell seems to be trying to build a BIG10 type of team for sustained program success without the need for a gimmick type of offense...by winning in the trenches and being able to match up size wise with the big boys. Get to a point where your freshman and sophomore lineman are given time to develop skill and strength and let the juniors and seniors win games on the field. Seems like he is building for longer term success than a flash in the pan few years of success. It will take time to actually accomplish that and as long as we look more improved this season than last, I think Hazell should be given time to try to build that foundation for sustained success. It's not like Nick Saban and 5 star recruits would be replacing Hazell if he gets canned after 3 years. I think player development at a school like Purdue is just as important as recruiting. A 3-star recruit can be a 4 star player with development and coaching. I think once we get to the point where we are playing a lot of upper classmen, Hazell will have success...and the rest falls on QB play.
At that point once the foundation is built, Purdue could make a huge leap in wins if we stumbled upon a future NFL quarterback.
But that's just me being a pre-season optimist.
You're probably both. That happens to some posters when a mirror is held up to this forum.
If You recall, Dicken was injured as a Freshman playing QB, but due to the should problem, I didn't think that Coletto put Billie back at QB during his tenure.. I didn't recall Dicken coming back as a QB his Junior Year... Could be wrong. I do remember that BD under the Tiller system tore Wisconsin apart as we came away with a win.. in 97 as he did many other teams.
The Bigger point overlooked, is that fitting the players into a system where the team can maximize its success is big draw for recruiting and fans. No one wants to lose. The concept that Purdue will just recruit 2 /3 star players to fit Hazels system until they develop is a best a slow path to success and as we have experienced - a very unsatisfying start.
Last edited:
You are correct, Dicken did return to QB in 96, threw 40+ passes on the way to a 3-8 season. Shared the position with Trevger (sp) and Reeves.
97 was quite different.
Okay let's take a step back and look and the general "theme" if you will here. And that is getting 5 wins would be deemed successful for the most part and seems to be where the bar is set.
5 .. freakin... wins
I'm not trying to be critical of those being optimistic, I used to be one of you in terms of the football team, but this just shows how far we have fallen when it seems like we all would be "happy" if we got 5 wins.
Purdue should be better than that. Personally I think the talent is there already but the staff just doesn't know how to use them properly or is in over their head as it were. I have no issues with CDH and co as people, but as a coaching staff I have yet to see ANYTHING that makes me optimistic with the future.
And trust me, I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong. Football is hands down my favorite sport ... by a large margin .... so all of this extra sucks for me at least.
5 .. freakin... wins
I'm not trying to be critical of those being optimistic, I used to be one of you in terms of the football team, but this just shows how far we have fallen when it seems like we all would be "happy" if we got 5 wins.
Purdue should be better than that. Personally I think the talent is there already but the staff just doesn't know how to use them properly or is in over their head as it were. I have no issues with CDH and co as people, but as a coaching staff I have yet to see ANYTHING that makes me optimistic with the future.
And trust me, I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong. Football is hands down my favorite sport ... by a large margin .... so all of this extra sucks for me at least.
I really don't think Hazel is the problem. I don't think we're spending enough money on the football program, and he can't get the staff he wants to come here. When we get good coaches, they leave for other schools and more money. When Morgan Burt gives him the money he needs to build the program, will be successful. Until then, will be at the bottom of the barrel.
Who did he want that he couldnt afford? If Hazell had his way, Brian Rock would have been OC and i doubt he would have cost more than Shoop.
And you very well might be right. I have never been a fan of Shoop as an example and think just getting a good OC and DC in would do wonders.
You are correct. In Colletto's defense, he was attempting to get the best players on the field.
Dicken was a solid QB who could have benefited tremendously from Tiller's offense, if given 4 seasons to play it.
If Hazell/Purdue wins 2 pre conference games this season, & 2 B1G games this season, what do you [as Burke/BOT/powers that be] tell Coach Hazell after the last game of the season?
A. Good job coach, can't wait until next season.
B. We didn't have many key injuries this season, do you think we could/should have won more than 2 B1G games?
C. We hate to inform you of this Coach Hazell, but we're going in a different direction, thanks for the effort. Good luck next stop.
D. Since you've been here, recruiting has been nothing to write home about, our record is consistantly at or near the bottom of our conference, & it's time to say goodby.
E. We think you should have shown more progress in the 3 seasons you've been here. Our recruiting is still at or near the bottom of the conference & it's time to start looking for a new head coach?
I'd have told Coach Hazell, after the last game of last season, "For you to keep your job after next season, you must get at least 3 B1G wins next season." I think we all hope Coach Hazell does well, but deep down, his glass is now looking half past empty & turned up side down. Wishing, wanting & hoping just ain't gettin' it done. This is the season, the rubber meets the road, excuses are all used up & victories are at a premium. If he wins 2 B1G games this season, has average or fewer key injuries to deal with & recruiting is about the same as previously, what do you tell him/demand of him after this season? I don't think it should get to next season [again] unless he wins at least 3 B1G games this season. Unfortunately, I think it's come to that. How many years do you have to get beat in the head, before you start looking for the reason of your headaches? Three.
