through 2016. That way if things don't work out the rest of this year and next then there are no excuses that he did not get plenty of time. Plus with all of the openings this year, it could be slim pickings for some programs and some risky hires as well.
You are smart to keep Hazell...
- Thread starter IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life
- Start date
Well I think 3 years is plenty of time to show a little improvement, when you are the worst team in Division 1 football for 3 years and worst ever at Purdue, then its time to go with another coach. Other teams love playing Purdue now, and us fans hate seeing our team get beat when a lot of us feel like we are a better team than the teams record shows. i see you guys are playing well, wish we were.
It's easy to say that we should keep our coach when you're miles away and sitting at 8-0.
There's coaching turnover every year. Keeping Hazell because of competing openings is a horrible reason. Is this year going to have more significant openings than the past 2 years?
2015: Michigan, Florida, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Pitt, and Kansas all brought in new coaches.
2014: PSU, Texas, Louisville, Washington and Vandy brought in new coaches.
There's coaching turnover every year. Keeping Hazell because of competing openings is a horrible reason. Is this year going to have more significant openings than the past 2 years?
2015: Michigan, Florida, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Pitt, and Kansas all brought in new coaches.
2014: PSU, Texas, Louisville, Washington and Vandy brought in new coaches.
The difference with this year than years past is that there are already roughly 10 head coaching vacancies and arguably Purdue would be near the bottom in terms of attractiveness. Southern Cal, South Carolina, Minnesota, Illinois, Maryland, Virginia Tech, Miami, UCF, North Texas, and Hawaii are all currently open. With the exception to the last 2, I would personally rank Purdue behind all of those potential openings. With that said, Purdue could potentially be looking at 8th in the pecking order for head coaching candidates which could lead to a potentially volatile hire (some one unproven) unless MB is thinking outside of the box (which we all know he really doesn't do) and hiring from the NFL or from DII/FCS (outside of Brock Spack).
With that current model, you would be looking at Brock Spack as being your #1 priority because unless the guys that are the hot commodities choose to stay at their current schools, they will be scooped up (and have probably already been in contact) by the better programs...and honestly there are probably at least 2 more that will pop open.
With that current model, you would be looking at Brock Spack as being your #1 priority because unless the guys that are the hot commodities choose to stay at their current schools, they will be scooped up (and have probably already been in contact) by the better programs...and honestly there are probably at least 2 more that will pop open.
I don't think 1 person in their right mind would say he didn't have "plenty of time" to show progress in the current situation.
The problem with Hazell is beyond wins and losses. You can't find steady and hopeful progress anywhere with the program. Obviously one of the "future" forecasts of a program is recruiting and we haven't shown a lick of improvement there.
+1
There would be much more patience and understanding if any (preferably all) of the following were true:
(1) improved recruiting
(2) steady on field progress
(3) clear offensive and defensive identities
(4) multiple roster decimating injuries
(5) a brutal schedule
(6) a coaching history of multiple winning seasons
Just pointing out that, in the end, that first season Hazell played 3 BCS bowl teams (OSU, MSU, NIU) with 9 overall bowl teams (IU ended up at 5-7 that season).
Last season, Purdue ended up playing 9 bowl eligible teams once again with NU ending at 5-7 for nearing 10 total bowl eligible teams.
At this point, Purdue has 6 teams that are bowl eligible already (Marshall, BGSU, MSU, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Iowa) and teams that can still become eligible in Indiana, Minnesota, Virginia Tech, and Illinois (all have 4 wins). To me, that isn't an easy schedule at all. I am not making excuses and that is sort of the thing you get playing in the B1G, but MB did Hazell no favors trying to build a program when his non-conference opponents (in the FBS) are nearly all bowl eligible every year. That's a tough recipe for success.
All this is nice, but we should be 4-4 AT A MINIMUM at this point if the coach were showing any progress. We handed the game to Marshall.....and really did the same thing vs. BGSU in a game where the O played pretty consistently decent and the kicking game and D let us down.
There are now 41 bowl games, so I don't think "bowl eligibility" is a good metric for strength of schedule anymore. By the NCAA SOS method, Purdue had:
- The toughest schedule in 2013.
- 43rd toughest schedule in 2014.
- 50th toughest in 2015
This is out of about 65 major D1 programs. I agree 2013 featured an extremely tough schedule, but it looks like the past two years that Purdue's schedule was in the lower tier of P5 schools.
- The toughest schedule in 2013.
- 43rd toughest schedule in 2014.
- 50th toughest in 2015
This is out of about 65 major D1 programs. I agree 2013 featured an extremely tough schedule, but it looks like the past two years that Purdue's schedule was in the lower tier of P5 schools.
The only reason I appreciate Hazell's continuance is that, hopefully, Burke will be gone when it comes time to pick a new coach. I would really rather see Hazell turn in to a COY candidate for an amazing turnaround but I have no illusions about that.
I mentioned that it shouldn't be used as an excuse because you could easily say that winning some of those games allows Hazell to show clear improvement in the program. However, look at how programs like Minnesota and Texas Tech and Baylor built their programs...they scheduled cupcakes to build a record that could get them to a bowl game every year. It isn't just about the novelty of playing in a bowl game, it is about the added month or more of practicing and working on fundamentals that helps improve a program. It gives those younger guys an ability to continue working on things to be able to step in when they are ready at a much better level than not.
hell Purdue is the cupcake other teams want to schedule now
Correct me if I am wrong but aren't football games scheduled years in advance? If so, even with a new coach and the desire to soften the schedule, wouldn't it be too late to affect anything in the next few years? And isn't that the time frame when we want things to happen?
Trying to soften the schedule would work down the line, but who wishes Purdue to be where it is for that length of time? It seems to me that the better solution is to keep the more attractive schedule (and presumably more tv exposure to help recruiting) with a new regime that will focus and succeed in turning the program around well before the proposed scheduling strategy would have any significant effect.
You said it,brother.I will never forget Griggs two FG misses,and the defense getting called THREE TIMES for hands to the face penalties on Bowling Gtreens winning drive,and scoring with nine seconds left.UGH!
ESPN radio the other day was talking about roughly 30 coaching vacancies. Didn't even mention Boilers as a top 20 job.
Good god man!!!!!!Who doesn't go to a Bowl game anymore besides us and IU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And once again I'll mention, it doesn't matter what bowl game you get to, to build a solid program you need those extra 3-4 weeks of practice you get to continue working on things as a team. When you think about it, it is essentially like an extra spring football session every year.
Similar threads
