A name that hasn't been thrown out to replace Darrell Hazell...
- Thread starter JohnnyDoeBoiler
- Start date
Um, duh.
This forum is dedicated to Purdue football...how could it be anything but a dumpster fire?
Ignore him, he doesnt post substance, only posts insinuating he is a better fan.
Holgerson was gone when Houston put up it's best season under Sumlin. May mean something, may mean nothing but it wasn't like the thing just imploded without Holgo like Auburn did when Malzahn left.
I think that's very much oversimplifying things. First off, Tiller wasn't a 2 year and done coach. We were good prior to Brees and we were good after Brees (and arguably our best team was post-Brees). Secondly, it's not just a winning/losing thing - there has been issue after issue that has nothing to do with on the field. That's a red flag.
Offensive philosophy is great, but it means nothing if you can't have players to execute it.
Nothing Sumlin has done is "I want nothing to do with him", but I certainly am not at a point where I'm clamoring either.
I also do not understand everyone's obsession with spread offense coaches. It's not unique anymore, as it was under Tiller, and it's hard to be good with it (i.e. you need a good defense too). Yes, we saw success because of a spread offense for a few years - but as we got better with Brees, our offense actually wasn't growing, it was our defense getting better and we took fewer risks. And in the early 2000s, much of our success had to do with having one of the better defenses.
Just because you are the "Cradle of QBs" doesn't equal spread offense. Bob Griese had Leroy Keys by his side, for example. We weren't a spread offense.
I don't want to have an "Alabama offense" where we have some crazy defense that requires just running up the middle most of the time. But in the Big Ten, I don't think a spread offense is really going to cut it. It reminds me of the post-Orton days with Painter, etc. We racked up some major yards against bad teams, but could barely score against just a good team (and we had no defense). We went quite some time without beating a top 25 team, yet were making a 6/7 win bowl games. That's obviously an improvement than what we have now, but I think a lot of people ignore the other side of the ball that's less flashy a bit too much.
What you're missing here is that since Tiller left....we haven't really had ANY offensive philosophy to hang our hats on. It makes it hard to recruit top players when they are uncertain what schemes you will be running with them.
We don't recruit OL well enough to be a run based team. So why WOULDN'T we run the spread?
Sumlin really hasn't had many off the field issues. A lot of it has centered around his offensive coaches (Spavitol, the OC and this WR coach who went off with his tweet). Honestly, even if he brought those same hires to Purdue we wouldn't have the same issues here. Why? Because those guys are feeling the heat of insanely unrealistic expectations of winning national championships in the toughest division in CFB with underclassmen QBs. That puts every action under a microscope and ratchets up the pressure to where personalities clash and wills break.
Those same guys could come to Purdue and win 8 games their first year. If not, they would take us as far as our talent could go. They are good coaches....just maybe not cut out for that situation.
Also, all I was really saying above was that Tiller raised the bar and then when he couldn't maintain the natives got restless. That's all. Sumlin came in and raised expectations and now that he has underclassmen QBs that aren't immediate heisman winners he is having trouble meeting those expectations. Expectations that he set. TAMU was definitely a better football school than Purdue....but most of that has to do with being in Texas and not what they have accomplished on the field. I really don't think they had been that much better than us from say 1996-2008.
Agree with pboiler on this. Of course having a good defense is preferable to not, no one is arguing that. But unless we are recruiting top OLs and RBs, running a pass-heavy spread is the only way we will be successful.
I truly think the first season, with what appeared to be a better than most defense, Hazell wanted to attempt to establish an offense that would hopefully chew clock and keep the defense fresh for the Boilers and hopefully win games scoring below 20. The issue is that the offense ended up leaving the defense out to try and continued to do so over his first three years. It is very hard, no matter what type of defense you have, to play 65-80 snaps a game and be on the field for 35-40 minutes and not be exhausted by the second half. It truly think that is the reason why Purdue has tended to get blasted in the second half of games or near the mid-portion of the second quarter. This is why, I truly think, the main issue with the program was in fact the offensive and defensive coordinators (yes, I am placing blame on Hudson as well).
From my sources, there was a massive divide between the OC and DC, to the point of a physical altercation at one point. It is hard for a DC to take what Shoop was handing to the defense for three years sitting down, so I obviously don't blame him. Had Purdue been playing with a halfway decent offense the past three years, there is probably a minimum of 12 wins over the past three years instead of just 6. It doesn't look great BUT it's better to average 4 wins than 2!
What strikes me as very odd is that if Hazell had an inkling of thought about giving Malone the job at the end of the season and firing Shoops, why not allow Malone the chance to work with the players mid-season and fire Shoop right then? What the absolute worst that could have happened had Shoop been fired in-season? Make the change after the Wisconsin game with an upcoming off week and you lose to Nebraska and go 1-11 instead of 2-10? Hell, firing Shoop mid season would have ended a lot of debate for many of the fickle fans alone to give Hazell his fourth year because it would have shown he had the balls to make major moves.
I am waiting until fall camp where I can see the team perform closer to Saturday's about my optimism for the entire season. Malone appears to have the offense working at a much more efficient rate (not more explosive but more efficient) and the new DC appears to understand personnel match-ups much better. If Hazell can lead the team to 5 wins this season, he garners a 5th to get the team to a bowl game...anything less and Purdue needs to start the search for their new coach mid-season...and unfortunately that tag is going to come at an equal to higher rate than what Hazell is getting now.
It's bowl or gtfo. And even then a bowl might not be enough. A new ad will be in place by the start of the season and he will have to deal with the damage hazell has done. 6 wins probably won't be enough to to appease pissed off and apathetic fans. 5 wins certainly wont
It is supposed to be a low bowl in year three of a rebuild. Not year 5
It is supposed to be a low bowl in year three of a rebuild. Not year 5
Disagree. 5 wins keeps his job, as we would likely go to a bowl with there being so many now. 6 wins definitely keeps it.
I think that with the stinker OC we had we can easily show that level of improvement.
If not, he's gone....and I don't have a problem with it.
IMO, a new AD isnt going to keep someone who has won 11 games in 4 years. Whoever it is will want their own guy.
Fire a guy on an upswing and bringing in your own guy with odds pointing to him most likely being a failure than a success...
Seems like something MB would do.
If you are going to fire a guy for only winning 11 in 4 years, why not fire him for only winning 6 in 3? We are looking for logical and realistic improvement, not a BIG championship next year.
They didnt fire him this year because of Burke's contract. There is a reason the AD search was announced in February of this year and not next.
As for logical/realistic improvement, 5 wins in year is underperformance. Comparing it to his prior seasons is the wrong metric. Comparing him to the 4th year of other B1G coaches of similar programs is the correct metric. The only program that kept a loser in year 4 was IU.
So if he doesn't win 8 he's gone? That's just not logical. At all.
I think we won't win any more than 4 and he will be fired....but if he turns the ship I think he gets more time.
That is, unless we have a slam dunk hire lined up.
I work with Kevin Sumlin's cousin and he says that Sumlin's mother and immediately family is in Indianapolis still. I think his father passed away 2 months ago....so he might be willing to be closer to "home". He could come here....keep a P5 job and still make $2.5+ million. I'd support him or PJ Fleck as hires. Again, if its not a slam dunk or a clear upgrade I think we'd be wasting our time to make a change if we won 5-6 games.
Regarding win count. I think the well is so poisoned that it would take a miracle season for the fans to return if he were still coach in 2017. The diehards are pissed off and the remainder of the fanbase is too apathetic to attend. That is a big problem. Is it logical, no. What fan base is?
Re: Sumlin. he going to survive at TAMU? Id take him or Fleck. Although im not sure how good Fleck is with Xs & Os
No way Sumlin survives. He had the #1 pro style QB from 2014 and the #1 Dual Threat QB from 2015 and now both are gone. Lots of infighting in the coaches room. UNREAL expectations of TAMU fans (competing for NCs in the toughest division and conference in CFB). He gone.
I'd be up to pick up his $5mil over the next 3 years if TAMU picks up Hazell's $4.4 over the next 2. Factoring what we would have to pay our next coach ($2.5mil+++) plus Hazell's buyout we would be at about $5mil a year anyways. From there, we could see how Sumlin does and then extend him at something similar if we are doing well....something less if he's around 6 wins.
6 wins is minimum to CONSIDER keeping him, because you would have to extend his contract. 5-7 record in year 4 is not an "upswing".
Kevin. Sumlin.
As much as we want Sumlin as a head coach, how likely would you truly think that is a possibility? I place it somewhere around the 30% range if he is available at the same time that the job here in available. There will be other jobs that open up that will be better jobs for Sumlin to take as Purdue is still in a some what of a rebuild and looking at Sumlin's history...he appears to be more of a tweaking what has worked already rather than breaking it down and building it back up. Now, I don't have knowledge of the workings inside the program and maybe that is all that needs to be done...but it appears that a breakdown may be necessary as a habit of losing has swept in to the program.
I still believe that Bob Stitt would be the ideal head coach and give him $2-$2.5 million a year to find a damn good DC.
Hahaha. Bob Stitt over Kevin Sumlin?
You must be high. Kevin Sumlin runs an offense that works and would work here. He also averages 8-9 wins per year at every stop he's been HC.
And you want to hire Bob Stitt?
Cmon....
$2Mil for a good DC? I don't think there's a single DC out there that makes that much.
Do you even football?
He has been pushing Stitt for years. I wouldnt mind him as OC, but wouldnt hand him the keys to the program.
If you have followed my train of thought on this topic, I have said previously that Sumlin would be the perfect hire for Purdue....however, I am thinking in realistic terms. Even if Sumlin were to leave AND the Purdue job was open, what would be the likelihood he would return (hence why I made the 30% remark). Many on here have clamored for an offensively innovative coach with a philosophy of passing...Stitt fits what many on here have claimed they wanted, however he had done that at Division 3 for many years prior to moving to Montana this past season. He did beat NDSU this past season and will more than likely be looking for a bigger job in the next 2-3 years if he can show improvement in his philosophy at Montana.
In reference to the error in my post about the salary of the DC, I was thinking one thing and typing the other. I have no problem in correcting my thoughts here:
If Purdue could open up a salary base of $3 million for all positions, it would open a lot of doors to the seriousness of improving the program. Now, although no DC's made $2 million last year...Muschamp did make $1.6 million Kirby Smart made $1.5 million, and Kevin Steele made $1.05 million. The total staff payout for Purdue last season was $2.245 million. In conference that puts Purdue just above Illinois as the lowest of the schools that provide data (PSU and NU didn't provide data).IU ranks ahead of Purdue at $2.317. The highest mark was Michigan at $4.249. The highest paid assistant coach at Purdue was John Shoop at the 29th highest paid in the conference. That means, there is at least one assistant coach that makes more than Shoop does as a coordinator. In fact, in the top 50 of paid assistants, the school break down goes as such:
MSU: 8
Michigan: 7
OSU: 7
Nebraska: 6
Iowa: 6
Indiana: 4
Rutgers: 3
Wisc: 2
Minny: 2
Illinois: 2
Purdue: 2
Maryland: 1
No data for PSU/NU
Purdue spends heavily on it's top end and seems to scrape the barrel for the bottom end for other assistants. When comparing this type of model, it appears that schools that spend heavily at the top and not for their other assistants are the programs that are struggling, with the exception of Whisky. Although MSU ranks #4 in overall coaching salaries, they are the number one school in terms of top 50 paid assistants.
Now that I have taken a look at this data and plugged some numbers, it would appear that my idea of paying more for a top flights DC and OC would be a model that would be hard to succeed with. The issue, as this data shows, appears to be the little amount left over for quality assistant coaches. The average staff salary in the B1G iin 2015 was $2.958 million. Purdue is currently under that amount by almost $750 thousand!
Looking at this now, I have more sympathy for Hazell as it appears his hands may have been more tied than I initially thought when hiring his staff. Freeing up another $750 thousand makes higher better quality of assistant coaches that much easier and makes the rebuild process much easier as well. Spending $2.958 would place Purdue 6th in the B1G JUST ahead of Minnesota currently.
I doubt he would need to kiss many asses. My guess is most kids would be stuttering to find the right words and looking for something for him to sign his autograph on. Unless they are top 150, then maybe they could talk heirs an and what it takes to get to the NFL.
They have everything in place to have massive success in football. Local recruiting base, incredible facilities, financial resources comparable to anyone, and the national exposure that comes with playing in the top division of the top conference in America.
I mean seriously, if you can't win huge at TAMU, where the hell can you?
I literally bust out laughing every time that I see this.
Please differentiate between PJ Fleck and Darrell Hazell pre-hire.
I'll hang up and listen.
DId you read what PJ Fleck did when he got the head coaching job at Western Mich? He took away all the verbal offers, this was pretty close to signing day, if I was reading it right, pretty crappy thing for a coach to do.
A lot of it also depends on who you hire as an athletic director and their connections. A big part of hiring a "big" head coach at a non-premiere school has to do with connections.
The thing with Sumlin - as a Purdue guy I'm sure he knows the ins and outs of the program. If he was available, he'd probably require so many guarantees, it may not be worth it (especially given a spotty track record at A&M).
As for this year, no AD will want to start off brand new at a school and be surrounded by negativity. Hazell will have to pull out a season that people are truly excited about for him to stay.
You're clearly trolling the thread with nothing to offer. I'm not going to do your research for you.
I would suggest looking at recruiting rankings though. Fleck is a guy who could recruit here. Hazell is not. That's pretty clear. I'm not necessarily sold on him Xs and Os wise but he could hire somebody that would work out i'm sure.
On your point that if Sumlin can't compete in the SEC West he can't compete here....that's total horseshit. He has to play Ole Miss, Alabama and LSU every year. LSU is a perennial 10 game winner. Nick Saban is the greatest CFB coach of all time. Ole Miss pays better than anybody (players and staff). You HAVE to have a top level commitment to win in that conference so what they get at TAMU is just the cost of business.....it doesn't set them apart from any of their competitors. When you have to play 3 top 10 teams and 5-6 top 25 teams every year it's just harder to win. Trying to do that with 2 good, but underclassmen QBs makes it tougher. He'll be in the same boat this year and another 8-9 win season likely means he's out....and TAMU will hire somebody and start the 4-5 year cycle over of just being average. They always have been and they always will be.
Sumlin would come here and automatically make us a better destination than some or most of our peers in the conference scheme wise. He could restore the offensive identity that made us notable in the 80s and 90s-00s.
Since you're such a genius....who should we hire?
1. I would hire anyone other than a MAC flavor-of-the-month. That seems to not be working out so well for you.
2. Are you implying that Hazell was known as a weak recruiter prior to taking the Purdue job?
3. For all the great recruiting classes that he's bringing in, Fleck sure is piling up a lot of 5+ loss seasons in a pretty weak conference, with zero conference championship game appearances. That would be Red Flag #1 if I were a fan of a program thinking about hiring him.
4. And your "Poor little Teas A&M" crap is beyond laughable. Ole Miss was a national joke until just a few years ago (and will be again soon). Auburn has been historically down lately outside of 2 good years in the last 6 or 7 and is on the verge of firing their coach. LSU has had plenty of crappy teams in the last few years (did you happen to catch the near-firing of Les Miles last year). Both of those teams lost at least 5 games last year. In fact, the "Greatest Division in Football History" had exactly TWO teams out of 7 finish with fewer than 5 losses last year. Wow, impressive.
Your argument that it's impossible to win there is literally the stupidest thing that I have ever seen. Most fertile recruiting territory in the country right in their backyard, as much financial investment in football as anyone in the country, history and tradition out the wazoo, and only a couple of games on the schedule each year where they will be decided underdogs.
Texas aTm is a hell of a lot closer to Alabama and LSU in resources and tradition than Purdue is to Nebraksa, Wisconsin, or Iowa. If he can't be competitive in the SEC then he sure as hell won't do it a place like Purdue which has far more inherent disadvantages compared to the rest of its league rivals (take a look at the coaching budgets and facilities at some of those places compared to Purdue) than A&M does compared to anyone in their confernce.
Your (lack of) knowledge of football makes Morgan Burke look like Bill freaking Walsh.
Last edited:
2) Yes. Look at what he left at KSU. Nothing. Any jackass can recruit at OSU. Fleck assembled what was considered the best MAC recruiting class ever in 2014.
3) He went 6-2 in conference the last two years and finished tied for first in his division. Back to back bowls for the first time in school history. 2 of the 5 total losses were to MSU and OSU. Your 5 loss line is either lazy or purposefully disingenuous.
One might say that Purdue is more comparable to, say, Houston, than it is to aTm.
You realize that all those teams have to play each other.....right? And that they are pretty much ALL top 25 teams? It's a murderers row of a schedule....good teams have to play lots of good teams. It is what it is.
LSU is a crappy team? They still won 9 games and it would have been 10 if their first game hadn't of been cancelled.
Auburn was the only team that wasn't that good last year but they still had a top defense, they were just having to play a RS FR QB who was battling injuries. He'll be healthy and they'll be an 8+ win team this year.
I live in SEC country, watch these teams week in and week out and understand how good they are. TAMU has 0 inherent advantages over any of these teams in the SEC West. 0. NONE. All have strong donor bases. All have great facilities. All are willing to bend the rules. I actually think that TAMU might have the toughest go of it because they have to convince Texas kids to play a lot of games a year outside of Texas whereas TCU, Baylor, TTU have all come up over the past few years to where they are major destinations for top recruits where 10 years ago that just wasn't the case.
But alright.....troll on.....
Except we don't have 50 D1 players come out of our zip code every single year.
They are also a mid major and like 6th in the pecking order in their own state. I'd say that balances things out quite a bit. My underlying point was for those who diminish his accomplishments at aTm look what he did at Houston, which is more comparable to Purdue in terms of prestige. His resume runs circles around the current clown and probably any other realistic candidate at this point.
