Chelf and Dawson transfer
- Thread starter New Pal Boiler
- Start date
2 over if you're counting Craft and Lane.
I still think we lose a WR and grab a couple transfers for the defense. We have 11 of 85 schollies tied up at WR. Last year we had 10. The problem wasn't depth but quality, which has been addressed.
I still think we lose a WR and grab a couple transfers for the defense. We have 11 of 85 schollies tied up at WR. Last year we had 10. The problem wasn't depth but quality, which has been addressed.
Im still counting the walk ons (all three) that were awarded scholarships.
We are at 64 + 23 recruits (including moore).
how about Benaiah Franklin or Mike Little. Just guesses but don't remember them contributing too much. Hey Nat, guess I will not be asking ?'s about Dawson anymore.
You've got to have a minimum of 9 WR's to account for injury, graduation, and RS.
The difference between 9 and 11 is pretty significant given our need at at LB and CB. Also given the fact we have a walk-on WR who has seen more action than some on scholly.
He isn't far off on the fact that the 4 WR's that are coming in to Purdue for 2018 (Bonner, Anderson, Moore, and Taylor) are probably more ready for the field for any current freshman or sophomores outside of DJ Edwards and Jackson Anthrop. I would have to see more of Catlett however to add his name. Given that with returners in Wright, Zico, and Burgess who saw playing time last year....you could waive good bye to at least 2 and not really have an effect on the depth and ability of the position.
Hopefully the frosh receivers outside of Anderson get on campus early this summer to work with Plummer and Sipe. But....if you recall, we all thought the addition of Holmes, Zicco, Wright and Edwards were the answer to our depleted depth at WR a year ago. Except for Wright, none factored into game plans and the rest are still unproven or washouts.
Placing too much faith in immediate production from the high 3*'s coming in at WR, might be wishful thinking until we actually see them play...............
Placing too much faith in immediate production from the high 3*'s coming in at WR, might be wishful thinking until we actually see them play...............
I like everyone's favorite realtor, Terry Wright. If healthy and can hang onto the rock, pretty electric. May be remembering him too fondly, but would like to see him on the field next year with anthrop, Edwards and the frosh
Ok, I'll take Bonner, Hamilton, Taylor, Anderson and Moore against your collection of Catlett, Dotson, Edwards, Ellison, Franklin, James, and Kimbrough and you tell me which 5 receivers you'd rather have on the field !!!
I don't give a rats tail about experience, I'm taking my 5 against those other 7 receivers if they're even still on our roster. All I want is a receiver who can catch the ball! and i like my odds a lot better with our freshmen than our other existing receivers.
You may also love Burser, Wright, Anthrop and Zico But given a chance to play, I'll take my five.
I don't give a rats tail about experience, I'm taking my 5 against those other 7 receivers if they're even still on our roster. All I want is a receiver who can catch the ball! and i like my odds a lot better with our freshmen than our other existing receivers.
You may also love Burser, Wright, Anthrop and Zico But given a chance to play, I'll take my five.
rather than wishful thinking, you might say I was very disgusted with the play of our WRs this past year, and believe almost anybody has to be an improvement. I was very disappointed in both Philips and Zico this year. I can't count the number of drops Philips had. I had high hopes for Zico and Jallow. Neither player lived up to the hype. Holmes never gave me a chance to hate him as he did absolutely NOTHING. Anthrop is a nice 5-7 yard receiver. at least he caught the ball. But as we switched from Blough to Sindelar, his role decreased. Wright was ok. Mahoungou had his moments.
that's why i look to our freshmen - not with visions of superstardom, but the y have to at least be better than what we trotted out on the field last year. That's my real hope.
I too am excited about the potential of the receivers coming in. However, I think it's premature to clean house and get rid of someone who has been in the program for a year or two such as Franklin, Catlet or Edwards. The other guys you mentioned? Are they even on scholarship?
Wolegib, if you were GM of Vikings you likely would have drafted Mo Boehrenger based on his German weekend club team stats and " measurables"...
Wolegib, if you were GM of Vikings you likely would have drafted Mo Boehrenger based on his German weekend club team stats and " measurables"...
Last edited:
If Ben Franklin is on the roster this fall let's hope he puts on a spectacle on the field!
Thank you. I'll be here all week. Try the veal...
Thank you. I'll be here all week. Try the veal...
Tip your servers and for you ladies I am in room 233 at the Howard Johnsons...,,
If you've read my posts, I would never ever be the GM of the Vikings! EVER!!!!!!! And I would never give away my first round pick for an injured Sam Bradford! I would have signed Kapernick for peanuts before giving away that pick. And when Rogers went down I would have tanked the remainder of the season. The new MLB commish seems to believe that's an acceptable solution for small market teams
Is it just me or does anyone else find it shameful for this board to be contemplating whether we should be axing the future of student athletes (even freshmen) just because they have not seen enough time on the field and treating them like commodities? Some of the folks you are discussing are 19 year old students that put their whole future on the line to come to Purdue. If we need help at CB maybe one of the WR can convert?
I see what you're saying, but it comes across borderline naive. What you see as shameful is the highly competitive results driven environment of big boy D1 FBS football. Players sign up for this. And while trying to build a program that's more Ohio State than Ball State, there are the hard personnel decisions that are made behind the scenes.
I agree the language used and the calling out of specific players can be in poor taste. We should all be mindful of that. That's why I typically refer to over/under numbers and positional groups instead of names when discussing scholarship numbers. Also, players are not being "axed" or "cut". They are given the option to remain on the team with the knowledge that they are buried on the depth chart.
Some amount of talk is inevitable when there is a coaching change and significant roster turnover. I suspect this will be less of an issue in future.
Last edited:
Be careful with these kind of factual rational comments naming players. CalBoiler will call out the Snowflake police on you.
I am glad to hear I am not the only one who believes calling out individuals is in poor taste. I understand how and why the burying in depth charts occurs and trustee arelivonguo to our commitment in letting the student athletes decide if they want to stay and finish our their academic career at. Purdue with the understanding they may never see a snap. I. Don’t mind the dicusssion in private among friends or whatever. What I don’t like is seeing these discussions on public forums where the kids or their friends and families would be exposed. They know what they signed up for and that is a 4 year education at Purdue and a chance to play football, not to be thrown aside if they get passed up for new young talent or practically bullied by middle aged men on message boards in public settings. They are just kids and the QB from Washington should be a stark reminder to us of how frail they can be.
your point is made. on the other side of the coin, the posts made on this forum are very tame when compared to other forums, facebook, and twitter. the criticisms of recruits provided here are nothing compared to the strengths and weaknesses posted on national scouting services.
and when you do a google search, and find the player's name on a public police blotter, the reality is this is probably the last place that information was shared.
it's a gray line between using a forum to present facts or just be a rah rah board. Another 5 page thread was completely deleted on the basketball forum. Why? because two people got upset.
I'm of the belief that parents get more upset about the words shared here than the players. the players use other social media means.
and when you do a google search, and find the player's name on a public police blotter, the reality is this is probably the last place that information was shared.
it's a gray line between using a forum to present facts or just be a rah rah board. Another 5 page thread was completely deleted on the basketball forum. Why? because two people got upset.
I'm of the belief that parents get more upset about the words shared here than the players. the players use other social media means.
You are probably right. I am as guilty as anybody else and more guilty than most. I probably shouldn't name players we could probably do well without.
a lot of our banter revolves around the reality that Purdue is now a BIG time football program. and as such, it will become more of a business, than a club. You have a limit of scholarships. Once at that limit of 85, to add somebody, you must subtract somebody.
and it's a commentary on what Power football has become. A player is offered a 4 year scholarship. All he has to do is maintain his grades. However, if he's not as productive as the coach wants, the coach can't take away his scholarship. But he can talk the boy into giving up his scholarship.
it's not me or any other poster on this board who is bullying any boy to leave Purdue's football program. But I will admit that boy received a lot of pressure from other sources closer to his situation to volunteer to leave.
I believe it's sad that players are now being pressured to give up their scholarship so they can be replaced by somebody better. But that is what big power 5 football is all about.
What is my solution? If I were a coach, rather than taking away a scholarship, or encouraging a player to transfer; there are certain players I would not be recruiting or offering a scholarship to in the first place.
and on that same side of the coin, the facts that are shared here are second and third hand. A player leaving here puts the information on twitter long before it's posted here.
I'll try to improve my posts.
a lot of our banter revolves around the reality that Purdue is now a BIG time football program. and as such, it will become more of a business, than a club. You have a limit of scholarships. Once at that limit of 85, to add somebody, you must subtract somebody.
and it's a commentary on what Power football has become. A player is offered a 4 year scholarship. All he has to do is maintain his grades. However, if he's not as productive as the coach wants, the coach can't take away his scholarship. But he can talk the boy into giving up his scholarship.
it's not me or any other poster on this board who is bullying any boy to leave Purdue's football program. But I will admit that boy received a lot of pressure from other sources closer to his situation to volunteer to leave.
I believe it's sad that players are now being pressured to give up their scholarship so they can be replaced by somebody better. But that is what big power 5 football is all about.
What is my solution? If I were a coach, rather than taking away a scholarship, or encouraging a player to transfer; there are certain players I would not be recruiting or offering a scholarship to in the first place.
and on that same side of the coin, the facts that are shared here are second and third hand. A player leaving here puts the information on twitter long before it's posted here.
I'll try to improve my posts.
It's one thing to conjecture on possible transfers because a player hasn't seen the field much. It's another thing to say they should transfer because they aren't good enough to be a key contributor.
I, personally, without evidence, don't believe Brohm is axing schollies. I think he is very honest with his players that they aren't likely to be getting playing time in the future and if they really want a chance to get on the field, they may want to look elsewhere. Most of these guys came here to play football. The natural process will be that many players will transfer if they know they won't get to play. Underclassman and even juniors still have an opportunity to play elsewhere with the hopes of having an pro football career. But again, I think if a player is willing to put in the work without hopes of seeing significant playing time, with the intent of graduating with his Purdue degree, Brohm will not axe them.
I, personally, without evidence, don't believe Brohm is axing schollies. I think he is very honest with his players that they aren't likely to be getting playing time in the future and if they really want a chance to get on the field, they may want to look elsewhere. Most of these guys came here to play football. The natural process will be that many players will transfer if they know they won't get to play. Underclassman and even juniors still have an opportunity to play elsewhere with the hopes of having an pro football career. But again, I think if a player is willing to put in the work without hopes of seeing significant playing time, with the intent of graduating with his Purdue degree, Brohm will not axe them.
Hopefully provide some electric moments for the offense...
A thank you, a thank you....
He doesn't seem to value the ball, and thus, Brohm seemed to value him less and less as the season wore on.
Similar threads
