Economics of bad football

[Born Boiler]

Originally posted by nat100:
Of course six wins beats what we have now.

As for hope, continuity wasn't a good enough reason to keep him. If a hire is bad, you have to cut bait

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Finishing among the top 10 coaches in our history isn't "bad" .. unless you put that tag on our whole football program, which it hasn't been (.529 overall, .467 Big Ten). However, immediately following our winningest coach, who himself was pushed out by spoiled and short-sighted fans who still complain about "Old Tiller" and that his two eight-win seasons in his final three years weren't good enough, having average results (.520 overall in his last two years) cost Hope.

Now the ongoing public push for getting a coach to "take us to the next level" has been accomplished -- Tiller averaged 7.25 wins per year; Hope averaged 5.5; Hazell is averaging 2.0.

Thanks to too many people who dismissed Tiller's warning to "manage expectations," we've transitioned ourselves into the pits. Burke deserves no more blame than all the fans who demanded the changes and the elite alums who advised him, including two NFL general managers. It's on everyone.

 

[lbodel]

I'm not saying he needed to oppose Presidents. I'm saying they've never opposed anything he's tried to do! It goes both ways. Thus, the responsibility of the athletic department largely rests on the athletic director. And I know you aren't here to defend him, but there are many people that see him as a pawn of the President, which for having been through 4 different Presidents, athletics sure has remained quite consistent while the university has certainly changed throughout the presidencies. My example of "opposing the president" has to do with people saying the Presidents are restricting what Burke wants to do - that's just an absolute lie. Burke had 0 intention of investing the proper money in basketball - our head coach practically had to leave his alma mater because he was done with the games.

Sorry, I know that you aren't necessarily lumped into that, I'm just tired of people giving Burke a pass and instead blaming the President.

Purdue's done some good things in athletics and made some strides in some of the areas I've been critical about. But it just baffles me when you hear all of this stuff about Purdue doesn't have this or that or enough money, etc., but you don't see very innovative ideas or concepts come from them. Purdue has a great technology and engineering schools - why not make Purdue the most tech savvy athletic department/athletic campus in the Big Ten? The Big Ten Network has done a great job in providing content at a relatively low cost by having student run streaming broadcasts of Olympic sports. Develop a killer app. I don't know.

I know I've given some hell to those who complain about not having in-stadium wifi is a deterrent to coming to the game and I don't think our attendance hurts because of it. But my God, we also brag about our engineering, technology, etc. - why not work with these great schools to develop something revolutionary and brag-worthy?

 

[nat100]

Originally posted by Born Boiler:

Originally posted by nat100:
Of course six wins beats what we have now.

As for hope, continuity wasn't a good enough reason to keep him. If a hire is bad, you have to cut bait

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Finishing among the top 10 coaches in our history isn't "bad" .. unless you put that tag on our whole football program, which it hasn't been (.529 overall, .467 Big Ten). However, immediately following our winningest coach, who himself was pushed out by spoiled and short-sighted fans who still complain about "Old Tiller" and that his two eight-win seasons in his final three years weren't good enough, having average results (.520 overall in his last two years) cost Hope.

Now the ongoing public push for getting a coach to "take us to the next level" has been accomplished -- Tiller averaged 7.25 wins per year; Hope averaged 5.5; Hazell is averaging 2.0.

Thanks to too many people who dismissed Tiller's warning to "manage expectations," we've transitioned ourselves into the pits. Burke deserves no more blame than all the fans who demanded the changes and the elite alums who advised him, including two NFL general managers. It's on everyone.

He is also top ten in losses. His stature on the win list has more to do with games coaches than his ability.

Odd you are trying to claim a guy with a sub 500 record is not a bad coach
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[BoilerBonz]

I've never given MB a pass, other than to recognize that the President and the BOT dictate the financial constraints MB must live within, and they also determine what's possible in terms of new initiatives based on how they prioritize fundraising.

 

[boiler17]

Originally posted by Born Boiler:

Thanks to too many people who dismissed Tiller's warning to "manage expectations," we've transitioned ourselves into the pits. Burke deserves no more blame than all the fans who demanded the changes and the elite alums who advised him, including two NFL general managers. It's on everyone.

Wow, really?

Just cause Haz dumped in his own bed doesnt mean fans wanting more suck.

I dont even have a problem with the hiring process they took last time. If you can produce a nationally relevant Kent State team, youre probably a good coach. Haz just made some severely bad judgements on how much change he could dictate walking in the door.

I do believe if they keep conducting searches like that for the next coach they will a good one in the next hire or two.

 

[pboiler18]

Originally posted by boiler17:

Originally posted by Born Boiler:

Thanks to too many people who dismissed Tiller's warning to "manage expectations," we've transitioned ourselves into the pits. Burke deserves no more blame than all the fans who demanded the changes and the elite alums who advised him, including two NFL general managers. It's on everyone.

Wow, really?

Just cause Haz dumped in his own bed doesnt mean fans wanting more suck.

I dont even have a problem with the hiring process they took last time. If you can produce a nationally relevant Kent State team, youre probably a good coach. Haz just made some severely bad judgements on how much change he could dictate walking in the door.

I do believe if they keep conducting searches like that for the next coach they will a good one in the next hire or two.

Don't worry....Born Boiler is delusional.

No matter how you feel about the current coach, it is easy to agree that Hope WAS NOT the guy for the job and a change should have been made. While his results aren't as bad as the current regimes' have been, he was not elevating the program or moving it forward. A lot of our line depth issues that we have right now are directly attributed to his (lack of) recruiting in those areas. At the same time, that doesn't excuse the current staff from not developing a QB from the ones we have/had.

I don't think this program is dead. Not at all.

I also think Burke HAS/HAD done some good things for this program and AD as a whole. That said, he's A. nearing the end of his term by virtue of a retirement age and B. his teams aren't really achieving on the field like they should....or used to. It's like the Hope firing....to me, its clear that MB isn't going to take this department to the promised land...so why don't we find somebody who will?

 

[lbodel]

I still think you're putting too much weight on it. The athletic department operates independently from the university. Like I said, as long as there aren't major issues in terms of consistent monetary losses, scandals, etc. - most Presidents are not going to assert themselves over an athletic director. It's not like the President is saying here is your budget for this year and have to keep it in that amount at all times. Within the last 10 years, our athletic department budget has grown by millions. But it's dictated by revenue produced within athletics, not what the president says you're allowed to have or is appropriated by the university. And hell, if anything, the whole mantra of "we receive no university support" makes Purdue even more independent from university control than some schools that do have significant university support. You're gonna be watched a lot more closely.

 

[boiler17]

Originally posted by pboiler18:

Don't worry....Born Boiler is delusional.

No matter how you feel about the current coach, it is easy to agree that Hope WAS NOT the guy for the job and a change should have been made. While his results aren't as bad as the current regimes' have been, he was not elevating the program or moving it forward. A lot of our line depth issues that we have right now are directly attributed to his (lack of) recruiting in those areas. At the same time, that doesn't excuse the current staff from not developing a QB from the ones we have/had.

I don't think this program is dead. Not at all.

I also think Burke HAS/HAD done some good things for this program and AD as a whole. That said, he's A. nearing the end of his term by virtue of a retirement age and B. his teams aren't really achieving on the field like they should....or used to. It's like the Hope firing....to me, its clear that MB isn't going to take this department to the promised land...so why don't we find somebody who will?

Good to know, I wont pretend to have read all that he said. At the same time, glad to see someone killing time on here during the downtime.

Agree Burke has done some good things. Its a tired song to sing, but the facilities he inherited were ridiculously in need of renovation. That said, he easily does enough bad things to collapse his house of cards.

I ask myself the same quesion as the bottom bolded and come to two conclusions. 1: Burke is coasting to retirement. I find it difficult to believe the university is/will continue to be content with this given how bad revenue is. I find it more likely that some version of 2: Burke is working within the constraints they provide for him, and expect him to make athletics a non discussion point so the grown ups can talk about academics. I think Burke gets what needs to happen to make the football team relevant. He just doesnt make it his top priority and he should. Or he likes to wait for things to break before acting.

I am astounded that he thought it was a good strategy to focus on non revenue sports as a way to create more wealthy alums and thus create more donations. Im also amazed at the amount of contempt in his voice when he talks about people giving him money. Im glad he makes all those extra charges wrapped around ticket prices, because I would never give the man money on principle.

I thought it was weird someone posted a quote of Mitch saying we had the facilities in place to be competitive. Im sure he hasnt traveled around to see the facilities at programs they want to compete with; thats way below him. So how would you know?

 

[BoilerBonz]

Originally posted by lbodel:
I still think you're putting too much weight on it. The athletic department operates independently from the university. Like I said, as long as there aren't major issues in terms of consistent monetary losses, scandals, etc. - most Presidents are not going to assert themselves over an athletic director. It's not like the President is saying here is your budget for this year and have to keep it in that amount at all times. Within the last 10 years, our athletic department budget has grown by millions. But it's dictated by revenue produced within athletics, not what the president says you're allowed to have or is appropriated by the university. And hell, if anything, the whole mantra of "we receive no university support" makes Purdue even more independent from university control than some schools that do have significant university support. You're gonna be watched a lot more closely.

So this independence you imagine ... can it explain why Cordova had to be brought in and a special meeting of the BOT convened just so MB could counter Mizzo's offer in an attempt to retain Painter?

I would agree that MB is not the President's pawn but he does work under the thumb(s) of the Pres and BOT.

 

[lbodel]

I mean, they are still "above" him, but it doesn't mean they control everything. I make decisions that my boss trusts without questioning or dictating.

Presidents and BOT have to officially approve anything that major. What President of a University doesn't "approve" a $2 million annual check?

But I absolutely do not think Burke was remotely pushing for that check to be written prior to the Missouri fiasco.

What do you expect Cordova to do, force MB to spend more money on MBB? As far as she was being told by MB, men's basketball was fine. If I tell my boss that everything's fine with what I oversee, my boss is not going to question it unless there's serious problems (i.e. like I said, financial issues, scandals, etc.). And if my employees (i.e. head coach) are not performing well, my boss would ask me what I have done and am doing about it. MB's reaction was obviously reactionary.

 

[Born Boiler]

Originally posted by boiler17:

Originally posted by pboiler18:

Don't worry....Born Boiler is delusional.




Good to know, I wont pretend to have read all that he said.

It's a true delusion to cite facts for people who can't read.

 

[boiler17]

Originally posted by boiler17:

Originally posted by Born Boiler:

Thanks to too many people who dismissed Tiller's warning to "manage expectations," we've transitioned ourselves into the pits. Burke deserves no more blame than all the fans who demanded the changes and the elite alums who advised him, including two NFL general managers. It's on everyone.

Wow, really?

Just cause Haz dumped in his own bed doesnt mean fans wanting more suck.

I dont even have a problem with the hiring process they took last time. If you can produce a nationally relevant Kent State team, youre probably a good coach. Haz just made some severely bad judgements on how much change he could dictate walking in the door.

I do believe if they keep conducting searches like that for the next coach they will a good one in the next hire or two.

So then you actually have something to add about the bolded?

How exactly is it better to coast with Tiller who was admittedly no longer willing/able to put the necessary effort into his position for several years before his retirement?

 

[Born Boiler]

Originally posted by boiler17:

Originally posted by boiler17:

Originally posted by Born Boiler:

Thanks to too many people who dismissed Tiller's warning to "manage expectations," we've transitioned ourselves into the pits. Burke deserves no more blame than all the fans who demanded the changes and the elite alums who advised him, including two NFL general managers. It's on everyone.

Wow, really?

Just cause Haz dumped in his own bed doesnt mean fans wanting more suck.

I dont even have a problem with the hiring process they took last time. If you can produce a nationally relevant Kent State team, youre probably a good coach. Haz just made some severely bad judgements on how much change he could dictate walking in the door.

I do believe if they keep conducting searches like that for the next coach they will a good one in the next hire or two.

So then you actually have something to add about the bolded?

How exactly is it better to coast with Tiller who was admittedly no longer willing/able to put the necessary effort into his position for several years before his retirement?

As mentioned repeatedly above ... Tiller won eight games in 2006, Tiller won eight games in 2007, Tiller's last and worst team beat Indiana 62-10 in 2008 ... all better than anything we've seen in the six years since he was pushed out the door.

Two of those last three seasons by "Old" Tiller exceeded his average win total at Purdue (7.25). His 12 years included nine winning seasons, plus more bowl appearances (10) than the rest of Purdue's football history combined (7).

So, yes, the "coast" of Tiller would beat all but a few coaches in our history, let alone anyone new we could land.

And, yes, as evidenced by you even years later, loud public sentiments demanded that Burke make the changes, which he did with substantial consultation, and all that fresh blood and effort -- and turnover -- has led us to where we are now.

 

[Born Boiler]

Originally posted by nat100:

Originally posted by Born Boiler:

Originally posted by nat100:
Of course six wins beats what we have now.

As for hope, continuity wasn't a good enough reason to keep him. If a hire is bad, you have to cut bait


Posted from Rivals Mobile

Finishing among the top 10 coaches in our history isn't "bad" .. unless you put that tag on our whole football program, which it hasn't been (.529 overall, .467 Big Ten). However, immediately following our winningest coach, who himself was pushed out by spoiled and short-sighted fans who still complain about "Old Tiller" and that his two eight-win seasons in his final three years weren't good enough, having average results (.520 overall in his last two years) cost Hope.

Now the ongoing public push for getting a coach to "take us to the next level" has been accomplished -- Tiller averaged 7.25 wins per year; Hope averaged 5.5; Hazell is averaging 2.0.

Thanks to too many people who dismissed Tiller's warning to "manage expectations," we've transitioned ourselves into the pits. Burke deserves no more blame than all the fans who demanded the changes and the elite alums who advised him, including two NFL general managers. It's on everyone.

He is also top ten in losses. His stature on the win list has more to do with games coaches than his ability.

Odd you are trying to claim a guy with a sub 500 record is not a bad coach

Posted from Rivals Mobile

A 22-27 record isn't really bad ... 4-20 is. But in either case, "bad coach" never applies at Purdue, because we don't hire bad coaches. We sometimes get bad results from good people. And I'm not even a Cub fan.

 

[boiler17]

Agree at a p5 and pro level its about good/competent guys getting bad results.

Disagree that 06-07 were the years you make them out to be. Zero quality wins, IMO anyway, and sandwiched with sub 500 years. 22-27 is bad.

Are you saying Purdue shouldnt try to get better cause things could get worse?

 

[pboiler18]

Originally posted by boiler17:
Agree at a p5 and pro level its about good/competent guys getting bad results.

Disagree that 06-07 were the years you make them out to be. Zero quality wins, IMO anyway, and sandwiched with sub 500 years. 22-27 is bad.

Are you saying Purdue shouldnt try to get better cause things could get worse?

That was basically the only argument people had for keeping Hope.

What I don't think they were taking into account was how brutal our schedule was going to be in 2013 and just how green our OL and DL would be!

 

[Born Boiler]

Originally posted by pboiler18:

Originally posted by boiler17:
Agree at a p5 and pro level its about good/competent guys getting bad results.

Disagree that 06-07 were the years you make them out to be. Zero quality wins, IMO anyway, and sandwiched with sub 500 years. 22-27 is bad.

Are you saying Purdue shouldnt try to get better cause things could get worse?

That was basically the only argument people had for keeping Hope.

What I don't think they were taking into account was how brutal our schedule was going to be in 2013 and just how green our OL and DL would be!

"Quality" wins??? You're kidding, right? Since when have Big Ten teams and seasons been graded for "quality" wins? What's the magic formula? Why hasn't it been made public? Where does "quality" show in the conference standings and team record books or media guides?

Or is that just some subjective bullcrap to toss out when someone doesn't like the actual facts?

If you can blow off six-win seasons , let alone eight-win seasons -- not to mention the bowl appearances, extra exposure and extra practice those bring -- you must add extra "quality" to the fact that Hope beat a program like Ohio State twice, got an extremely rare win at Michigan and beat Indiana's butts three times. You also have to add "quality" to impressive losses, like Hope's close encounters with Notre Dame and with mighty Oregon and the almighty Buckeyes in OT, to name just a few. And the "quality" of merely showing up after losing all his skills players in one year to injuries, two deep and more. And you have to elevate Tiller to saint status by simple comparison.

The magic formula must work both ways. Although another critic noted that losing close isn't winning. That means winning sure as heck isn't losing ... let alone winning eight games.

But, before the idea of rejecting wins based on the pure science of "quality" reaches the "C'mon, Man" bust-ups, also consider that we've played the same schedule formula through the past couple of decades -- a patsy, a couple upstart MACs, the Irish and the Big Ten -- and any time you don't come home with your hats in your hands, you've done plenty.

The 2013 schedule was no more "brutal" than what we routinely play. And the new staff had 16 returning starters, including linemen, available upon arrival, plus a year of experience for Purdue's highest-ranked recruiting class in the past 10 years. What they did with all that experience and talent was a matter of record.

And then you'd better factor in the quality of what they did, too.

 

[Codeman00]

Don't forget the part where the NCAA eliminated the use of private airlines coming in to Purdue for recruits to use. Instead of fighting vehemently publicly, Morgan just say back and let it happen. Tiller really voiced his opinion on that one.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[boiler17]

I didnt/dont get why the NCAA thought it was better like that.

 

[RegionWarrior101]

I have heard Purdue football as a national punchline for the last 2 weeks.

Watching a lot of ESPN with down time. On Colin's Football Show before Harbaugh took the Michigan job, Tom Waddle (who thought he would stay in the NFL) said, "You really think Jim Harbaugh is going to want to go and spend a Saturday playing Purdue?"

WSCR Chicago talking about Urban Meyer being a Pro Coach some day. "Do you think an Urban Meyer could go to a place like Purdue and win?"

On a Fox Sports bowl show talking about Ohio State's "upset" of Alabama, "Ohio State did not get the respect they should have and some of that is being in that conference with the Purdue's of the world."

Today on Cowherd's show he pointed out on the college football landscape it is not fair- "USC is in LA, Washington State is in a wheat field in Washington State. Ohio State has much better facilities than Purdue."

Morgan is spending now, just on the wrong people. Had he paid Tiller assistants what he paid Hazzell assistants maybe Kevin Sumlin does not leave Purdue for TAMU in 2001.

We are officially at joke status, for football anyway. Thankfully the basketball team got those two big home wins otherwise it might be in complete meltdown mode.

 

[Courthouse Carp]

Re: I have heard Purdue football as a national punchline for the last 2 weeks.

Originally posted by RegionWarrior101:
Watching a lot of ESPN with down time. On Colin's Football Show before Harbaugh took the Michigan job, Tom Waddle (who thought he would stay in the NFL) said, "You really think Jim Harbaugh is going to want to go and spend a Saturday playing Purdue?"

WSCR Chicago talking about Urban Meyer being a Pro Coach some day. "Do you think an Urban Meyer could go to a place like Purdue and win?"

On a Fox Sports bowl show talking about Ohio State's "upset" of Alabama, "Ohio State did not get the respect they should have and some of that is being in that conference with the Purdue's of the world."

Today on Cowherd's show he pointed out on the college football landscape it is not fair- "USC is in LA, Washington State is in a wheat field in Washington State. Ohio State has much better facilities than Purdue."

Morgan is spending now, just on the wrong people. Had he paid Tiller assistants what he paid Hazzell assistants maybe Kevin Sumlin does not leave Purdue for TAMU in 2001.

We are officially at joke status, for football anyway. Thankfully the basketball team got those two big home wins otherwise it might be in complete meltdown mode.

Well, those TALKING HEADS must not read the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and USA Today.

Just remember, "things could be worse"... the B1G could add two more schools and we could finish in 16th place.






Speaking of the Talking Heads, they've a ROAD MAP

 

[RegionWarrior101]

Re: I have heard Purdue football as a national punchline for the last 2 weeks.


It is great that USA Today and the Wall Street Journal have glowing things to say about Purdue. I am a fat old man and I read those publications. Most kids who are 6'3" 250 and run a 4.5 40 yard dash may be more concerned with other things.

 

[loftygoal]

Those of us that have been Purdue football fans for over 40 years know better than to say that it can't get any worse because when it comes to this football program it is always darkest just before it gets pitch black which is where we are today. An earlier poster made a great point when he indicated that his boss would allow him to independently make decisions unless something really went wrong. And that is really the issue here: It can't go any wronger than it's been going here for several years in our eyes - the fans and alumni - and yet Burke continues to get raises. The leadership sets the tone - Daniels doesn't care if the program and by association, the university, is a laughingstock as long as it's economically self sustaining, there are no scandals, and there is an academic focus. It's a problem when you have a non alumni as president of the institution because he has no pride and doubly bad when you have politician at the helm with an agenda separate from greatness and excellence of the university.

 

[BoilerBonz]

Originally posted by loftygoal:
It's a problem when you have a non alumni as president of the institution because he has no pride and doubly bad when you have politician at the helm with an agenda separate from greatness and excellence of the university.

Agreed, to Daniels, Purdue is nothing more than the state utility for providing higher-level technical education, and he's only interest is in providing a cost effective service to the state.