Not a bad haul and we will continue to do better as the wins grow...just liked the overall whole professionalism of how they handled and promoted NSD! Kudos!
First Class of 24 Signees
- Thread starter ghostoffatjack
- Start date
Yep....great job by the new staff. Dead last in the Big 10 just like Hazell. IU one notch above but 7 places above PU in the National Rankings. IU 61st and PU 68th. My guess it's gonna' be another long season....or three.
Are you implying that we can't win being ranked last in the conference in recruiting? Most here believe these kids are a system and Purdue fit. The winning will certainly be here soon.
Well, it's certainly not as bad as this:
- 240
-
Texas A&M-Kingsville
- 1/29/2017
- David Allison
- CB5-8165Stafford
- NA
And yes, I think it's going to be very difficult to win in the B10 with what's left of the Hazell era and with this group of signee's. We can only wish them well....and safe games.
Is it too late to schedule them for homecoming next year?Well, it's certainly not as bad as this:
Key Commitments
- 240
Texas A&M-Kingsville
Latest Commitments
- 1/29/2017
- David Allison
- CB5-8165Stafford
- NA
Decent class considering HAZZ ran the program off the cliff..........I for one think Brohm will right the ship quickly...5-7 first year 7-5 by year two...........I just think this staff will coach these kids up. I for one was never on the Hazz band wagon from the beginning!!!! He had me when he mentioned in his first press conf that we would be a running team...........We were doomed before our first practice.......
You sir are drunk if you think we were going to sign a highly ranked class this year...smh! Give the dude a chance and stop being so damn negative. No one wants to hear "we gave Hazell a chance and look what we got sh*t!" Talk all your sh*t in three years if Coach Brohm fails but I don't see that happening so have a nice day and Boiler Up!
99% of those here, and maybe you included, thought that Hazell was the answer too.
Thats a stretch........there were quite a few on here that weren't in the Hazz camp from the beginning......
No, I'm that 1% that says we should of kept Danny Hope. At least we would be bowling at the end of the year rather than watching a dumpster fire!!!
for the record, I was against hiring Hazell before he was hired. I have archived documented posts saying so with a lot of stupid Purdue posters saying I was delusional and other immature comments.
Were you even a member here before he was hired? Your info says May 23, 2013. Purdue announced him as coach on December 5, 2012.
if I may, I will criticize Brohm for having a class this big. If as the posters here say to have patience and give him time and next year's class will be better. then the smart thing to do would be to limit the size of this class to 20 maximum and then have a bigger class next year. by having a huge 24 man class this year, next year we may have less than 18 scholarships to give. and rather than having those scholarships tied up to mediocre players, we would have been better off with a bigger class next year after proving how successful we are, and giving brohm time to make some inroads into a higher level of recruits. rather than flipping players from Toledo, WKU and FIU, we need to start stealing players from some good schools. I would hate to see this huge class impact our ability to have a great class next year.
if it were me, I would have banked 4 scholarships rather than reaching for projects. Being realistic as people here like to say, what's the difference if we bank the scholarship, or if we give it to somebody who needs to redshirt his first year? Either way, that player is not available. and by banking the scholarship, we might be able to use it to land an elite player rather to continue to develop the existing one we signed this year.
if it were me, I would have banked 4 scholarships rather than reaching for projects. Being realistic as people here like to say, what's the difference if we bank the scholarship, or if we give it to somebody who needs to redshirt his first year? Either way, that player is not available. and by banking the scholarship, we might be able to use it to land an elite player rather to continue to develop the existing one we signed this year.
Not sure why it matters to the program who supported who for coach. If you are trying to pat yourselves on the back just do it. It doesn't freaking matter.
I was hopeful for every coach we hired. I have been heart broken none have worked out. Brings me back to the early 80s up to Tiller time. Kept hoping and it didn't happen until Tiller. He gave us a few fun years.
I am probably a sucker, but I am fired up on this hire. I have liked everything he has done so far. But of course the only measurements that matter is the Wins and Losses.
So I will go to games an root hard and hope this year is the beginning of another good era.
I joke with my co-workers all the time. Being a Purdue fan is tough and heart breaking.
But I am hoping 2017 our basketball team and football teams start to deliver.
I was hopeful for every coach we hired. I have been heart broken none have worked out. Brings me back to the early 80s up to Tiller time. Kept hoping and it didn't happen until Tiller. He gave us a few fun years.
I am probably a sucker, but I am fired up on this hire. I have liked everything he has done so far. But of course the only measurements that matter is the Wins and Losses.
So I will go to games an root hard and hope this year is the beginning of another good era.
I joke with my co-workers all the time. Being a Purdue fan is tough and heart breaking.
But I am hoping 2017 our basketball team and football teams start to deliver.
I wouldn't worry much about banking scholarships, with the normal attrition of rosters year to year and with a new staff weeding out a few holdovers after the spring and next fall after the season he will have all the scholarships he needs. He did exactly what was needed in getting some good JUCO's and grad transfers that in the staff's opinion could play right away to fill our glaring needs!
If his offense is anything near what played out at WKU, they will come and if the defense coaches do the same it will happen! Most know how bad the past years have been and what is left this program with and considering all that I believe the product on the field next fall will show a marked improvement both in wins and overall play...it starts now with the off season conditioning, spring ball and summer commitment by the players and staff and you will see it in the fall!
In addition, you had several players that counted against last year's class. I would not be surprised to see this class increase between now and fall camp and next year's class be between 25 and 30.
Who do think they will beat for 5 wins? This isn't to start a war...I'm just curious.
I think Brohm was a solid hire and I know you all HOPE he rights the ship quickly like that. Gonna take some time though. I think at best 3 years to get bowl eligible (6 wins) is a reasonable expectation for someone with head coaching experience. However, Hazz didn't leave the program in very good shape, and you are changing alignments on both sides of the ball, so kids that were recruited for one set, may not be as good in the new. So I'd give them time. In past experience, I think 3 to 4 wins this season, 4 to 5 next, and then 6 the following will be a more realistic view. We as fans hope and pray for instant success, but that's not always what happens. However, you are fortunate to play in the west where winning 5 to 6 games in a couple years is a lot more feasible.
Ohio...Minny...Rutgers...ILL...IN.....All are beatable!! The talent level we had under Hazz last year alone should have gotten 5 wins........But bonehead play calling at crucial times in some of these games cost us some wins! Just my GUT feeling that this staff will mold these kids into winners very quickly.........I guess it's a wait and see factor.
By NCAA bylaw you can't have a class over 28 (3 over signs) in a year. Add to that the fact that we will have 17-18 seniors this year, there will have to be a bunch of "drops" in order to get that big of class next year...
If someone is a midyear enrollee and counts against the prior year, I don't think that would be counted as an oversigN
The whole prior year thing really doesn't matter much, except towards the NCAA limit of 25 per signing class (and the new athletes have to take the place of someone who has graduated in December).
The hard number is 85 total student/athletes on campus attending class and working out with the team (+3 oversigns which must be reduced back to 85 by season/fall semester)
Catch up buddy, Brohm said we have 5 open scholarships still.
If you're going to spend hours every day ragging on Purdue football with 5 paragraph posts that nobody wants to read, at least keep up with what's going on.
Attempting to answer my own question.. the answer appears to be 89 scholarships accounted for as of today.
I simply took the Spring roster from the official Purdue site (93), subtracted walk-ons (22), added the recruiting class (24), and subtracted the freshman already on campus and on the official site roster (6).
I'm guessing with Brohm's approach, he is going to lose a few guys in the spring or gently tell them they need to find greener pastures to get back to 85 for when the freshman show up. Not usually a fan of doing such a thing but with a totally new staff, new AD, and a program that needs a boost in talent, i'll admit I'll take a pass on it this time.
Agreed. The new staff is inheriting 65 scholarship players they did not recruit and know little about. Some are upperclassmen who have never cracked the depth chart (on some very bad teams). It will take time to figure out which ones are both physically capable and mentally committed to do what is necessary. Four appears to be the weed-out number between now and the end of Spring ball, which tells me for those 65 it is time to be all in or find the door.
All normal with a new staff and if only 4 or 5 would weed themselves out that would be a low number!
Unfortunately some that we don't wish to weed themselves out will do so by getting in trouble academically or otherwise!
Unfortunately some that we don't wish to weed themselves out will do so by getting in trouble academically or otherwise!
16 Seniors (7 5th years)
- 0 QB
- 2 RB
- 3 WR\TE
- 2 OL
- 3 DB
- 3 LB
- 3 DL
19 Juniors (10 Red Shirts)
- 1 QB
- 2 RB
- 3 WR/TE
- 5 OL
- 1 P
- 3 DB
- 4 DL
25 Sophomores (15 Red Shirts)
- 1 QB
- 4 RB
- 3 WR/TE
- 3 OL
- 1 K
- 5 DB
- 2 LB
- 6 DL
27 Freshman (8 Red Shirts)
- 3 QB
- 0 RB
- 6 WR\TE
- 6 OL
- 4 DB
- 5 LB
- 3 DL
87 scholarships used right now...
I had 16 Seniors and 20 Juniors. It appears Burgess and Hudson account for my +2. So, Burgess is a walk-on and likely to remain one unless a spot opens up. Does Hudson really still not have a scholly?
I'm sure his 'scholly' was attributed to his dad's salary...if that makes sense. I'm sure the AD could scrounge up money for an appearance here and there while his dad was here to slide in to his paycheck...if that makes sense.
Hudson is not on schollie. Also, when you added the commits to the # on the spring roster you double counted mid year enrollees.
So with Dad no longer being a Purdue employee (or ND which pays for faculty kids instate tuition), does he count against the numbers?
We'll go with 87 for now, but with others (McCollum, Winfield) out there the number may end up around 89.
I double counted them and then subtracted the 6 out.
The discrepancy was my 22 walk-ons is really 24.
Doubtful. I'm sure he was probably given preferred walk-on status which allows him some flexibility (university pays for housing and food for summer camp/fall camp). Also, I found this bit of information about preferred walk-ons: A player has to be on the team for two full years before they can get a scholarship and not have it count like an incoming student.
Similar threads
