Good news/bad news regarding LB
- Thread starter Bullwhip Griffith
- Start date
I like our chances verses Georgia Tech. Georgia Tech is a great school academically and athletically. but Purdue offers a player a chance to shine against some top competition, the best TV coverage in the NCAA, and a great defensive coordinator, and a great academic program too.
I believe the biggest difference this year will be our improved defense. yes Brohm is about offense. but we were pretty good offensively last year. our defense is what's going to win us some games.
I believe the biggest difference this year will be our improved defense. yes Brohm is about offense. but we were pretty good offensively last year. our defense is what's going to win us some games.
No kidding four seniors LB and nothing but Bailey returning next year from the starters
my opinion is if you're a 4/5* linebacker, immediate playing time isn't as big of a decision, because you naturally assume your talent is good enough that most any team will offer you immediate playing time. if you are a 3 star athlete, I would think immediate playing time would be more attractive than wasting a year redshirting in a weight room.
GA tech site gives us slight edge. They're trying to get him to visit still. They also do not miss "MBob" they claim he neglected football program and is "toxic". Kind of funny how a change in scenery can make all the difference. He has been best thing to happen to Purdue since Tiller
I agree MBob is starting out real well. But whoever replaced Burke was the best thing that would happen to Purdue since Tiller.
It's easy to point out the AD but the president plays a role. Cordova was terrible for athletics imo.
Agree. She and the board saw the AD as a cash machine to fund other garbage. Nothing like stripping revenues at the exact time they are most needed.
Would make reference to the evil college head in the movie PCU, but that would mean someone else would have had to seen it
"You're wearing the t-shirt of the band you're going to see - don't be that guy."Sure is. Amazing to see Piven with hair... kinda.
Agreed, but in FB, much more so than in BB, I think it's tougher for a freshman to come in and make an immediate impact, especially on D. Part of it is the complexity of the schemes and trying to read offenses and part of it is just the physical nature of playing against guys that are just much bigger/stronger/faster than what you experienced in high school.
We can all blame whoever we want but let's not forget to point the finger at ourselves. When Cordova raided the BTN revenue stream, JPC contributions should've plummeted as a direct, immediate result. Instead many fans listened as the athletic department cried poverty and upped their donations to try to cover it. I blame Burke for a couple of things (not supporting Hope and hiring Hazell) but I don't believe it was his choice to hand over that revenue to fund some building Cordova would never have otherwise found the money for. That's on Cordova, the BOT, and to some extent all the donors for accepting it.
The question is, what did Burke do in response? What were his options? I don't know the answer to either one of those questions. Did he go to the BOT and strenuously argue his case?
Or did he sit there with his green eyeshade on, and cut the football and hoops budgets as he was instructed to?
If anyone knows the answer to these questions, I would love to hear them.
TC4Three: Do you believe all revenue generated by athletics should remain in athletics? and that all donations made by the John Purdue Club should be designated to athletics rather than academics?
My memory is not as great as it used to be. But I thought when it was first proposed that the BIG 10 network and its revenues generated was also to support each university's academic programs as well. and the network programming would include other campus activities besides just sports. I have seen a lot of fingers and blame from many posters on this board accusing Cordova of misusing revenues from the BIG 10 network and applying them to academic programs. God forbid the Band or Library received money. In that regard, isn't that what every other BIG 10 University President did as well? I have to believe the OSU President also dedicated some of their BIG 10 network revenue to academics, but it's just not as obvious.
My memory is not as great as it used to be. But I thought when it was first proposed that the BIG 10 network and its revenues generated was also to support each university's academic programs as well. and the network programming would include other campus activities besides just sports. I have seen a lot of fingers and blame from many posters on this board accusing Cordova of misusing revenues from the BIG 10 network and applying them to academic programs. God forbid the Band or Library received money. In that regard, isn't that what every other BIG 10 University President did as well? I have to believe the OSU President also dedicated some of their BIG 10 network revenue to academics, but it's just not as obvious.
I don't know but I would think he made his case behind the scenes and under the radar. Publicly I think he remained loyal to the board and president which is what I think maybe 90% of people in that position would do and another 9% would probably leave the job. Very few people would have the guts to go out to the media and alumni and blame forthcoming problems on the policies their own boss put forth. Most people would probably work to try to make it as smooth as possible under those restrictions and I would guess that Burke fits that bill. We don't know what off-the-record discussions were had though and I'd be surprised if Burke didn't want that extra revenue although what he might have spent it on is anyone's guess.
I don't think you take it out of the athletic department when you are behind peers on things that are necessary to help you compete. If you're Ohio State, yea you can afford to throw more money around because your athletic department is one of the top revenue generators in the country and you are ahead of everyone else on those factors. We do not have such luxuries. As for what was promised at the inception of BTN, I don't recall exactly but there were probably discussions of how the benefits would go beyond athletics. But all of that is just talk and we're dealing with the reality of the situation.
And my final point is this. I'm fine with the athletic department funding other things but let's be open and upfront about it. Don't ship 2 million out annually and then come crying to donors when you have to bring your basketball coaching staff and recruiting budget up to snuff or buy out a football coach. Don't have Nancy Cross send out nasty emails blaming us for their financial problems when they aren't doing all they can to help themselves. Show the donors that you're using all your resources wisely before reaching out your hand to ask for more. Don't come asking for more donations for athletics because you're shipping money out to fund something else.
The athletic department should have kept the revenue and Cordova should have done a separate, direct fundraising campaign to build that CSEL building (or whatever its called). Why didn't they? My guess is because they either knew they would never get the money for it that way or it would have been exponentially harder than trying to raise that kind of money for athletics instead.
ok, I can understand where you are coming from. My priorities are more academic than athletic. but I believe in honesty. Cordova should have been upfront when asking for money for the CSEL building. and it should be a public record of what universities used their revenue received from the BIG 10 network. I also thought the John Purdue Club raised money for other things other than athletics.
Agree with a lot of your take on MB1, but completely disagree on the 90% number. I personally don't know many people with marketable skills and who are well qualified in their profession who would be content to remain in a position for very long if they did not feel adequately supported by their superiors. Particularly in a results driven role like this where the buck stops with you. Now I am admittedly more in tune with the 40 and under crowd, many of whom never knew loyalty on the job because they have not seen it and are quick to make demands or change jobs in the blink of an eye. Regardless, whether 90% or 10% would do the same he did not leave therefore he continued to ante up for his name to be associated with the state of Purdue athletics.
For most positions I wouldn't have said 90%. I just think for a unique position like an athletic director of a Big Ten university people would be more reluctant to move on or risk losing it.
In short, he put his half-million dollar salary ahead of the well being of Purdue Athletics, IF he passively accepted the decrees of Cordova. Which if I had to guess is probably what happened.
And that's fine. Lots of folks would do the exact same thing. Go along and get along, and commission your assistant to fire off nasty, borderline dishonest emails to your customers.
I'm sure you'd like to believe that but reality is she had a lot of connections from her time at NASA which met the board's goals of appointing someone who could get more research grants and investment at Purdue. And she succeeded. Our football program tanked, but she did what she was brought in to do.
Faculty bring in research grants, administrators do not especially presidents. They can make resources available to faculty to help win awards, but AFOSR, ARO, ONR, DARPA, NSF, NREL, etc. fund faculty. In fact if a faculty member who wrote the proposal and obtained the funding changes universities, those grants move with the faculty member.
Cordova did nothing for the teaching or research side of the university.
Some here, and elsewhere, banged the table when it happened, but too few pay enough attention, except on Saturdays. I recall JT saying on his radio program, in 2007-08, that he couldn't compete with Wisconsin and MSU in recruiting because Purdue had fallen too far behind in terms of facilities. Most callers responding by deriding JT and accusing him of making excuses to cover his own lazziness and incompetence! Remember all the IDIOTS who wanted JT fired for supposedly retiring in place? If JT did let up his last couple years, it's because he had had it with MB1, Cordova, and those idiots in our "fan" base.
Similar threads
Purdue recruiting Purdue lands Arkansas LB transfer Alex Sanford
