ADVERTISEMENT

Gray uniforms, open QB competition, and no staff changes in 2015.

RegionWarrior101

Junior
Gold Member
Dec 9, 2014
2,285
1,135
113
2-1-9
That is what I got out of the Hazell interview today.

Gray uniforms- hey whatever. Basketball did something like that too. I think it is lame, but kids 20 years younger than me like it so it must be a necessity. We have come out in black helmets, neon decals, pictures of people in the P logo and none of it has helped us win so at the end of the day it does not matter.

Third year for DH third year where he goes in not knowing who is QB is. Yikes. The old saying, if you have two QBs you have none, what is it when you have three QBs?

No staff changes is the biggest problem and will probably the downfall of Coach Hazell. He took a gamble on the DC bringing in a DC who was not a DC. I think the Defense has shown some progress, some, enough to earn a third season. On the other side of the ball, he made a huge mistake with his OC hire. Wrong guy. Plain and simple. Complicated scheme, odd play calling, the whole thing is a disaster and it will be a disaster- People, as I pointed out before this guy's best season as an OC was 42nd in total offense at UNC when he had 6 NFL players on the roster! It is bad. I am sorry, but it is just not going to work. All in all just not good.

Looking at the schedule we will finish 4-8. That will be enough for Hazell and Morgan to talk progress. That will also make DH 8-28 in three seasons. Look at the schedule- no gimmes.

I look at it as having little chance at all in 7 games. @ Marshall (they put up points and we cannot keep pace), Virginia Tech, @ Michigan State, @ Wisconsin, Nebraska, @ Northwestern, @ Iowa.

There are 4 games I think we have a shot at winning, but I am not sure. Bowling Green (We lose to a MAC opponent seemingly every year), Minnesota (We had them beat but Jerry Kill is a tough out), Illinois, and Indiana.

There is 1 game we should beat regardless, that is Indiana State. More talent alone should get the W.

So if we beat ISU and 3/4 of BG, MN, IL, IU, that would put us at 4-8.

"We are close." No we are not. Maybe one play this year away from being 4-8. Minnesota was really it. Indiana beat us by 7 with their 5th string QB. I think some of these teams showed some mercy and took their foot off the gas, like Michigan State, but we are going to have another losing record. It is just reality. The other thing is these teams beating us soundly by 2+ TDs are nothing on a National level. Look what OSU did to mighty Wisconsin.

Hazell will get a 4th year and then who knows. As long as the OC is the same it will not change. That 4th year if we do not win, recruiting will take a tremendous hit as he will be essentially a lame duck coach. Think about the reality of 8-28 in 3 years.
 
If the kids actually start buying in and selling out every play, I can see reason for optimism/6+ wins. Thats a huge if.

I think we take a significant step back next year. No backfield speed means another new system. I think they will be inclined go power run, but there are no TE's and no passing game to keep opponents from stacking the box. Im thinking something closer to 2013. maybe one or two wins and some unexpected reasonable showings.

Glad to hear about the legit alternates though! I'll probably spend retail money on that.


Can you link the interview? Would love the read.

This post was edited on 12/22 12:53 PM by boiler17
 
I assume the interview will be published later

I was following on the Twitter machine.

6 would be impossible in my opinion. Indiana State, Bowling Green, Illinois, Indiana. Then I guess Marshall, Iowa? But even with the wins I count on, they will slip up and lose one to BG or something.

Mike Carmin Twitter
 
Originally posted by RegionWarrior101:
I was following on the Twitter machine.

6 would be impossible in my opinion. Indiana State, Bowling Green, Illinois, Indiana. Then I guess Marshall, Iowa? But even with the wins I count on, they will slip up and lose one to BG or something.

Link: Mike Carmin Twitter[/URL]

Marshall should be winnable since they lose their qb but I don't know. Game is in wv
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Just looking at it, I can't see where other wins could come from.

Marshall - score SO many points
Indiana State - Should beat them, although I could see transfer Danny Etling pulling off an upset (lol)
Virginia Tech - Don't think we could score on them, plus they play well early in the season
Bowling Green - I would say we should win but I said that about CMU this year
Michigan State - No
Minnesota - We had them beat on the road, but Jerry Kill is a great coach
Wisconsin - No
Nebraska - No, especially off the bye week where we always seem to play worse, ala Northwestern
Illinois - Should beat these guys
Northwestern - I liked our chances this year, then they slapped us around. May be 7,000 people in Evanston that day
Iowa - Other than that 2013 game, I don't remember winning there or playing well there
Indiana - We could not beat Zander. I imagine the #1 may cause us problems, esp. if the RB is back
 
They lose a QB, we have no QB.

When we opened at Cincinnati on the road that was not good. We have not won our road opener since 2007 over Toledo. They will be juiced playing a Big Ten team at home.
 
Re: I assume the interview will be published later

Originally posted by RegionWarrior101:
I was following on the Twitter machine.

6 would be impossible in my opinion. Indiana State, Bowling Green, Illinois, Indiana. Then I guess Marshall, Iowa? But even with the wins I count on, they will slip up and lose one to BG or something.
Thanks.

I think 6 wins is very possible. Imagine Anthrop and Knauf short routes freeing up Yancey and Posey deep with a stable of young strong running backs and Etling or Appleby playing like we have seen them at their best behind what should be the best line we have had in a long time and a capable defense. I mean Illinois won 6 this year and they lost to us at home. Not that hard to do.

Do I think its likely, not in anyway. Really just including it cause I get tired of saying negative things over and over again.
 
"IF" the OC stays on past National Letter of Intent signing day we have the same chance of going 4-8 as 1-11. First game of the year will set the tone to which of these two we are on track for. Interesting to see some counting the IU game as a win as if we had not lost to them the past two years.

Have to admit "I" thought Purdue would be doing a much better job of recruiting with Hazell as Head Coach but it just hasn't happened and recruiting will be the downfall of our football team as it has been with the basketball team! JMO.

Hazell gets the upcoming season to show the W/L record improvement Purdue needs and Painter needs to have a decent B1G season with his young team this year or Purdue could be looking at changes in both in the immediate year or two!

1-11 and Hazell has to be gone, and if the BB team finishes at the bottom of the division ditto for Painter! Bad play brings empty stadiums and unfortunately new Head Coaches!
 
Originally posted by ghostoffatjack:
"IF" the OC stays on past National Letter of Intent signing day we have the same chance of going 4-8 as 1-11. First game of the year will set the tone to which of these two we are on track for. Interesting to see some counting the IU game as a win as if we had not lost to them the past two years.

Have to admit "I" thought Purdue would be doing a much better job of recruiting with Hazell as Head Coach but it just hasn't happened and recruiting will be the downfall of our football team as it has been with the basketball team! JMO.

Hazell gets the upcoming season to show the W/L record improvement Purdue needs and Painter needs to have a decent B1G season with his young team this year or Purdue could be looking at changes in both in the immediate year or two!

1-11 and Hazell has to be gone, and if the BB team finishes at the bottom of the division ditto for Painter! Bad play brings empty stadiums and unfortunately new Head Coaches!
I would hope anything less than 6 wins seals his fate barring something like 10 competitive games.

Burke seems all in with Hazell when he talks about how the two 'share the same vision in spades', but Burke was a pretty vocal proponent of the last two guys too (seperating Tiller post 2004, from the guy before). Im guessing he is just doing his best job to give any reason for people to watch.
 
Unless we win both of the first two games, I smell an Ohh fer coming...and that will spell the end of Purdue Football for the next few years...
 
well after listening to the Philly fans hammer Chip Kelley today, if DH doesn't improve this wreck and if Kelley doesn't adapt to the Pro's and they run him out of town, maybe the stars align and in 2 years Kelley comes to Purdue. Alright, back to reality, I predicted 4 wins this year and next year more of the same.
 
Re: I assume the interview will be published later

6 wins is not possible as long as Shoop is the coordinator at Purdue. Get an upgrade at OC position and maybe this team could eak out 6 wins. I just don't see it. We are talent deficient at the offensive skill positions and our offensive scheme never seems to get more out of our players than is expected. (Tiller's teams always seemed to do this.)
 
Originally posted by AZboiler:
Unless we win both of the first two games, I smell an Ohh fer coming...and that will spell the end of Purdue Football for the next few years...
the end? you mean we haven't been watching the end?
 
I am all for getting an alternate uniform, but that grey fad is over. We are behind the eight ball on that one. We had way too many helmets last year, it got annoying. I like our home unis or the all black look, but our away white jerseys need a revamp.
 
Because Purdue got creative with the helmets is why Nike is finally providing Purdue an alternate uniform scheme. It's a good thing.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
I love how people try to crap on the resume of our Defensive coordinator before actually reading it !
 
Re: F the uniform bs...let's get something in the uniforms

The problems with the football team are not the uniforms but what is inside of them.
 
Re: F the uniform bs...let's get something in the uniforms

Originally posted by Bigohh:
The problems with the football team are not the uniforms but what is inside of them.
I don't feel its all that way either. Even going into year 3, there are a lot of Hope recruits still on this roster and not a lot of Hazell's?

Where does the blame lie?

I think it takes an honest look to say that Late Tiller, Hope and Early Hazell have not recruited the talent it takes for us to win.

Compounding that, is an offensive coordinator that has no clue how to scheme his team to success, even with top level talent (in the NFL, and with a team loaded with tons of players who played in the NFL @ UNC).

Now, I was willing to absolve Hazell of this hire but his unwillingness to change is part of the problem. I am pretty much tuned out of Purdue athletics right now between this and the basketball team. For me to do that....wow. The casual fan must not even know we have a football or basketball team right now!

That's a REAL problem for the AD moving forward. An empty Mackey AND Ross-Ade tells me that somebody(s) isn't doing their job and its time to move on. It starts at the top...plain and simple. Burke has done plenty of good for this school, but plenty of bad in the most recent 5 years to put us where we are at right now. It's time for us to get a marketing type AD and rebuild the brand. If we don't....well...at this point can it really get any worse?
 
The ONLY way FB gets turned around at Purdue and possible BB as well is if the BTN starts distributing money to B1G members based on performance. As long as MB is in charge and the BTN $$$ keeps rolling in without regard for performance their is no incentive to improve on the field or court. Take away the BTN $$$ and you can bet your house that filling RA and Mackey would be a priority but with money coming in with no strings attached why should Morgan care as long he's running in the black???
 
I'm glad the staff is trying to get creative with helmets and uniforms. The coaches know they need to play better, but I like the new uniform schemes they are using. It can't hurt to tinker with how they look, while they work to improve how they're playing.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Re: He is not running in the black...

He had to pull up $3 million to make it through 2014. Question is can he get things squared away before he runs out of reserves????
 
Re: He is not running in the black...

Virtually every Purdue sport from men's and women's basketball to baseball, volleybal, golf, wrestling you name it and it has gone downhill sinice :Darrrel Hazel arrived at Purdue two years ago. Everybody continuously says how bad Danny Hope was but while Danny had some bad loses he also had some big wins and get Purdue to two bowl games. Purdue survived France Cordova and will survive Darrrel Hazel . If Darrell wojld replace John Schoop maybe this horrible cycle would stop and Darrell could get Purdue football back on the right track and all the other sports would follow suit but for some reason just like he would not replace Danny Etiling until it was too late he will not replace John Schoop.:
 
Re: He is not running in the black...

Those who forget the past are dammed to repeat it, is how I feel if the OC is not replaced!
 
Seasoned Greetings!

4, 5, 6 wins? I would think the DH Kool-Aid pitcher was empty by now. Burke must have told DH to mix up more Kool-Aid. I remember last year we how many seconds away from losing to ISU and having an 0-fur? I don't want to hear about recruiting etc. DH had his good season at Kent with the previous guys kids. DH's kids with the new guy haven't done much other than what is happening at WL!. The fact this guy is keeping shoop means he is clueless, he just got lucky at Kent - lightning in a bottle - I doubt this guy will ever win more than 3 in a season. There has to be a way to break his contract for non performance, because if he was doing his job he would have done at least as well as Hope with Hope's kids. Hell the BOT may even end the FB program so they can justify letting him go and non payment because there is no longer a job. This guy will be gone this time next year, because they will rename Ross Ade to Cricket Stadium because that's what your going to hear there when they are 0-4 / 1-3. You will have a harder time finding seat at a West Side game at that point.

We don't adjust at halftime, and the whole of the Big will have all the scouting and film they need on the OC and HC to beat us. Look forward to two runs up the gut for a yard or less and then a 2 yrd pass to a sideline. If Eric Hunter could be found I'm sure he could run this train wreck much better.



12W's in 4 years for Hunter, probably more than DH will chalk up.

What was wrong with these uniforms anyway?


This post was edited on 12/24 12:04 PM by Redhotfill
 
The lack of complexity is concerning, and speaks directly to coaching. That was predicted by some, not me, when Haz was hired.

The biggest difference I see with his Purdue teams and that one year at Kent State is passion. His Kent state team played with tremendous organization, discipline, and passion. I'll be amazed if he can elicit the emotion and dedication to win after failing at this so miserably.

As for keeping Shoop, Hes clearly doing what Haz wants him to or wouldnt be getting such glowing reviews from him and Burke.
 
Sorry, been out for Christmas and just seeing this.

We had a full notebook from the interview -- conducted by only me and Mike -- on the Monday before Christmas.

It was Ultimate Ticket.

But we also tweeted things, as we typically do.
This post was edited on 12/30 3:41 PM by Stacy_GoldandBlack.com
 
Re: He is not running in the black...

Purdue survived Cordova? That's a bit extreme. Tell me one thing Mitch Daniels has done differently than Cordova with athletics. 1 thing. It hasn't changed a bit - it's not the president, it's the athletic director. I'm not sure why everyone thinks it's the President's fault when it comes to the athletic department.
 
One thing that cracks me up in this thread is the uniform talk. "It's so important for recruiting", "the players love them", etc.

Ok, so it's important for recruiting. Great. Where are the recruits? Yep, haven't seen a lick of improvement in that area.

The players love them? Great. All we read about on this board is how there's problems in the locker room, the team isn't cohesive, they don't care, etc. Yep, they haven't seemed to make a lick of difference.

So who cares about the flipping uniforms?

Purdue is about 5 years late on this fad to make any sort of difference. Even doormat borderline 1-AA programs have new uniforms and flashy uniforms now. It doesn't matter. And there are plenty of schools that have kept it the same and kept on winning just fine. And quite frankly, the only alternate uniform I thought that's been nice are the 60s throwback ones.

Purdue needs to establish an ACTUAL IDENTITY instead of worrying about some flashy, fake identity that draws people in.

What identity does Purdue have? Are we defensive minded? Offensive? I couldn't tell you. Are we a passing team? Running team? I couldn't tell you. Where do our recruits come from....do we build the base in Indiana, the Midwest and fill in from other parts of the country? I have no idea what our strategy is, couldn't tell you.

We are basically a "MEH" football program. None of those questions are answered by flashy or superficial crap like uniforms, fancy facilities, etc. Until we can get our actual identity out there and can sell recruits on it - it's not gonna make a damn difference.



This post was edited on 12/31 9:15 AM by lbodel
 
My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.


Great points lbodel. Watching some of the 40 bowl games and reflecting on my own Boilermakers, I have come to the conclusion that the upper level of Purdue does not care. Simply put, not the AD, the President, the Board of Trustees, etc. no one really cares, so why should I be upset?

Morgan has to answer to the President. The President through letters, etc. wants an athletic department basically that does not need a ton of money to run, graduates athletes, and does not have a bunch of dopes in prison; behave themselves. Well we are doing that. Nothing about wins. So the AD is good with the President. Then the Board of Directors, well they were all appointed by said President when he was governor of Indiana, they will do what he wants so MB is good with the board too. No one cares. Kind of sad.

In addition, reading up on the contracts for both Painter and Hazell over the past few weeks- it is HUGE buyouts. Who dreamed up those things? Basically if another school wants one of our guys they have to pay up. That is all well and good, but right now no one would want either guy and we are on the hook for a huge compensation package to make either go away. Nothing about a performance clause. Painter could miss the NCAA 3 straight years, finish in the bottom half, and if we were to fire him we would owe him $2.5 million? Seems we are handcuffed.

My fear is that we will either choose to leave the Big Ten to focus as an academic institution or worse yet, the Big Ten will kick us out. Hey, it happened to the University of Chicago.
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

Nobody has been kicked out of the Big Ten...
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

Whoa, this is vastly overblown.

First off, your comments about the President, BOT, etc. is rather irrelevant. Very few places will those levels get involved in any sort of day-to-day operation of the athletic department, and as long as there are no problems, it's not that big of a deal to them. Most schools operate their athletic department independently from the university's budget. Purdue has athletic minded people on the BOT, it doesn't change anything. That's just flat out not what they're there to worry about. The athletic department is literally a fraction of what a university is.

Secondly, your comments about Purdue dropping out of the Big Ten to focus on academics is just flat out ABSURD. I mean, bless your heart, I love Purdue just as much as anyone, but it's not even in the top 5 best schools in the Big Ten. So cool your jets on how academic focused we are.

Purdue's athletics revenue is MORE than Kansas State, VA Tech, Clemson, Arizona, NC State, Arizona State, Oregon State, UCONN, Mississippi State, Iowa State, Georgia Tech, etc. And that's in order of closest to us to further away (Georgia Tech's revenue is $11 million less than Purdue).

So this notion that we're just so poor, don't have the resources to compete, etc. is just flat out a lie. Every single one of those schools has a better football or men's basketball program than we do (and quite frankly, most have a significantly better football or men's basketball program). And those are only programs that have less money than we do!

Purdue's got to do better in some things - and it's not just about who you hire as head coaches. And that falls on Morgan's shoulders. And to be fair to him, Purdue also has less money than other athletic departments that do either worse than us or on the same par. Illinois has $7 million more in revenue and is bad in football and fairly meh in men's basketball of late. Money certainly doesn't buy you wins in many, many cases.

And that's my whole point - money doesn't buy you wins, new uniforms don't buy you win, new facilities buy you wins, etc. Purdue's athletic department, not just the coaches, have to work harder than the Ohio States and Michigans, they have to be more creative than the Ohio States and Michigans, they have to be more resourceful than the Ohio States and Michigans, etc. And quite frankly, Purdue hasn't been able to put much of anything impressive over the last 10+ years in terms of that. I think the best thing Purdue has going for it in terms of its peers is Purdue Men's Basketball's Twitter account (which Painter had to threaten to leave Purdue to get money to hire someone for that stuff).

I don't want to compare ourselves to Oregon of now, but the Nike money wasn't always there. And they started building that program before the Nike money was there in any significant fashion. And they did so by doing those things - being ahead of the pack in several areas - branding, creativity, edgy, etc. Oregon's logos haven't changed for 16 years. For a school that you think is always changing their looks, they have kept the same colors, logos, etc. for that long. They got it right the first time. And here Purdue can't even keep a consistent logo, colors, etc.

And we don't need to be on Oregon's level by any means. But we should aspired to be Oregon, we should aspire to be Ohio State and Michigan, we should think that if Michigan State can do it, we can do it. If you don't aim to be the best, you never will be. And what you hear from Purdue Athletics administrators is far from that and is usually negative in tone.
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

You had me at first but then when you turned to Nike and Oregon you are way off base. I recently read the impact, both financial and with the use of Nike's staff just exactly what they have done for Oregon. They used Nike's Marketing Staff to re-design their logo and develop and use all the electric colors for their athletic teams...that is a fact. Nike's owner and founder has poured millions to the Athletic Department over the years to bring the player facilities to standard all the other PAC teams needed to catch up to! It goes on and on and it has been for the past 15-20 years!

Sports Illustrated and other media annually reports what Universities specifically spend on their Football Programs and the big boys and the top programs spend significantly more money than Purdue does and they spend it on an annual basis and the same goes for the top BB programs. Most of the time I cannot find Purdue even listed in their reports.

Winning is about having good coaches and recruiting good players and all that surrounds a great program which includes the different and fancy uniforms and helmets, PLAYER facilities and perks to get the players and coaches. Sad to say it is an arms race and recruiting budgets for the top programs in both FB and BB well exceed what Purdue spends.

Winning also puts butts in the seats and at Purdue in both FB and BB it is very easy to see what is not sitting in Ross-Ade and Mackey! Purdue may have one of the few self-sustaining Athletic Departments but that comes a lot from not spending anywhere near as much as Top 25 Programs do. It has been reported that Purdue actually gives part of the Big Ten Network money to the University and if true that certainly doesn't help!

It certainly is not a cure-all but not too many Universities that spend big bucks and have sugar daddy donors such as Nike, Under Amour and individuals like T. Bone Pickens, etc. overall year in and year out recruit top coaches and top players and win! I have no doubts that Michigan with their 6 million dollar man will turn around their FB in a year or two!
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

This was a really good post, but can you back up the statement that "money doesn't buy wins"? I tried to look up stats to prove my point, but the following two points illustrate my difficulties.

There's an extremely high correlation between athletic department revenue and wins. But a part of the revenue is ticket sales, which improve if you win, so revenue doesn't necessarily cause wins.

And in the link, there's an extremely high correlation between athletic department expenses and football wins. I'm sure those schools spend way more than Purdue on football, but part of the budget differences come from the olympic sports. Purdue has 18 varsity teams. Ohio State has 39 - obviously they're going to have a lot more expenses.


I think it's a lot more likely that Knight's influx of money at Oregon had much more to do with their success than logos. When are you assuming Knight began donating large chunks of money? I'd say they made the transition to a great program in about 2000. Even in 2008, Oregon was on par with Purdue. They were a better team (beat us in OT in Ross-Ade, and in a close game at Autzen the next year) but it was at least comparable.


While being a rich athletic department is obviously preferable to being a poor one, not having money doesn't preclude Purdue from success. When I see Georgia Tech, Kansas State, Baylor, Utah, MSU, Mizzou, etc. have success in multiple big sports, I get really annoyed at the Purdue athletic department. Whatever their success is attributed to (getting the right coach, getting athletes easier admission, etc), Purdue is fully capable of those same type of things. It's obviously easier said than done, but why doesn't Purdue try to copy those things that seem to lead non-traditional powers to success?

My feelings echo that of an earlier poster who said the BoT just don't care about sports. I know it's their job to worry about the entire university, but (and this is pure speculation) I feel like at powerhouse programs, they care a lot more about sports than Purdue does. Ohio State's president repeatedly stuck his nose into the sports media because he cared that much. Ole Miss, despite not being a traditional power, defines itself by football. This includes everyone from fans to the BoT. Purdue, despite not being top 5 in the B10 academically, defines itself almost solely by academics. This is not the case at PSU and Michigan, even though they would be widely considered better schools than Purdue.

It seems like the desire for Purdue to be preeminent in athletics is just not there for the people running Purdue. I believe that the desire by all people involved is a requirement to achieving that preeminence - that's how difficult it is to be great. And I don't think we're all on the same page. Some fans take a "holier than thou" attitude with Purdue's struggles; I think this is mostly defensive. But I desperately want Purdue to be top notch in athletics. It just doesn't seem like Purdue gets the same amount of support from the BoT or President that other top athletic programs receive.

budgets
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

If you read my post, I clearly stated it happened before Nike/Knight put money into the program. Knight's first major athletic donation wasn't until 2002, well after the team's success had been established and their Nike contract wasn't any out of the ordinary from other programs at the time. Yes, they met with Nike's branding to get concepts together. But is Purdue not allowed to meet with branding companies? They met with Nike and Nike told them their train logo was bad cause you couldn't read it. It's not any different from any other school - you either make the effort or you don't. There aren't magical wizards that create consistent branding for other schools. But Purdue never made the effort to. Hence all the color changes, inconsistent branding, etc.

You can use so many different schools as examples - Oregon is one that most people understand. And you also wouldn't think their logos haven't changed in over 15 years.

At the end of the day, like I said, you have to follow the models of the best out there. And in an internet age where you can see what's going on all over the country and world, a college athletic department has to keep up with the pros now too.
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

Knight's first major donation to the athletic department was for the Autzen renovation, post 2000. Oregon had been good for several years before that. He had made a large donation to the academic side prior to that (it's currently rumored he's about to make a $1 billion donation - to the university).

As for the revenue, of course in generic terms, more money will set you up more for success, but like you said - a lot of it is based on winning first, like ticket revenue and donations.

However, the list of athletic departments I provided - they are bringing in less money than we are. And they all have better programs than us.

And astutely, you pointed out that Purdue offers a very low amount of sports, which are added expenses - and they're not minor expenses.

Money does matter, but it's not the end all, be all. There are a lot of schools that have shiny new facilities that don't do well in football and basketball. There are lots of schools that have shiny uniforms that don't do well or recruit well.

The fact of the matter is that Purdue has what it takes to be successful, but they not only have to have the money (which is there to be successful), but they have to spend it wisely. And like I said, a school like Purdue needs to stretch their dollars further than a Michigan or Ohio State - and that doesn't just mean cutting costs. You don't see Purdue be particularly creative, edgy, resourceful, etc. They operate very much along with the status quo.
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

Originally posted by lbodel:
Knight's first major donation to the athletic department was for the Autzen renovation, post 2000. Oregon had been good for several years before that. He had made a large donation to the academic side prior to that (it's currently rumored he's about to make a $1 billion donation - to the university).

As for the revenue, of course in generic terms, more money will set you up more for success, but like you said - a lot of it is based on winning first, like ticket revenue and donations.

However, the list of athletic departments I provided - they are bringing in less money than we are. And they all have better programs than us.

And astutely, you pointed out that Purdue offers a very low amount of sports, which are added expenses - and they're not minor expenses.

Money does matter, but it's not the end all, be all. There are a lot of schools that have shiny new facilities that don't do well in football and basketball. There are lots of schools that have shiny uniforms that don't do well or recruit well.

The fact of the matter is that Purdue has what it takes to be successful, but they not only have to have the money (which is there to be successful), but they have to spend it wisely. And like I said, a school like Purdue needs to stretch their dollars further than a Michigan or Ohio State - and that doesn't just mean cutting costs. You don't see Purdue be particularly creative, edgy, resourceful, etc. They operate very much along with the status quo.
Agree spending money on facilities and unis isnt a guarantee of future winning, but it only helps. I dont get the argument that they should have to win first to induce wiser spending. Maybe youre saying that, maybe not, but I hear that argument enough on here. The AD isnt a parent looking to reward behavior, hes there to put them in the best spots to win.
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

You better check your facts Nike's first major donation was immediately after the 1996 Rose Bowl, my 15-20 years was spot on!

This post was edited on 1/5 4:29 PM by ghostoffatjack
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

Originally posted by ghostoffatjack:
You better check your facts Nike's firstt major donation was immediately after the 1996 Rose Bowl, my 15-20 years was spot on!
Good to know. I was pretty sure that the Nike money created the team we know now.
 
Re: My realization- Purdue really doesn't care.

Sorry it didn't register. He donated about half the amount of money for their indoor football practice facility that was built in 1997. Purdue had an indoor facility in 1990 of the same scope. So I don't think that really put Oregon over the top…

Knight was a much larger donor in terms of their Autzen Renovation in 2002 I believe.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT