The program that comes to mind is Virginia Tech. I see a lot of similarities between the two colleges. I think Purdue could be that type of program. Another is Oklahoma St.
Is Purdue a sleeping giant in college football
- Thread starter Nerdberts
- Start date
If we can continue signing Game Changers, difference makers to this program, we will certainly be!!
I believe that in order to be a sleeping giant you must have been a giant at one point and then fallen asleep. Please explain how we were ever a giant.
I'd compare us to the flu virus. It's around all the time but usually it's just something that causes minimal problems and only a few people notice. Every now and again it mutates into something more formidable.
I'd compare us to the flu virus. It's around all the time but usually it's just something that causes minimal problems and only a few people notice. Every now and again it mutates into something more formidable.
Not sure sleeping giant is the term, but I'd be happy being Va Tech. Maybe a bubbling cauldron.
Sleeping giant is an underachieving program smack dab in the middle of a recruiting hotbed. Think LSU before Saban, or Florida before Spurrier.
This.
Sleeping Giant is a school that has every reason to be good (money, recruiting, fanbase, etc.) but can never seem to put it together.
Best Example:
Clemson before Dabo
Best Current Example:
Nebraska
I wouldn’t really put Nebraska in that group due to their built-in recruiting challenges.
Yeah I wouldn't consider VTech or Purdue to be giants in the college football world. Giants have permanent advantages. I also see a pretty big geographical difference between Purdue and VTech. They rose to power at a time when there was a void of strong football programs up and down the eastern US (outside of the state of Florida), a hug territory with extremely fertile recruiting ground. It was a scenario just begging for a school in that region to rise up. And along came Beamer..
I would consider Purdue football closer to K-State, MSU, or ISU. Capable of rising up with the right coach (as any P5 school can), but not inherently at an advantage over other P5 football programs. Success will ebb and flow indefinitely with the quality of the coaching staff, investment in facilities, and some good old fashion luck. We are at a good place right now and for the near future, but it isn't permanent.
I would consider Purdue football closer to K-State, MSU, or ISU. Capable of rising up with the right coach (as any P5 school can), but not inherently at an advantage over other P5 football programs. Success will ebb and flow indefinitely with the quality of the coaching staff, investment in facilities, and some good old fashion luck. We are at a good place right now and for the near future, but it isn't permanent.
I wouldn't mind seeing us become established like Wisco, though I wonder how that program will fare once Alvarez retires. They should be okay, but it'd be nice if we could run a train on them for 12+ games in a row (or whatever that crappy streak is right now they have on us)
So now we are arguing about what metaphor we should use to describe how good Purdue football can become over the next couple of years. The team still has to earn that, but it's a good feeling, no matter what.
Sleeping giant? Probably not. A very strong program who should compete for conference titles every 3-5 years? Yes. No reason Purdue shouldn't be an 8-9 win team most years and with a veteran squad with good to great young play makers around to provide depth to grab a 10-11 win season.
Think of how the basketball program is setup with CMP...copy and paste that to football.
Think of how the basketball program is setup with CMP...copy and paste that to football.
I can ALWAYS count on you Nat to rain on my Purdue parade! LOL! Whether it be on KHC (when my card number isn’t being swiped from someone off Rivals and used around the globe - twice now it’s happened) or here on the free site. Damn the dreamers to Boilermaker hell! LMAO!
In all seriousness & honesty, I do believe Purdue (under Brohm) is very much a sleeping giant. With the continual backing from the JPC and fans alike, I see big things in the future of Purdue Football. Just like past VaTech, Baylor, Kansas, (one year) WVA teams etc....why not Purdue. I personally enjoy you Nat...but I am very, very happy The Brohm Brothers do not consult with you on the future possibilities of Purdue Football.
I’ve been watching Purdue for 30 years (jebus) and i have seen some lows and highs. Purdue will never sustain success like osu. Can we recreate the tiller years? Yes. Can we recreate the mollenkopf run? Maybe. Can we sustain it beyond brohm? Show me
Texas is the best current example imo. Hard to not recruit well there and a decent coach could win huge there. A good coach could be a multiple national title winner.
Oh...I wholeheartedly agree. But just as I do when I buy a PowerBall or MegaMillions ticket, I have to say “why not me”.
We are obviously of similar age, (I may be a bit older) as we utilize the same Purdue names as a measure of success. But these days if we win the B1G, we are sitting pretty in regards to how far the program has come. And I believe we will see it. I’d love for it to be sustainable but The Brothers Brohm would truly need to be here for the “long haul”.
I reject the whole concept of "bluebloods." The term was initially used to describe in-bred noble families of Europe where titles were inherited.
Sports programs earn their status on the field/court. They rise and fall. Obviously, assets dedicated and commitment of the university are huge factors in assisting in the ability to earn status. However, no programs stay on top forever and that is likely a good thing. Long-term success often leads to complacency and the rot sets in. The programs then takes a downturn.
Look at ND: they became famous under Rockne and Leahy but then in the 1950s they were bad. There was resurgence under Arabut then decline followed by success by Holtz and then decline again. They really haven't been a top-rated program since Holtz despite th subway alums, media and extended fanbase.
Purdue has the international reputation as a fine academic institution. It ha the ability to compete at the top level. What it has lacked is the commitment from the university to be really, really good for a long time. It does seem like that view has changed and Brohm is a product of that change. We'll see if he can execute the rise. Based on last year's success, I like his chances.
Sports programs earn their status on the field/court. They rise and fall. Obviously, assets dedicated and commitment of the university are huge factors in assisting in the ability to earn status. However, no programs stay on top forever and that is likely a good thing. Long-term success often leads to complacency and the rot sets in. The programs then takes a downturn.
Look at ND: they became famous under Rockne and Leahy but then in the 1950s they were bad. There was resurgence under Arabut then decline followed by success by Holtz and then decline again. They really haven't been a top-rated program since Holtz despite th subway alums, media and extended fanbase.
Purdue has the international reputation as a fine academic institution. It ha the ability to compete at the top level. What it has lacked is the commitment from the university to be really, really good for a long time. It does seem like that view has changed and Brohm is a product of that change. We'll see if he can execute the rise. Based on last year's success, I like his chances.
Purdue can reside in the top 25 and make a top 10 run every four years or so. Sleeping giant? Dunno about that. Academics and location are always going to be a restriction on that.
It isnt a coincidence that OSU and Bama among others are in the hunt annually. USC, ND, Texas etc are a good coach away from returning to prominence. They dedicate the resources and bend the academics enough to cater to sports.
Yeah, USC May not be sawing logs just yet, but they’re definitely nodding off some. Helton ain’t the guy.
You have to look at the program throughout it's history to be considered a sleeping giant. USC was a sleeping giant until Pete Carroll took over. It had sustained high levels of success and then fell off at some point for an extended time. The same could be said for Texas over the last few seasons. Another would be Minnesota considering it has 7 National Titles...BUT to get back to that point will take sustained success.
Purdue has had short periods of success under different leaders throughout its' history, but never prolonged.
The best 5 year runs for Purdue are as follows:
1965-1969: 40-10-1 (Mollenkopf)
1977-1981: 38-19-1 (Young)
1997-2001: 39-22 (Tiller)
2003-2007: 37-26 (Tiller)
There isn't enough history to be considered a 'sleeping giant.'
Columbus is a shithole. Hard to use campus as a selling factor if OSU is an annual contender.
Three straight top 10 finishes from 66-68. We have just been asleep for 50 years.
I think it has more to do with coaching than academics and location. How does South Bend do it? Their paradise location? NW and Stanford win with tough academic standards.
Arizona State has this:
1970: 11-0 AP 6
1971: 11-1 AP 8
1972: 10-2 AP 13
1973: 11-1 AP 9
1974: 7-5 AP NR
1975: 12-0 AP 2
1976: 4-7 AP NR
1977: 9-3 AP 18
Would you consider Arizona State a sleeping giant?
Not really responding to you Gunner...just used your post as a reply!
Metro area in a football hotbed. They can half ass a recruiting class with in state kids and still be better than most of the big ten.
Not sure location is such an obstacle as many believe. I've seen the Oklahoma campus and wonder why anyone would want to go there. It must be tradition as it certainly can't be location.
Palo Alto is incredible, for one thing. A Stanford degree carries more weight in general than a Purdue degree as well.
As I said, it depends on your definition of sleeping giant. Can we be NW? Of course we can, but they’re not a “giant”. ND is a different animal. The golden dome is a thing.
Purdue in the past has not made academic exceptions to things like science and math credit requirements for admission for athletes. Most schools do. Purdue’s are higher than the Big Ten’s, which are higher than the NCAA’s in general. That’s what I meant by academics and that matters too. Many Players don’t want to have extra academic requirements to go one place over another. Perhaps that’s changed now and Purdue has leveled itself with the rest of the conference.
Purdue can be NW for sure, maybe like Stanford too, but I doubt that much more. ND? Probably not, though ND now isn’t really a “giant” either.
Of course there is. In my book, anytime any team has had brief to intermediate runs of success and snag an all star coach, they’re a sleeping giant.
Many would suggest Minnesota, based on being only D-1 school in state and rich tradition nationally back in 1961 and earlier ....
Last edited:
Can we be NW??? Please lets not put Northwestern on a pedestal. They schedule cupcakes and have benefited the last 6 years or so with an extremely weak West. Minny, Purdue, Illinois, even Nebraska haven't been good. Times are changing. Northwestern has a decent program but is lik 4 and 10 in bowl games. They are not the ceiling not even close.
If Brohm stays we will surpass them again
I didn’t ask the question. I answered it. Obviously if you read my post, I think Purdue can be NW because NW isn’t that good
Similar threads
