All kinds of media are reporting today that Harbough is their new coach and that the family will be in Ann Arbor on Tuesday for the announcement!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Originally posted by studed:
Harbaugh won't wear out his welcome in 4 years. It's not like Michigan and harbaugh don't know each other. He is going to have a say in who the next ad is. His contract is actually longer than what was reported and it is heavily back loaded with a huge bonus at the end. His parent are moving to be by him. He is going to be at Michigan for a least 8-10 years
If he comes to U of M, don't forget about the rise of PSU and the addition of Rutgers. I think with the exception of Purdue and IU, B10 football is on the rise.Originally posted by Mroad:
Harbaugh is half psycho but I think that's part of his genius. The guy is hyper-competitive, a work-aholic and has won big every place he's ever been. It will be must watch TV when Harbaugh coaches against Meyer and Dantonio!
Originally posted by fentonboiler:
Originally posted by studed:
Harbaugh won't wear out his welcome in 4 years. It's not like Michigan and harbaugh don't know each other. He is going to have a say in who the next ad is. His contract is actually longer than what was reported and it is heavily back loaded with a huge bonus at the end. His parent are moving to be by him. He is going to be at Michigan for a least 8-10 years
I'm sure the folks at Stanford and San Fran thought the exact same thing.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
I dont get how other B1G teams getting better is bad for Purdue. This is great for Purdue indirectly. This gives OSU, MSU, and Michigan all a significant chance to up their profiles nationally, and we will be playing the same teams. Better exposure to recruits, higher level of competition, whats bad about this? That we have to pull our heads out of ourselves and figure out how to run a program?Originally posted by NCBoiler06:
Bad for Purdue. Great for the B1G. BTN is calling their physicians after a 4+ hour erection.
Agree 17. I think Danny Hope REALLY benefited from a down OSU in 2011(people still cite that 2011 win over a 6-6 team as something special....it wasn't..) and a down Michigan early in his tenure while he was here.Originally posted by boiler17:
I dont get how other B1G teams getting better is bad for Purdue. This is great for Purdue indirectly. This gives OSU, MSU, and Michigan all a significant chance to up their profiles nationally, and we will be playing the same teams. Better exposure to recruits, higher level of competition, whats bad about this? That we have to pull our heads out of ourselves and figure out how to run a program?Originally posted by NCBoiler06:
Bad for Purdue. Great for the B1G. BTN is calling their physicians after a 4+ hour erection.
Largely agree, but think the OSU/Michigan points are relevant when gauging the physical talent of those teams. Even on their worst years those two in particular mop the floor with us recruiting. The most interesting thing to me about those games is how well we held the LOS on both sides of the ball.Originally posted by pboiler18:
Agree 17. I think Danny Hope REALLY benefited from a down OSU in 2011(people still cite that 2011 win over a 6-6 team as something special....it wasn't..) and a down Michigan early in his tenure while he was here.Originally posted by boiler17:
I dont get how other B1G teams getting better is bad for Purdue. This is great for Purdue indirectly. This gives OSU, MSU, and Michigan all a significant chance to up their profiles nationally, and we will be playing the same teams. Better exposure to recruits, higher level of competition, whats bad about this? That we have to pull our heads out of ourselves and figure out how to run a program?Originally posted by NCBoiler06:
Bad for Purdue. Great for the B1G. BTN is calling their physicians after a 4+ hour erection.
That, and the sanctions/scandal at PSU really helped keep some of the perennial football powers in the conference down. We didn't really take advantage.
The biggest difference in the Hope era vs. the Hazell era to me is simply offensive production. When Hope/Nord was here, the offense on average performed in the 70s. That's not good...but if we had that same offense this year we could have gone bowling! With Hazell/Shoop, we still haven't cracked the top 100. Anytime your units A. make the other side of the ball look worse than they really are and B. can't at least perform in the neighborhood of their recruiting rankings you have a problem.
Hazell was not the main problem. That is, until he failed to make a change and remedy the big issue that he has!
I don't think that slow adjustment is all on Hazell. I mean, last year and even at times this year we made sweeping changes on the defensive side of the ball wether it be base alignment/system, personnel or strategy. I also don't necessarily DIRECTLY blame him for recruiting. We didn't recruit well BEFORE he got here and didn't have the players to have great results (but certainly better than we got). That said, he is recruiting on par with his predecessor...so at least recruiting has not gotten worse per se while he has been here. How Hazell is hurting recruiting is by not getting rid of Shoop (would you want to play for that guy? Ha!) and not establishing a distinct offensive identity....which is what Purdue is known for.Originally posted by boiler17:
Largely agree, but think the OSU/Michigan points are relevant when gauging the physical talent of those teams. Even on their worst years those two in particular mop the floor with us recruiting. The most interesting thing to me about those games is how well we held the LOS on both sides of the ball.Originally posted by pboiler18:
Agree 17. I think Danny Hope REALLY benefited from a down OSU in 2011(people still cite that 2011 win over a 6-6 team as something special....it wasn't..) and a down Michigan early in his tenure while he was here.Originally posted by boiler17:
I dont get how other B1G teams getting better is bad for Purdue. This is great for Purdue indirectly. This gives OSU, MSU, and Michigan all a significant chance to up their profiles nationally, and we will be playing the same teams. Better exposure to recruits, higher level of competition, whats bad about this? That we have to pull our heads out of ourselves and figure out how to run a program?Originally posted by NCBoiler06:
Bad for Purdue. Great for the B1G. BTN is calling their physicians after a 4+ hour erection.
That, and the sanctions/scandal at PSU really helped keep some of the perennial football powers in the conference down. We didn't really take advantage.
The biggest difference in the Hope era vs. the Hazell era to me is simply offensive production. When Hope/Nord was here, the offense on average performed in the 70s. That's not good...but if we had that same offense this year we could have gone bowling! With Hazell/Shoop, we still haven't cracked the top 100. Anytime your units A. make the other side of the ball look worse than they really are and B. can't at least perform in the neighborhood of their recruiting rankings you have a problem.
Hazell was not the main problem. That is, until he failed to make a change and remedy the big issue that he has!
Still think Hazell is at least 50% of the problem. Even if he never hired Shoop, he is way too stubborn and slow to adjust among other points we have been over. At least with our dialog, I have something to keep me analyzing/interested in our games when we go down 20.
I do agree with a 60th ranked offense we go bowling. Its remarkable how bad they make them play.
Do you think recruiting is similar because of the overall rankings? I think recruting has gone from a D+/D to a D-/F. I dont really follow recruiting rankings, but the amount of guys we are the only P5 offer from greatly concerns me.Originally posted by pboiler18:
I don't think that slow adjustment is all on Hazell. I mean, last year and even at times this year we made sweeping changes on the defensive side of the ball wether it be base alignment/system, personnel or strategy. I also don't necessarily DIRECTLY blame him for recruiting. We didn't recruit well BEFORE he got here and didn't have the players to have great results (but certainly better than we got). That said, he is recruiting on par with his predecessor...so at least recruiting has not gotten worse per se while he has been here. How Hazell is hurting recruiting is by not getting rid of Shoop (would you want to play for that guy? Ha!) and not establishing a distinct offensive identity....which is what Purdue is known for.
I think Hazell would be moderately successful here, but his choice of coordinator and subsequent slowness to remove that problem has basically made sure he will not be successful here.
I don't think the team is undisciplined. I think execution and assignment wise they have slowly gotten better (at least on defense...and I think the OL isn't our weakpoint on offense any longer). I think you forget how dismal things were in that regard when Hope was here and we penaltied and time managed ourselves out of a handful of winnable games. That's not what upsets me about this team. It's that when the offense comes out, its clear we have no identity, strengths or discernable difference in gameplan from week to week.
I get why people think this, but really doubt it. Michigan has been humbled and will gladly hand over the keys to him for however long he can fix it without breaking any rules.Originally posted by Lionheart1:
They had to do something with Meyer putting O$U in the 4 team playoff this year. O$U will be even more formidable in recruiting. UM had to make a big splash with their next coach. Harbaugh will get them turned around; but his personality will rub them raw.
Gotcha. I can understand that. I'd prefer as many big games as possible in the big ten to give us a chance to play the best teams and have perpetual beatdowns cause the university/athletic department reevaluate their approach or have the program start earning momentum. Would prefer we just start winning, but significant change would feel awful good right now too.Originally posted by NCBoiler06:
I say that Harbaugh to Mich to is bad for PU b/c my theory is that the only way for PU competes for the B1G championship is to "sneak" in during a down year. It is certainly a debatable theory, but I don't see Shoop and Hazell sneaking up on anyone w/ innovative coaching methods or formations anytime soon.
Expect him to have them in the top 10 as early as next year. Hoke didn't leave the cupboard that bare and Harbaugh will get some of the better leftovers to come this year and play for him. With U of M, MSU, and OSU it's going to be very tough for anyone other than those three to ever win the B10.Originally posted by boiler17:
I get why people think this, but really doubt it. Michigan has been humbled and will gladly hand over the keys to him for however long he can fix it without breaking any rules.Originally posted by Lionheart1:
They had to do something with Meyer putting O$U in the 4 team playoff this year. O$U will be even more formidable in recruiting. UM had to make a big splash with their next coach. Harbaugh will get them turned around; but his personality will rub them raw.
If he returns them to top 15 status, hes there for however long he wants to be.
No chance. For starters, who's their QB? And who is said QB going to throw the ball to?Originally posted by TwinDegrees2:
Expect him to have them in the top 10 as early as next year. Hoke didn't leave the cupboard that bare and Harbaugh will get some of the better leftovers to come this year and play for him. With U of M, MSU, and OSU it's going to be very tough for anyone other than those three to ever win the B10.Originally posted by boiler17:
I get why people think this, but really doubt it. Michigan has been humbled and will gladly hand over the keys to him for however long he can fix it without breaking any rules.Originally posted by Lionheart1:
They had to do something with Meyer putting O$U in the 4 team playoff this year. O$U will be even more formidable in recruiting. UM had to make a big splash with their next coach. Harbaugh will get them turned around; but his personality will rub them raw.
If he returns them to top 15 status, hes there for however long he wants to be.
Let's see how MSU looks minus Pat Narduzzi. Their offense has never wowed me; defense has been their calling card and is what has won them games the last few years. I expect them to slip back a little bit, but we'll see.Originally posted by BoilerBiker:
"With U of M, MSU, and OSU it's going to be very tough for anyone other than those three to ever win the B10."
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Hope's last full recruiting class, the year before his firing, included two four-stars and 22 three-stars out of 26 total.Originally posted by pboiler18:
I don't think that slow adjustment is all on Hazell. I mean, last year and even at times this year we made sweeping changes on the defensive side of the ball wether it be base alignment/system, personnel or strategy. I also don't necessarily DIRECTLY blame him for recruiting. We didn't recruit well BEFORE he got here and didn't have the players to have great results (but certainly better than we got). That said, he is recruiting on par with his predecessor...so at least recruiting has not gotten worse per se while he has been here. How Hazell is hurting recruiting is by not getting rid of Shoop (would you want to play for that guy? Ha!) and not establishing a distinct offensive identity....which is what Purdue is known for.
I think Hazell would be moderately successful here, but his choice of coordinator and subsequent slowness to remove that problem has basically made sure he will not be successful here.
I don't think the team is undisciplined. I think execution and assignment wise they have slowly gotten better (at least on defense...and I think the OL isn't our weakpoint on offense any longer). I think you forget how dismal things were in that regard when Hope was here and we penaltied and time managed ourselves out of a handful of winnable games. That's not what upsets me about this team. It's that when the offense comes out, its clear we have no identity, strengths or discernable difference in gameplan from week to week.
Rankings are decieving you here. 5 of those guys never even played...Originally posted by Born Boiler:
Hope's last full recruiting class, the year before his firing, included two four-stars and 22 three-stars out of 26 total.Originally posted by pboiler18:
I don't think that slow adjustment is all on Hazell. I mean, last year and even at times this year we made sweeping changes on the defensive side of the ball wether it be base alignment/system, personnel or strategy. I also don't necessarily DIRECTLY blame him for recruiting. We didn't recruit well BEFORE he got here and didn't have the players to have great results (but certainly better than we got). That said, he is recruiting on par with his predecessor...so at least recruiting has not gotten worse per se while he has been here. How Hazell is hurting recruiting is by not getting rid of Shoop (would you want to play for that guy? Ha!) and not establishing a distinct offensive identity....which is what Purdue is known for.
I think Hazell would be moderately successful here, but his choice of coordinator and subsequent slowness to remove that problem has basically made sure he will not be successful here.
I don't think the team is undisciplined. I think execution and assignment wise they have slowly gotten better (at least on defense...and I think the OL isn't our weakpoint on offense any longer). I think you forget how dismal things were in that regard when Hope was here and we penaltied and time managed ourselves out of a handful of winnable games. That's not what upsets me about this team. It's that when the offense comes out, its clear we have no identity, strengths or discernable difference in gameplan from week to week.
Compare that with the illustrious group of commitments we have right now ... pre-poaching.
Then take your foot out of your mouth again and explain about the bare cupboard and how we're better off.