Quit scapegoating Shoop

[New Pal Boiler]

Yeah shoop sucks, as everyone can see.

But who hired the Weird Beard?

Who brought him back for 2nd and 3rd seasons?

Hazell just doesn't get it. He's trying to play tressel ball at purdue, which is a fools errand. On his radio show Thursday, he told Tim that the key to our offense this season would be to "establish the run". Does he think he's woody Hayes at OSU in the 1960s? When's the last time Purdue "established the run" against teams like OSU, michigan, nebraska or wisconsin? Probably before the invention of the forward pass.

As long as he is dictating this idiocy from the top, we will continue to play boring, unwatchable, ineffective offensive football.

 

[Big Red Crimson Buffalo]

Actually, you guys run the ball pretty damn well.

What is inexplicable is that when you had a chance to really stomp on their necks and play power football in the 3rd-2 or 3rd-3 situations, the OC got cute and tried to throw.
This is after your bigger OL was pushing them around up front.

 

[Purduethruandthru]

Strange thing is, he did establish the run yesterday. And then he went away from it at all the wrong times.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Strange thing is, he did establish the run yesterday. And then he went away from it at all the wrong times.

You think we're going to run for 4 and 5 yards a carry like that against MSU, wisconsin, or Nebraska? I don't.

There's a reason tiller scrapped Coletto's power running game.

 

[Purduethruandthru]

Not really trying to argue that New Pal. Just saying it was working yesterday and when it's working, you don't go deep on third and two. At least you don't with our current QB.

 

[BoilermakerD]

Yeah shoop sucks, as everyone can see.

But who hired the Weird Beard?

Who brought him back for 2nd and 3rd seasons?

Hazell just doesn't get it. He's trying to play tressel ball at purdue, which is a fools errand. On his radio show Thursday, he told Tim that the key to our offense this season would be to "establish the run". Does he think he's woody Hayes at OSU in the 1960s? When's the last time Purdue "established the run" against teams like OSU, michigan, nebraska or wisconsin? Probably before the invention of the forward pass.

As long as he is dictating this idiocy from the top, we will continue to play boring, unwatchable, ineffective offensive football.

It's the way it works man. Before schools eat HC contracts the change that comes, if any, is at OC or DC. Do I agree hazell has been bad? Yes. But starting with Landry and Lombardi on the Giants ... Coaches have been as good as their coordinators

 

[BoilerStutz]

On the first play of the game, our QB with three years in the program was not able to differentiate between man and zone coverage. As a result, he threw a pick six directly to an opposing player. Unless Appleby is a complete flipping idiot (which he is clearly not), then Shoop has not prepared him to play Division 1 football. This is unacceptable at any level of college football.

 

[shooterfly]

The buck stops with Hazell. If the head coach is any type of coach he will be more hands on with play calling and defensive calls. The HC should at least be an expert on one side of the ball and takeover and take ownership of the team from a play by play perspective.

 

[BoilerStutz]

The buck stops with Hazell. If the head coach is any type of coach he will be more hands on with play calling and defensive calls. The HC should at least be an expert on one side of the ball and takeover and take ownership of the team from a play by play perspective.

Have to agree with this...

 

[pboiler18]

I think Shopps play calling was better. That said, what's better than completely horrific? Barely passable?

We were moving Marshall off the ball and getting decent chunks in the run game and then totally went away from it in 3rd and short. Don't get it.

I also think Hazell is less involved in the play to play ops of the offense than you think.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Not really trying to argue that New Pal. Just saying it was working yesterday and when it's working, you don't go deep on third and two. At least you don't with our current QB.

Agreed.

On the first play of the game, our QB with three years in the program was not able to differentiate between man and zone coverage. As a result, he threw a pick six directly to an opposing player. Unless Appleby is a complete flipping idiot (which he is clearly not), then Shoop has not prepared him to play Division 1 football. This is unacceptable at any level of college football.

Agreed. And hazell is all-in at the John Shoop table.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I think Shopps play calling was better. That said, what's better than completely horrific? Barely passable?

We were moving Marshall off the ball and getting decent chunks in the run game and then totally went away from it in 3rd and short. Don't get it.

I also think Hazell is less involved in the play to play ops of the offense than you think.

Doesn't really matter who is calling the plays. Hazell has an "establish the run" mentality that he has mandated Shoop to employ, which has not been successful in my lifetime, or anyone else's lifetime on this board, I would venture to guess.

 

[pboiler18]

Doesn't really matter who is calling the plays. Hazell has an "establish the run" mentality that he has mandated Shoop to employ, which has not been successful in my lifetime, or anyone else's lifetime on this board, I would venture to guess.

Did you watch the game yesterday? Do you know ANYTHING about football?

Run game looked pretty damn good. Very physical. Our OL really controlled that phase of the game. So what do we do? Run screens and short passes, especially in situations where we needed to push it down the field. Then, we pushed it down the field in situations where we needed 2-3 yards to continue a drive.

That's not on the players.

 

[PaBoiler78]

Did you watch the game yesterday? Do you know ANYTHING about football?

Run game looked pretty damn good. Very physical. Our OL really controlled that phase of the game. So what do we do? Run screens and short passes, especially in situations where we needed to push it down the field. Then, we pushed it down the field in situations where we needed 2-3 yards to continue a drive.

That's not on the players.

gave me a flashback to this past superbowl, instead of ground and pound, we get cute on 3rd and 2's esp. when they were supposedly tired.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Did you watch the game yesterday? Do you know ANYTHING about football?

Run game looked pretty damn good. Very physical. Our OL really controlled that phase of the game. So what do we do? Run screens and short passes, especially in situations where we needed to push it down the field. Then, we pushed it down the field in situations where we needed 2-3 yards to continue a drive.

That's not on the players.

You must not have watched a lot of Purdue football if you really think we're going to control the line of scrimmage and play smash-mouth football against the B1G. Colletto tried that, and failed miserably.

Shoop is doing just what Hazell wants, that's why he keeps bringing him back as OC. Otherwise, He would reassign play calling duties or have sent shoop packing by now.

 

[nat100]

I have to admit. Weird Beard made me laugh. Kudos

 

[pboiler18]

You must not have watched a lot of Purdue football if you really think we're going to control the line of scrimmage and play smash-mouth football against the B1G. Colletto tried that, and failed miserably.

Shoop is doing just what Hazell wants, that's why he keeps bringing him back as OC. Otherwise, He would reassign play calling duties or have sent shoop packing by now.

This will be our best OL since 2009...and looks like it could be better than that. Run game was dominant yesterday...and should be equally or more dominant vs. ISU, BGSU, IU and a few others (depending how NW, Minny, and Iowa shake out) and will be better vs. tougher teams than it has been. We lost due to play calling and execution in a few spots...it's not like it was terrible all day. This team needs to learn how to finish...it's really as simple as that.

 

[Jack_Ripper]

Actually, you guys run the ball pretty damn well.

What is inexplicable is that when you had a chance to really stomp on their necks and play power football in the 3rd-2 or 3rd-3 situations, the OC got cute and tried to throw.
This is after your bigger OL was pushing them around up front.

Good post right there.....

 

[Redhotfill]

You think we're going to run for 4 and 5 yards a carry like that against MSU, wisconsin, or Nebraska? I don't.

There's a reason tiller scrapped Coletto's power running game.

Yeah the A train was gone lol!

Maybe Hazell thinks he has another one ready to play lol!

FYI this is what the A - Train looked like;





Also notice the score in the first clip, even Colletto teams beat the piss out of IU.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

For as much as I blame this staff for what is going on, the loss was mostly on AA. He had a shit game. Actually thought the play calling was ok. At least it was coherent for most of the game.

 

[lbodel]

It's the way it works man. Before schools eat HC contracts the change that comes, if any, is at OC or DC. Do I agree hazell has been bad? Yes. But starting with Landry and Lombardi on the Giants ... Coaches have been as good as their coordinators

The one thing I'd say to that is that it usually would have happened - after the first or second season. Typically you don't go 3 seasons and then say "oh, well let me fire the OC...".

I'm surprised a move was not made after last season (which, for nothing else, is done to make fans feel better and think there will be a change).

 

[njm8845]

A quick logic check - just because Purdue hasn't historically been a run oriented team, does that mean it can't happen?

I like Purdue's history at QB, but it would seem a 5* QB (which is apparently what it takes to succeed at Purdue) is harder to get than a big, mature OL that can establish the run.

Football is still won in the trenches, and I don't think it's necessarily a doomed strategy to develop a powerful running game.

 

[pboiler18]

Also, last year I think our best offens vs MSU (best D in conference) was our run game. No reason it can't be the same this year with more consistent backs.

 

[Heller]

For as much as I blame this staff for what is going on, the loss was mostly on AA. He had a shit game. Actually thought the play calling was ok. At least it was coherent for most of the game.

So it wasn't Shoop and Hazell's fault 2 years ago, it was Henry and only if we would let Etling play,. then last year it was Etling's fault and only if we would let AA play, and now it's AA's fault and we need to see Blough. At some point you need to put the blame where it belongs, on the coaches. They are the only common denominator in all this.

 

[lbodel]

A quick logic check - just because Purdue hasn't historically been a run oriented team, does that mean it can't happen?

I like Purdue's history at QB, but it would seem a 5* QB (which is apparently what it takes to succeed at Purdue) is harder to get than a big, mature OL that can establish the run.

Football is still won in the trenches, and I don't think it's necessarily a doomed strategy to develop a powerful running game.

It's a tough situation. Developing a strong running game in a conference like the Big Ten is much easier said than done. That being said, a strong offensive line is imperative whether you want to focus on running or passing.

There's obviously various forms of a running-focused offense. Northwestern has not been a pass-happy team and has seen decent success. But they've done so with typically a mobile-friendly running QB as well. You have to keep the defense honest to some degree and when they've had success, it's typically been a balance of both.

Last year, Northwestern beat Wisconsin - a team we haven't remotely competed with in years. They had nearly 200 yards rushing against Wisconsin and won the possession time which is tough to do against Wisconsin. They didn't throw that much - their QB only completed 50%. But half of their first downs came from passing and 1 of their 2 touchdowns. So when they had effective drives, it was a mix of pass and run - keeping the defense honest. However, that doesn't give you a lot of wiggle room for errors. The biggest key though? Northwestern's defense played a sound game themselves and created multiple turnovers off interceptions.

Overall, if you're going to be a run focused team in the Big Ten, you have to have the defense to make it successful. There's a reason why a traditional Big Ten team is known for running the ball and defense. You're not likely going to win a shootout in the Big Ten being run focused. And as soon as you get behind and have to play catch-up - you're going to have to do things outside of your comfort area. Ideally, we don't want Appleby throwing nearly 50 times a game. He's not supposed to be Drew Brees and that's ok. But we put ourselves in a lot of passing situations and our defense isn't good enough to say...ok, we burnt a little clock, we're not going to force a throw in this situation and our defense will take care of us.

Until we have a reliable defense, we're not going to be consistently successful with a run-focused offense. You can go back to Tiller/Drew Brees - in Drew Brees' senior season, he threw the ball less and we ran the ball more. Why? We had a good offensive line already - it wasn't new. It's because our defense was the best it was so you don't have to take as many risks.

 

[bocaboiler]

If Purdue runs the read option as much as they did Saturday then Blough seems like would be the better fit. The confounding thing is Henry was a really good read option QB, which they rarely if ever ran.

Trying to be successful by playing against your strength areas seems like a bad strategy.

 

[njm8845]

It's a tough situation. Developing a strong running game in a conference like the Big Ten is much easier said than done. That being said, a strong offensive line is imperative whether you want to focus on running or passing.

There's obviously various forms of a running-focused offense. Northwestern has not been a pass-happy team and has seen decent success. But they've done so with typically a mobile-friendly running QB as well. You have to keep the defense honest to some degree and when they've had success, it's typically been a balance of both.

Last year, Northwestern beat Wisconsin - a team we haven't remotely competed with in years. They had nearly 200 yards rushing against Wisconsin and won the possession time which is tough to do against Wisconsin. They didn't throw that much - their QB only completed 50%. But half of their first downs came from passing and 1 of their 2 touchdowns. So when they had effective drives, it was a mix of pass and run - keeping the defense honest. However, that doesn't give you a lot of wiggle room for errors. The biggest key though? Northwestern's defense played a sound game themselves and created multiple turnovers off interceptions.

Overall, if you're going to be a run focused team in the Big Ten, you have to have the defense to make it successful. There's a reason why a traditional Big Ten team is known for running the ball and defense. You're not likely going to win a shootout in the Big Ten being run focused. And as soon as you get behind and have to play catch-up - you're going to have to do things outside of your comfort area. Ideally, we don't want Appleby throwing nearly 50 times a game. He's not supposed to be Drew Brees and that's ok. But we put ourselves in a lot of passing situations and our defense isn't good enough to say...ok, we burnt a little clock, we're not going to force a throw in this situation and our defense will take care of us.

Until we have a reliable defense, we're not going to be consistently successful with a run-focused offense. You can go back to Tiller/Drew Brees - in Drew Brees' senior season, he threw the ball less and we ran the ball more. Why? We had a good offensive line already - it wasn't new. It's because our defense was the best it was so you don't have to take as many risks.

I've always wanted Purdue to have a defensive minded philosophy, and I almost said so in my previous post. All due respect to the Cradle, I think focusing on defense is the most sound way to win at Purdue. However, our AD wants offensive firepower because he believes it attracts more fans. I disagree; I think winning attracts fans, no matter how ugly. We would just need to win consistently. I don't really have time to run this analysis, but I would bet big money that season ticket sales are correlated higher with the previous season's wins than the previous season's yards/game.

I'm not arguing for a focus on running. I'm arguing against the opinion that to focus on running is futile. I agree a team needs balance - it's painful watching Navy, GT, Wisconsin, et al try to throw when they somehow get down big. A football team can win in many different ways. To strive for a power run game in the B10 isn't crazy.

I'm sure when Tiller first came up, there were fans who said "You can't throw against these strong defenses of the B10 - you'll get killed on time of possession and wear your defense out". Maybe the pendulum has swung too far in the passing direction.

 

[RegionWarrior101]

You know what we need to do? Have another "Football Summit." We can tell people how close we are to being even mediocre in a bizarre meeting and talk about projects that are 10 years overdue.

My favorite moment of the Run-And-Shoop on Sunday was not so much the 5 yard routes on 3rd and 10 like usual, but the turnover we got on the +30. I believe we were up 4 and instead trying to take a shot at the endzone, we ran into the pile 3 times and missed a FG. Petros Papadakis was floored. Then the calls on the goal line and during 2 minute got a few "I am not sure what you are doing there..."

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

So it wasn't Shoop and Hazell's fault 2 years ago, it was Henry and only if we would let Etling play,. then last year it was Etling's fault and only if we would let AA play, and now it's AA's fault and we need to see Blough. At some point you need to put the blame where it belongs, on the coaches. They are the only common denominator in all this.

Certainly my comment was not meant to remove blame from the staff, thus my first sentence, and I would be fine with their departure. But the game plan was good enough to win. And no I didn't think last year was Etling's fault. I was probably one of his only defenders. So now that you've ranted about a bunch of assumptions, I hope you feel better.