Here we are after a 1-3 start that appears to be the beginning of another in a string of very dismal seasons. Let's dive right in.
> Recruiting - It has not been good. The only thing I need anyone to realize is that you're only going to recruit so well without giving up the benefits. I've always felt that Purdue is just in a world outside that world where players are bought. Is everyone's hands dirty? Sure. But when I see that Cam Newton's dad just all out told schools what it would cost, I know there are two types of schools, schools willing to even chase that, and schools that are not. I believe we have always been the latter. Would we recruit better if we won? Of course. But if you're looking for that boost that ND got in talent (and not just overhyped ND rankings of recruits), that generally happens one way. So, although I think Tiller was underwhelming after his secret retirement, Hope was more so and Hazell is the worst, I also think you have to be realistic about recruiting at Purdue both ways. We also can't sell ourselves short. With enough prolonged success you could see things creep up, but this all star program changing class isn't coming before the winning. I roll my eyes when I see Purdue coaches blamed for recruiting. Not because I like Hazell. I don't like him. Because I don't want a good coach to actually come here, if he comes here, and be burdened with expectations of the kind of class that comes with cash filled backpacks.
> Is one party getting a pass because someone puts primary blame on another party? God no. If someone says a scheme is bad, that does not mean that they are saying execution is awesome and it's all the coaches. Both can be true.
> The schemes are bad.
Defense - There is a world of space underneath because I truly believe that these coaches think that the average fan will think it looks better if there isn't that one sportscenter deep ball. We have these corners that are veterans and supposed to be really good, and yet we were afraid to make Marshall prove it to us deep. We get pressure on the edges. We have to make the QB make those quick decisions without an easy outlet. The current scheme forces our linebackers to be coverage aces, cover massive ground and have the smarts of a pro. And then there is our DBs just being way too far from having a chance to jump a pass on a hook, etc.
Offense - First, I think people confused our offensive line with a line that's big and physical. These players are big and physical at their size IF they're athletic. They're not. They're okay. But at their lack of mobility, they'd really have to be Wisconsin's size to just knock a defensive line off the ball. They're also a liability in the passing game, because again, they aren't athletic. They're better than David Owen. They're not god awful. But they're not a strength. So, even with an outstanding OC, I don't see us running the ball for huge yards against talent. Let's have that established.
With that said, we have no fluidity. The spread with Tiller seemed to have a ton of bread and butter routes where the QB could work the receiver from making a catch at some edge of the defense, into space on the interior if the defender went to the edge. So Purdue could make a skinny post route look like they had just practiced it over and over again, and then could get all kinds of stuff underneath if the defender took away the spacial limit of the route. That's what BGSU did to us. They'd hit a 15 yard route if we gave it to them and they'd look fluid doing it. Then, if we took that away they'd work their delivery to 10 or 5 yards and hit receivers on the run.
From Kirsch 2.0 until now, that's been a problem. Spacing and fluidity in the pass game. And drops. We've had some relief at times with Painter and then with Elliott, but for the most part that was it.
The offense also has problems giving away drives, playing as if we're up 21 when we're actually either tied against Bowling Green or up 3 against freaking Marshall, and with the motioning and where the players line up. The alignment they use where the two receivers line up almost behind the OTs is something I can only remember seeing once on a regular basis... Vince Young's Texas Longhorns. Also, whatever Arkansas was trying to do with their motions out of the wildcat when they had Felix Jones and Darren McFadden, is the opposite of our motions and how they just end up taking receivers out of plays, messing up the spacing and running a play short a blocker to the boundary.
> The team plays stupid. When you're Coach Ohio Stazell, and you're making the Waterloo like mistake of thinking you can treat your West Lafayette experience as though you were in Columbus, you better at least field a team that plays smart. And this team has played dumber than Danny Hope's teams. And I'm no fan of Danny Hope. Coach Ohio Stazell not getting his team to play smart would be like Scott Skiles not having a fundamentally sound team that plays defense. If he doesn't have that, what else is there?
> I like Blough. My position on the whole QB position was that I thought that Appleby was "okay." I still do think he's okay. I'd hate to put anyone we've had since Orton up against Virginia Tech and probably only Brees looks GOOD against that team. I certainly always understood the desire for more from Appleby. I think Blough is more talented.
However, I'm against this whole technique where coaching staffs give themselves a reset button. To smart fans, this will be seen for what it is. But if Blough even shows glimpses of a far better future, to many people there will be a tale of two seasons. I could see this as "shaking it up to do whatever has to be done," if these guys didn't start the wrong guy every year and then try to bail themselves out.
I think Blough can be very good. I say can be because we won't know until coaches adjust to him. THEN we'll see what he really can do. However, at the same time, that makes me think.. "wow, these guys could get a chance to ruin THIS kid."
I'll be honest. That TD from 45 was probably the best pass I've seen since Orton.
> The whole commitment from the athletic department, school, etc thing....
I feel like the mentality is probably a lot more unfortunate than many are willing to come to terms with. I can't help but get past this feeling that the school/AD/president/Board of Trustees just sees Purdue revenue sports as a nice stream of extra revenue that is a "nice bonus" at a "place where sports aren't that important." And to them, those who are showing up now probably always will, and those who aren't are only going to become truly dedicated if Purdue achieves on a level that's "not worth the trouble and risk."
You just come to terms with it after a long period of time, like.... recruiting and the fact that we probably don't have a Tex Wade buying players, this is something else you might just have to come to terms with.. much like the chance that a 4* recruit will commit to Purdue, sign with Purdue, get to Purdue in one piece, stay academically eligible heading into camp, then during school, then play well at Purdue.. and THEN, even after that hurdle, not shoot their eye out or get stabbed, etc. It's about as good as my lifetime batting average with girls above an 8.5.... 10%, if that.
It's like watching footage of Brandon Kirsch in 2002 and then wanting him to just not be a douche in 2005... at some point, it's just banging your head against a wall.
Could our Tex Wade show up at the same time that the school and AD decides football is really important, Burke is fired, Hazell is fired and then we hire a good coach.. we make a hire as good as the hires Northern Illinois seems to always make?
Yes, all of that could happen the same way my Purdue girlfriend COULD divorce her husband, give her kid up for adoption, hunt me down and decides she has to have me. The scary thing is that as unrealistic as I know this possibility is, I find myself thinking the same thing about the previous paragraph.
> GBI - Look, this isn't the 80s... when Sam Smith could pick the Cavs to beat the Bulls and then walk around with this smug, "you, the Chicago Bulls need ME" attitude. Teams and schools hold access above the heads of media. Look at the Bears situation in Chicago. The media is firing away, but ONLY because the Bears took access away before preseason even started.
I'm sure that if there's a "look, our softer than the Pillsbury Dough Boy pass defense was PLANNED" angle that the coaches want to float out there, GBI is going to float it.. unless they have the old open season call from the higher ups at Purdue..
Try to get yourself to look critically at what is right there before you buy Shoop/Hudson/Hazell excuses..
> There's a lot of bad. Now, here's the good. As gloomy as it looks, always remember that all we need is someone to have the competence they have in Dekalb, IL, and we can do good things with our relative advantages. Could that be something that we just can't expect until we're post Burke? Maybe, but it's possible.
> Recruiting - It has not been good. The only thing I need anyone to realize is that you're only going to recruit so well without giving up the benefits. I've always felt that Purdue is just in a world outside that world where players are bought. Is everyone's hands dirty? Sure. But when I see that Cam Newton's dad just all out told schools what it would cost, I know there are two types of schools, schools willing to even chase that, and schools that are not. I believe we have always been the latter. Would we recruit better if we won? Of course. But if you're looking for that boost that ND got in talent (and not just overhyped ND rankings of recruits), that generally happens one way. So, although I think Tiller was underwhelming after his secret retirement, Hope was more so and Hazell is the worst, I also think you have to be realistic about recruiting at Purdue both ways. We also can't sell ourselves short. With enough prolonged success you could see things creep up, but this all star program changing class isn't coming before the winning. I roll my eyes when I see Purdue coaches blamed for recruiting. Not because I like Hazell. I don't like him. Because I don't want a good coach to actually come here, if he comes here, and be burdened with expectations of the kind of class that comes with cash filled backpacks.
> Is one party getting a pass because someone puts primary blame on another party? God no. If someone says a scheme is bad, that does not mean that they are saying execution is awesome and it's all the coaches. Both can be true.
> The schemes are bad.
Defense - There is a world of space underneath because I truly believe that these coaches think that the average fan will think it looks better if there isn't that one sportscenter deep ball. We have these corners that are veterans and supposed to be really good, and yet we were afraid to make Marshall prove it to us deep. We get pressure on the edges. We have to make the QB make those quick decisions without an easy outlet. The current scheme forces our linebackers to be coverage aces, cover massive ground and have the smarts of a pro. And then there is our DBs just being way too far from having a chance to jump a pass on a hook, etc.
Offense - First, I think people confused our offensive line with a line that's big and physical. These players are big and physical at their size IF they're athletic. They're not. They're okay. But at their lack of mobility, they'd really have to be Wisconsin's size to just knock a defensive line off the ball. They're also a liability in the passing game, because again, they aren't athletic. They're better than David Owen. They're not god awful. But they're not a strength. So, even with an outstanding OC, I don't see us running the ball for huge yards against talent. Let's have that established.
With that said, we have no fluidity. The spread with Tiller seemed to have a ton of bread and butter routes where the QB could work the receiver from making a catch at some edge of the defense, into space on the interior if the defender went to the edge. So Purdue could make a skinny post route look like they had just practiced it over and over again, and then could get all kinds of stuff underneath if the defender took away the spacial limit of the route. That's what BGSU did to us. They'd hit a 15 yard route if we gave it to them and they'd look fluid doing it. Then, if we took that away they'd work their delivery to 10 or 5 yards and hit receivers on the run.
From Kirsch 2.0 until now, that's been a problem. Spacing and fluidity in the pass game. And drops. We've had some relief at times with Painter and then with Elliott, but for the most part that was it.
The offense also has problems giving away drives, playing as if we're up 21 when we're actually either tied against Bowling Green or up 3 against freaking Marshall, and with the motioning and where the players line up. The alignment they use where the two receivers line up almost behind the OTs is something I can only remember seeing once on a regular basis... Vince Young's Texas Longhorns. Also, whatever Arkansas was trying to do with their motions out of the wildcat when they had Felix Jones and Darren McFadden, is the opposite of our motions and how they just end up taking receivers out of plays, messing up the spacing and running a play short a blocker to the boundary.
> The team plays stupid. When you're Coach Ohio Stazell, and you're making the Waterloo like mistake of thinking you can treat your West Lafayette experience as though you were in Columbus, you better at least field a team that plays smart. And this team has played dumber than Danny Hope's teams. And I'm no fan of Danny Hope. Coach Ohio Stazell not getting his team to play smart would be like Scott Skiles not having a fundamentally sound team that plays defense. If he doesn't have that, what else is there?
> I like Blough. My position on the whole QB position was that I thought that Appleby was "okay." I still do think he's okay. I'd hate to put anyone we've had since Orton up against Virginia Tech and probably only Brees looks GOOD against that team. I certainly always understood the desire for more from Appleby. I think Blough is more talented.
However, I'm against this whole technique where coaching staffs give themselves a reset button. To smart fans, this will be seen for what it is. But if Blough even shows glimpses of a far better future, to many people there will be a tale of two seasons. I could see this as "shaking it up to do whatever has to be done," if these guys didn't start the wrong guy every year and then try to bail themselves out.
I think Blough can be very good. I say can be because we won't know until coaches adjust to him. THEN we'll see what he really can do. However, at the same time, that makes me think.. "wow, these guys could get a chance to ruin THIS kid."
I'll be honest. That TD from 45 was probably the best pass I've seen since Orton.
> The whole commitment from the athletic department, school, etc thing....
I feel like the mentality is probably a lot more unfortunate than many are willing to come to terms with. I can't help but get past this feeling that the school/AD/president/Board of Trustees just sees Purdue revenue sports as a nice stream of extra revenue that is a "nice bonus" at a "place where sports aren't that important." And to them, those who are showing up now probably always will, and those who aren't are only going to become truly dedicated if Purdue achieves on a level that's "not worth the trouble and risk."
You just come to terms with it after a long period of time, like.... recruiting and the fact that we probably don't have a Tex Wade buying players, this is something else you might just have to come to terms with.. much like the chance that a 4* recruit will commit to Purdue, sign with Purdue, get to Purdue in one piece, stay academically eligible heading into camp, then during school, then play well at Purdue.. and THEN, even after that hurdle, not shoot their eye out or get stabbed, etc. It's about as good as my lifetime batting average with girls above an 8.5.... 10%, if that.
It's like watching footage of Brandon Kirsch in 2002 and then wanting him to just not be a douche in 2005... at some point, it's just banging your head against a wall.
Could our Tex Wade show up at the same time that the school and AD decides football is really important, Burke is fired, Hazell is fired and then we hire a good coach.. we make a hire as good as the hires Northern Illinois seems to always make?
Yes, all of that could happen the same way my Purdue girlfriend COULD divorce her husband, give her kid up for adoption, hunt me down and decides she has to have me. The scary thing is that as unrealistic as I know this possibility is, I find myself thinking the same thing about the previous paragraph.
> GBI - Look, this isn't the 80s... when Sam Smith could pick the Cavs to beat the Bulls and then walk around with this smug, "you, the Chicago Bulls need ME" attitude. Teams and schools hold access above the heads of media. Look at the Bears situation in Chicago. The media is firing away, but ONLY because the Bears took access away before preseason even started.
I'm sure that if there's a "look, our softer than the Pillsbury Dough Boy pass defense was PLANNED" angle that the coaches want to float out there, GBI is going to float it.. unless they have the old open season call from the higher ups at Purdue..
Try to get yourself to look critically at what is right there before you buy Shoop/Hudson/Hazell excuses..
> There's a lot of bad. Now, here's the good. As gloomy as it looks, always remember that all we need is someone to have the competence they have in Dekalb, IL, and we can do good things with our relative advantages. Could that be something that we just can't expect until we're post Burke? Maybe, but it's possible.
