So what's the problem?

[lbodel]

It's been frustrating to me lately see people pick out a reason here and there why we're not good. Obviously most of the focus on this board has been on Shoop.

Since yesterday was a "themed uniform" day, a lot of people have been saying we need all of these new uniforms because that's what recruits want. Our recruiting has been bad and has remained bad through multiple seasons now of a variety of uniforms. We have the least talented team in the Big Ten.

Then once the season starts, a lot of focus has been on Shoop. Our offense is not very good! We need to fire him and get a new offensive coordinator. Never mind the fact that Hazell has decided Shoop is the guy now for three years which points to bad leadership. You do not fire a offensive coordinator in his third year to "save your job" at this point. You do that after year 1 or maybe year 2. After year 3? You're essentially saying you wasted three seasons.

Also, what are our strengths on offense? Quite frankly, statistically our offense has been doing ok. And what's supposedly our strength? Our offensive line. It's basically been matched up evenly against Marshall and Bowling Green. Purdue is 13th in the Big Ten in giving up sacks. And per usual, our running game blows (6 yards/a game away from being last in the Big Ten).

But what about our QB? Man Appleby was terrible! People on this board clamored for Appleby last year in the same situation when Etling was struggling. He provided a quasi-spark when the change was made (as most QB changes do), but hardly sustained. Also, Blough played well, but it was also Bowling Green and we only scored 28 points (BG's strength is not defense). Memphis scored 44 on BG a week ago. A QB is not going to make or break this team - it has so many struggles offensively.

While our offense has struggled, what can help you out? Special teams! Our kickoff returns? 13th in the Big Ten. Punt returns? 12th in the Big Ten. Our punts? 13th in the Big Ten. Our kickoff coverage? 13th in the Big Ten. Our field goal percentage? 14th in the Big Ten. We are the worst team in the Big Ten on special teams.

So our offense struggles and our specials teams struggle - nobody seems to be ranting on the defense or defensive coordinator. Our scoring defense is 14th in the Big Ten. We're giving up 35 points per game. Virginia Tech scored 14 points against East Carolina after running up the scoreboard at Ross-Ade. We're giving up 440 yards a game. What are our defense strengths? We have some good linemen? We're giving up 175 yards on the ground (13th in the Big Ten) and 265 yards a game passing (9th).

And what about coachable things that don't rely on talent? Like penalties? Purdue's currently 10th in penalties.


So, what's the solution? You fire your coordinators? You fire some assistants? That's basically saying the last 3 years have been flushed down the toilet. This is why I just cannot help but say it starts at the top with Hazell. The way this program has been managed has been poor. He has not identified glaring weaknesses. There's been nothing done to try and fix weaknesses while racking up 5 wins in nearly 2.5 seasons.

This program doesn't need tweaks. It needs to hit the reset button. There's literally nothing positive that I can say this program is doing right now and gives much hope for any significant improvement. The recruiting is not good, the coaching is not good, the performance is not good. It's just bad all-around.

 

[njm8845]

I agree changes are required at the top. But I disagree that hazell is the top.

It seems pretty obvious that this is rock bottom. I'll be surprised if Purdue wins 1 more game.

 

[njm8845]

I'm not arguing that hazell should keep his job. I wanted to clarify that.

But is there any advantage to firing him now? I think any temporary gains would be just that. Might as well give him at least 4 more games to try to right the ship.

 

[threeeputtt]

I'm not arguing that hazell should keep his job. I wanted to clarify that.

But is there any advantage to firing him now? I think any temporary gains would be just that. Might as well give him at least 4 more games to try to right the ship.

He simply deserves to finish at least the end of the year, then evaluate. Anything less is crazy. He hasn't broken any laws or been accused of malfeasance (al la the Illinois coach). No one would consider our job mid season anyway. While I am RAPIDLY losing any interest in Purdue football, that is the minimum decency he deserves.

 

[BBG]

He simply deserves to finish at least the end of the year, then evaluate. Anything less is crazy. He hasn't broken any laws or been accused of malfeasance (al la the Illinois coach). No one would consider our job mid season anyway. While I am RAPIDLY losing any interest in Purdue football, that is the minimum decency he deserves.

Sorry but disagree. It's not like things would get worse by cutting ties now than later, we already aren't winning.

 

[uncleboiler]

IBODEL,
That is exactly the conundrum Purdue football finds itself in. Hazell was hired to "rebuild" a program and bring it back to some degree of respectability. Instead, it's now in worse shape than when he took over. A 5-23 record, poor recruiting classes, low game attendance and obviously,no idea how to improve it.
Therein lies the problem. If Hazell is let go after this year, what coach, an up & comer or a veteran coach, is going to look at Purdue as a good coaching position? It won't take long for them to realize Purdue lacks B10 talent, has low fan interest and they would have to work under budget restraints. Purdue is not a "destination" job or even a stepping stone to a better coaching position...it's now a dead-end job.

 

[njm8845]

Disagree. Any non-P5 coach would want to coach against the B10.

The reason we have had high coaching turnover is because they haven't won enough. Not because coaches are trying to get out of a toxic situation.

Fans will come back quickly with any kind of excitement. Look how quickly tiller rejuvenated the fanbase.

There is no conundrum. Purdue deserves a better football program. The current staff can't provude that. Time for change.

 

[gelesen]

I don't see why anyone thinks it would be unfair to fire a coach before he has had 4-5 years with the program. When you are paid millions of dallars to do a job there has to be some level of competence. And on top of that when you have a buy out option it's not like one is being kicked into the street penniless. With high paying jobs, there is high risk and more expectations. You'd better deliver.

 

[uncleboiler]

Of course Purdue deserves a better football program. Sure a non-P5 coach may want to coach in the B10, IF they think there's a good chance they would be succesful.
Fans did come back with the of excitement of Hazell and his 11 win season at Kent State. But their excitement faded quickly after an 1-11 & 3-9 season. And now, they've seen enough with his 5-23 record....even if a new coach put together a few more wins, he still would be considered a "poor" coach and certainly wouldn't be "advancing his career".
"The reason we have had high coaching turnover is because they haven't won enough"...Ya think, Captain Obvious? Yes, coaches get fired because they haven't won enough, but it wouldn't surprise me if Hazell just left after this year, because this has become no-win, "toxic situation" that has screwed up his career.

 

[njm8845]

Your point was that due to a lot of turnover at purdue, it's going to be hard to get another coach. I don't think that's true. The only reason we have turnover is because the coaches haven't won. So any coach that feels he can win (which is all if them) won't mind coming to Purdue.

Did you just say that you think hazell may walk away from Purdue? That would solve all our problems! Highly doubt he'd walk from his guaranteed money though, as he'd get nowhere near that on the open market now.

And you agree that fans can come back quickly, so once again, there's no conundrum.

 

[FLAG HUNTER]

Gonna be hard to recruit if Hazell doesn't leave!

 

[lbodel]

IBODEL,
That is exactly the conundrum Purdue football finds itself in. Hazell was hired to "rebuild" a program and bring it back to some degree of respectability. Instead, it's now in worse shape than when he took over. A 5-23 record, poor recruiting classes, low game attendance and obviously,no idea how to improve it.
Therein lies the problem. If Hazell is let go after this year, what coach, an up & comer or a veteran coach, is going to look at Purdue as a good coaching position? It won't take long for them to realize Purdue lacks B10 talent, has low fan interest and they would have to work under budget restraints. Purdue is not a "destination" job or even a stepping stone to a better coaching position...it's now a dead-end job.

I think the biggest disappointment for me in regards to the Hazell hire was his LACK of trying to establish a program. There were words used (like "State of Purdue"), but there was nothing concrete and consistent.

Purdue needs a coach who can build and manage a program. I don't think Hazell is just that kind of guy (I do not dislike this guy personally at all).

I'm in NO WAY endorsing this guy as a guy I think Purdue should hire (not that I'm against him, it's simply an example), but look at Fleck at Western Michigan. He put so much energy and effort into creating an identity for that program, both in regards to his team AND externally for fans, in such a short amount of time. I think some of the stuff he did was cheesy, but it's a MAC program.

That's the kind of coach we need - someone who understands that you're building an identity that fans are as much of a part of as your players.

I don't want to constantly make this comparison, but look at Painter. He took basic traditions ("Play Hard") and some other traits traditional of Purdue basketball like great defense and made sure those traits were expected by fans and existed with his players. He wasn't afraid of kicking off his own recruits when they did not respect those traits. And he's done a great job creating a relationship between him and his players and students in particular.

And quite frankly, Painter's done this heavily on his own. Purdue's AD is not some branding wizard, that's for sure.

 

[uncleboiler]

"And you agree that fans can come back quickly, so once again, there's no conundrum"
Yeah, they'd come back for 6-7 games, and then abandon the team when they go 1-6.
"The only reason we have turnover is because the coaches haven't won"
Exactly, and good coaches see that and want to go to a program where they have a fighting chance of bringing in good players and have a chance to be successful. Do you really think good young or veteran coaches see the Purdue job as a good "opportunity"? Sure, most "coaches feel they can win"...but the good ones are not stupid enough to put themselves in a "no win" situation.

 

[BoilermakerD]

It's been frustrating to me lately see people pick out a reason here and there why we're not good. Obviously most of the focus on this board has been on Shoop.

Since yesterday was a "themed uniform" day, a lot of people have been saying we need all of these new uniforms because that's what recruits want. Our recruiting has been bad and has remained bad through multiple seasons now of a variety of uniforms. We have the least talented team in the Big Ten.

Then once the season starts, a lot of focus has been on Shoop. Our offense is not very good! We need to fire him and get a new offensive coordinator. Never mind the fact that Hazell has decided Shoop is the guy now for three years which points to bad leadership. You do not fire a offensive coordinator in his third year to "save your job" at this point. You do that after year 1 or maybe year 2. After year 3? You're essentially saying you wasted three seasons.

Also, what are our strengths on offense? Quite frankly, statistically our offense has been doing ok. And what's supposedly our strength? Our offensive line. It's basically been matched up evenly against Marshall and Bowling Green. Purdue is 13th in the Big Ten in giving up sacks. And per usual, our running game blows (6 yards/a game away from being last in the Big Ten).

But what about our QB? Man Appleby was terrible! People on this board clamored for Appleby last year in the same situation when Etling was struggling. He provided a quasi-spark when the change was made (as most QB changes do), but hardly sustained. Also, Blough played well, but it was also Bowling Green and we only scored 28 points (BG's strength is not defense). Memphis scored 44 on BG a week ago. A QB is not going to make or break this team - it has so many struggles offensively.

While our offense has struggled, what can help you out? Special teams! Our kickoff returns? 13th in the Big Ten. Punt returns? 12th in the Big Ten. Our punts? 13th in the Big Ten. Our kickoff coverage? 13th in the Big Ten. Our field goal percentage? 14th in the Big Ten. We are the worst team in the Big Ten on special teams.

So our offense struggles and our specials teams struggle - nobody seems to be ranting on the defense or defensive coordinator. Our scoring defense is 14th in the Big Ten. We're giving up 35 points per game. Virginia Tech scored 14 points against East Carolina after running up the scoreboard at Ross-Ade. We're giving up 440 yards a game. What are our defense strengths? We have some good linemen? We're giving up 175 yards on the ground (13th in the Big Ten) and 265 yards a game passing (9th).

And what about coachable things that don't rely on talent? Like penalties? Purdue's currently 10th in penalties.


So, what's the solution? You fire your coordinators? You fire some assistants? That's basically saying the last 3 years have been flushed down the toilet. This is why I just cannot help but say it starts at the top with Hazell. The way this program has been managed has been poor. He has not identified glaring weaknesses. There's been nothing done to try and fix weaknesses while racking up 5 wins in nearly 2.5 seasons.

This program doesn't need tweaks. It needs to hit the reset button. There's literally nothing positive that I can say this program is doing right now and gives much hope for any significant improvement. The recruiting is not good, the coaching is not good, the performance is not good. It's just bad all-around.

Two things... Trust me. Yeah there are other things but if these saw a reversal so would we...

1. Poor spacing on offense. Shoop doesn't test the edges and work his way back in.

2. The defensive coaches, so afraid to look bad, would rather give the opponent the whole world underneath than make them beat us over the top

 

[njm8845]

Purdue isn't a no win situation. We just need a culture change.

Perhaps you're one of the posters that lbodel says has a losers mentality.

I'm not sure what your point is anymore - that we should consider keeping a loser coach because...why exactly?

 

[uncleboiler]

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying if anyone thinks a coaching change is going to change this situation in a year or two is delusional. Right now we're so far behind talent wise,it's going to take 2-3 good recruiting cycles to get the talent level where it needs to be to compete in the B10 on a consistent level. So the question remains, do you give Hazell more time or do you try to bring in another new coach? Either way, it's a gamble and the chance of showing significant improvement in the next 2-3 years is slim.
If the administration was serious about building a good,sustainable football program, they would pay to bring in former coaches, AD's and a sports consulting firm and let them give recommendations as to what is needed and what needs to change to make this a successful,long term program. Of course that would take money and some administrators would have to swallow thier pride....so, that will never happen.

 

[Casey and his Brother]

We're 17 years away from saying "Danny Hope was the best coach we've had in the past 20 years." Hazell will only be a small piece in that puzzle of that abyss.

 

[Cleanface]

I remember when MINN fired Tim Brewster mid-season after he started 2010 1-6 (his fourth season, 15-30 total).

Jerry Kill came in the next season, and MINN has seen a steady improvement since.

If it can happen/work at MN, it can happen here.

 

[spradecki]

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying if anyone thinks a coaching change is going to change this situation in a year or two is delusional. Right now we're so far behind talent wise,it's going to take 2-3 good recruiting cycles to get the talent level where it needs to be to compete in the B10 on a consistent level. So the question remains, do you give Hazell more time or do you try to bring in another new coach? Either way, it's a gamble and the chance of showing significant improvement in the next 2-3 years is slim.
If the administration was serious about building a good,sustainable football program, they would pay to bring in former coaches, AD's and a sports consulting firm and let them give recommendations as to what is needed and what needs to change to make this a successful,long term program. Of course that would take money and some administrators would have to swallow thier pride....so, that will never happen.

i think a lot of guys who had a different philosophy, guy who didn't play not to lose, would/could be way more successful with the players currently on the team. would love to give the kids a chance to succeed. i don't really feel they will succeed unless DH changes and is way more aggressive.

it still makes me crazy to watch him take a knee at the end of the half. like he can just hold on and win

edit: a coaching change could be just a change of philosophy which comes from the head coach

 

[njm8845]

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying if anyone thinks a coaching change is going to change this situation in a year or two is delusional. Right now we're so far behind talent wise,it's going to take 2-3 good recruiting cycles to get the talent level where it needs to be to compete in the B10 on a consistent level. So the question remains, do you give Hazell more time or do you try to bring in another new coach? Either way, it's a gamble and the chance of showing significant improvement in the next 2-3 years is slim.
If the administration was serious about building a good,sustainable football program, they would pay to bring in former coaches, AD's and a sports consulting firm and let them give recommendations as to what is needed and what needs to change to make this a successful,long term program. Of course that would take money and some administrators would have to swallow thier pride....so, that will never happen.

I think the right coach can win and win quickly at Purdue. Tiller turned around a worse situation. Just as the program has submarined under Hazell, the right coach can likewise quickly bring it up to Hope level in 1 year. It's not that difficult to get 5 wins.

NC State is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2013.
Cal is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2012 and 1-11 in 2013.

Both had coaches that were on our radar in 2011. It can be done at Purdue too. But financially we can't afford another 1 or 2 win season. It's a no-brainer that Hazell needs to go in my opinion. I think the interesting question is if we make an AD change. I'm of the opinion that we have to tear this thing down completely. It can't get any worse. He has 2 wins against the FBS. I have a bad feeling that after this year he's going to be 1-23 against the B10.

Would you be happy if Burke brought in two current NFL GM's, a HOF NFL GM, and a National Championship winning college coach to consult on the next coaching hire? That is almost verbatim what you're wishing for, but Purdue tried that with the Hazell hire and it apparently didn't work.

My point is this:

1. As the OP pointed out, it's not this thing or that thing that needs corrected. It's the entire system. We're at rock bottom.
2. After saying how bad it is right now, I don't think it's necessarily a 5 year rebuilding process. We just need a change, and a change from the top down. There's no reason to get our heads down and sulk. We can do this.

 

[banshee90]

Of course Purdue deserves a better football program. Sure a non-P5 coach may want to coach in the B10, IF they think there's a good chance they would be succesful.
Fans did come back with the of excitement of Hazell and his 11 win season at Kent State. But their excitement faded quickly after an 1-11 & 3-9 season. And now, they've seen enough with his 5-23 record....even if a new coach put together a few more wins, he still would be considered a "poor" coach and certainly wouldn't be "advancing his career".
"The reason we have had high coaching turnover is because they haven't won enough"...Ya think, Captain Obvious? Yes, coaches get fired because they haven't won enough, but it wouldn't surprise me if Hazell just left after this year, because this has become no-win, "toxic situation" that has screwed up his career.

The bar is set pretty low for what successful would be. Hopes bar was set at bring us back to the brees days. Hazells bar was win 6+ games and eventually get us to a BCS Bowl. The next guys bar will be just get us some wins. If a guy brings Purdue to 8-4 wins in 3 seasons he would be the hottest coach in the nation there is really no downside unless you can't improve. As even a mediocre 6-6 by year 4 is another year extension.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I think the right coach can win and win quickly at Purdue. Tiller turned around a worse situation. Just as the program has submarined under Hazell, the right coach can likewise quickly bring it up to Hope level in 1 year. It's not that difficult to get 5 wins.

NC State is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2013.
Cal is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2012 and 1-11 in 2013.

Both had coaches that were on our radar in 2011. It can be done at Purdue too. But financially we can't afford another 1 or 2 win season. It's a no-brainer that Hazell needs to go in my opinion. I think the interesting question is if we make an AD change. I'm of the opinion that we have to tear this thing down completely. It can't get any worse. He has 2 wins against the FBS. I have a bad feeling that after this year he's going to be 1-23 against the B10.

Would you be happy if Burke brought in two current NFL GM's, a HOF NFL GM, and a National Championship winning college coach to consult on the next coaching hire? That is almost verbatim what you're wishing for, but Purdue tried that with the Hazell hire and it apparently didn't work.

My point is this:

1. As the OP pointed out, it's not this thing or that thing that needs corrected. It's the entire system. We're at rock bottom.
2. After saying how bad it is right now, I don't think it's necessarily a 5 year rebuilding process. We just need a change, and a change from the top down. There's no reason to get our heads down and sulk. We can do this.

Tiller did NOT inherit a worse situation than this. Colletto won 12 games his last 3 years, Hazell will likely win half that in his first 3 years, and that's if we somehow beat somebody in the B1G.

 

[lbodel]

I agree changes are required at the top. But I disagree that hazell is the top.

It seems pretty obvious that this is rock bottom. I'll be surprised if Purdue wins 1 more game.

I'm certainly not advocating you fire him today. But there seems to be more and more of the "we'll just get rid of this coordinator or this assistant" after the season as the solution on this board.

And no, the "top" problem is MB just doesn't know how to help build programs. I've mentioned several weird things with Purdue's athletic department - one of which being MB having an accounting person overseeing marketing/communications.

It's a tough situation for Purdue though. Purdue's obviously going to go through an athletic director transition soon (relatively speaking). Typically, if a new AD is coming, you'd want that person to make a big hire like a football coach. But, just in terms of age, Burke is not THAT close to retirement. The president would have to step in and make a move for this to change. Right now, Burke

The bar is set pretty low for what successful would be. Hopes bar was set at bring us back to the brees days. Hazells bar was win 6+ games and eventually get us to a BCS Bowl. The next guys bar will be just get us some wins. If a guy brings Purdue to 8-4 wins in 3 seasons he would be the hottest coach in the nation there is really no downside unless you can't improve. As even a mediocre 6-6 by year 4 is another year extension.

I think you're being generous. I don't think I've ever heard Hazell and BCS bowl in the same sentence. I think Hazell's goal was to have a winning season, that's how low the bar was.

 

[BoilerBulldog]

I think the right coach can win and win quickly at Purdue. Tiller turned around a worse situation. Just as the program has submarined under Hazell, the right coach can likewise quickly bring it up to Hope level in 1 year. It's not that difficult to get 5 wins.

NC State is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2013.
Cal is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2012 and 1-11 in 2013.

Both had coaches that were on our radar in 2011. It can be done at Purdue too. But financially we can't afford another 1 or 2 win season. It's a no-brainer that Hazell needs to go in my opinion. I think the interesting question is if we make an AD change. I'm of the opinion that we have to tear this thing down completely. It can't get any worse. He has 2 wins against the FBS. I have a bad feeling that after this year he's going to be 1-23 against the B10.

Would you be happy if Burke brought in two current NFL GM's, a HOF NFL GM, and a National Championship winning college coach to consult on the next coaching hire? That is almost verbatim what you're wishing for, but Purdue tried that with the Hazell hire and it apparently didn't work.

My point is this:

1. As the OP pointed out, it's not this thing or that thing that needs corrected. It's the entire system. We're at rock bottom.
2. After saying how bad it is right now, I don't think it's necessarily a 5 year rebuilding process. We just need a change, and a change from the top down. There's no reason to get our heads down and sulk. We can do this.

It's laughable that you think Tiller inherited a worse situation. Tiller's first year had more talent than Hazell or Hope ever had.

 

[njm8845]

It's laughable that you think Tiller inherited a worse situation. Tiller's first year had more talent than Hazell or Hope ever had.

It's easy now to look back and say how much talent Tiller had in 1997 because he won. If he had only won 2 games with the same players, I don't think you'd be saying that. The main reason Tiller won isn't because he had a ton of talent in 97, but because he introduced a quirky offense to an otherwise conservative league. That and we didn't play UM or OSU.

All this being said, yeah, I probably shouldn't have used the word "worse". I wasn't thinking from a "recent wins" standpoint, in which case this is obviously worse. I was thinking more from a program standpoint - how many losing seasons did we have before Tiller came? The stadium/pressbox was pathetic. Students didn't care. We didn't even have lights on the stadium. Subjectively, it just seemed like Purdue football was more hopeless in 1996 than in 2015. I don't know, I might be wrong.

 

[BoilerBulldog]

It's easy now to look back and say how much talent Tiller had in 1997 because he won. If he had only won 2 games with the same players, I don't think you'd be saying that. The main reason Tiller won isn't because he had a ton of talent in 97, but because he introduced a quirky offense to an otherwise conservative league. That and we didn't play UM or OSU.

All this being said, yeah, I probably shouldn't have used the word "worse". I wasn't thinking from a "recent wins" standpoint, in which case this is obviously worse. I was thinking more from a program standpoint - how many losing seasons did we have before Tiller came? The stadium/pressbox was pathetic. Students didn't care. We didn't even have lights on the stadium. Subjectively, it just seemed like Purdue football was more hopeless in 1996 than in 2015. I don't know, I might be wrong.

I was a student from 91-95 and you're right that there was a mentality that we were bad and we're always going to be bad. The success we had early with Tiller was completely unexpected.

 

[bonefish1]

I was a student from 91-95 and you're right that there was a mentality that we were bad and we're always going to be bad. The success we had early with Tiller was completely unexpected.

In '93, we actually had a party at the fraternity house to watch the ND/FSU game instead of going to the Boiler/msu home game. I think we went 1-11 that year.

 

[FLAG HUNTER]

Coaching is a lot more than just having knowledge of football, Tiller had what it takes to inspire a team and win. Plus he knew talent. Saw the same thing happen at my high school, team was bad for years, regardless of having a lot of good athletes, in came Mark Surface, who went on to coach for years at Marion and Mike Kelly , who became head coach at Dayton. They turned it around immediately, they weren't going to accept losing and got the team thinking the same way. Just my opinion on Tiller

 

[boiler_pride]

I think the people here are not giving enough credit to Tiller -- at least early in his career. You can debate he had more talent, or an easier schedule in those early years, but he also didn't usually lose a game for us from the sidelines. We won some close games against quality competition -- Some examples are the unbelivable MSU comeback, Alamo Bowl vs KSU, and the OSU win to get to the Rose Bowl.

Later in his career, I feel like we had more close losses than close wins which made the difference between good seasons and mediocre seasons.

My biggest issue with Hazell and company is their game management at the end of halves and games. We had several games where a really good coach could have made a difference between a win and a loss -- including this past week and vs. Marshall. We don't have the talent to flat out beat teams. So we can't afford to make mental mistakes which this staff routinely makes with time and field position management with time running down. We regularly leave points on the field when we really really need them.

 

[banshee90]

I'm certainly not advocating you fire him today. But there seems to be more and more of the "we'll just get rid of this coordinator or this assistant" after the season as the solution on this board.

And no, the "top" problem is MB just doesn't know how to help build programs. I've mentioned several weird things with Purdue's athletic department - one of which being MB having an accounting person overseeing marketing/communications.

It's a tough situation for Purdue though. Purdue's obviously going to go through an athletic director transition soon (relatively speaking). Typically, if a new AD is coming, you'd want that person to make a big hire like a football coach. But, just in terms of age, Burke is not THAT close to retirement. The president would have to step in and make a move for this to change. Right now, Burke


I think you're being generous. I don't think I've ever heard Hazell and BCS bowl in the same sentence. I think Hazell's goal was to have a winning season, that's how low the bar was.

By his own word his goal was to get to the Rose Bowl.

 

[Hatter22]

By his own word his goal was to get to the Rose Bowl.

He made that statement to (1) energize the fan base, and (2) to impress potential recruits.

Number 1 worked, I guess, since we had a bump in tickets sold in 2013. Number 2 didn't seem to work as well, other than preventing Etling from decommitting, thank goodness!

 

[lbodel]

I think the people here are not giving enough credit to Tiller -- at least early in his career. You can debate he had more talent, or an easier schedule in those early years, but he also didn't usually lose a game for us from the sidelines. We won some close games against quality competition -- Some examples are the unbelivable MSU comeback, Alamo Bowl vs KSU, and the OSU win to get to the Rose Bowl.

Later in his career, I feel like we had more close losses than close wins which made the difference between good seasons and mediocre seasons.

My biggest issue with Hazell and company is their game management at the end of halves and games. We had several games where a really good coach could have made a difference between a win and a loss -- including this past week and vs. Marshall. We don't have the talent to flat out beat teams. So we can't afford to make mental mistakes which this staff routinely makes with time and field position management with time running down. We regularly leave points on the field when we really really need them.

Tiller had a lot of success re-energizing players, moving them around, etc. Colletto was NOT a bad recruiter. I'd agree that Tiller had more talent to work with than Hope/Hazell.

However, look at when Hazell was hired. Was there any shake-up? No. Was there a lot of players moved around? No.

Literally there wasn't much of a difference in the way that Hope/Hazell operated. You could have told me we didn't go through a coaching transition and just watched the games and I would have believed you.

 

[Summy1]

I think the right coach can win and win quickly at Purdue. Tiller turned around a worse situation. Just as the program has submarined under Hazell, the right coach can likewise quickly bring it up to Hope level in 1 year. It's not that difficult to get 5 wins.

NC State is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2013.
Cal is 4-0. They were 3-9 in 2012 and 1-11 in 2013.

Both had coaches that were on our radar in 2011. It can be done at Purdue too. But financially we can't afford another 1 or 2 win season. It's a no-brainer that Hazell needs to go in my opinion. I think the interesting question is if we make an AD change. I'm of the opinion that we have to tear this thing down completely. It can't get any worse. He has 2 wins against the FBS. I have a bad feeling that after this year he's going to be 1-23 against the B10.

Would you be happy if Burke brought in two current NFL GM's, a HOF NFL GM, and a National Championship winning college coach to consult on the next coaching hire? That is almost verbatim what you're wishing for, but Purdue tried that with the Hazell hire and it apparently didn't work.

My point is this:

1. As the OP pointed out, it's not this thing or that thing that needs corrected. It's the entire system. We're at rock bottom.
2. After saying how bad it is right now, I don't think it's necessarily a 5 year rebuilding process. We just need a change, and a change from the top down. There's no reason to get our heads down and sulk. We can do this.

I agree with you. I think if we had the right coach we would be winning games. We were right there with the Marshal and BG game. I think we could be 3-1 or at least 2-2. Then come Big Ten play there are plenty of teams we could beat.

 

[Hatter22]

Tiller had a lot of success re-energizing players, moving them around, etc. Colletto was NOT a bad recruiter. I'd agree that Tiller had more talent to work with than Hope/Hazell.

However, look at when Hazell was hired. Was there any shake-up? No. Was there a lot of players moved around? No.

Literally there wasn't much of a difference in the way that Hope/Hazell operated. You could have told me we didn't go through a coaching transition and just watched the games and I would have believed you.

Well, Hope had the moustache and whistle and Hazell has his bent-up hat and all-weather white windbreaker tucked in. Those are some of the more obvious changes. Plus in HD you can see that Hazell's wallet has a lot more 20's stuffed in it than Hope's ever did.