Talent or Coaching

[threeeputtt]

Because they’ve seen alarmingly bad coaching decisions the last two weeks - things that most felt were remedied with the new staff.
Going away from the run when it’s working
Going ultra conservative on both O and D in the fourth
Things we all thought were a thing of the past...

You can't have it both ways "Going away from the run when it’s working " We went to the run on the last possession. That is ultra conservative. Make one or two more 1st downs and it is over. Personally, I would have tried a play action on 3rd down and gone for the juggler but, an incomplete pass and that gives NU another stopped clock. I am second guessing with my comment but, I still like what Brohm has done and I am patient.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

The coach will be fine give him time.

Others, and maybe you, said the same about DH

 

[lbodel]

Sorry, but Painter couldn't eat at the local McDonald's for those few years. He was crucified.

I wouldn't waste a minute debating Painter's situation. First off, basketball and football are not the same. Unless the talent is in place already, you can't immediately turn around a football team. Painter brought in his first real class and immediate progress could be seen. Painter did not take 3-4 years of bad seasons - his first year Purdue was bad, his second year Purdue was in the NCAA Tournament for the next 6 seasons.

 

[jmohlman]

The name of the game in college football is recruiting. We can call out the coaching staff and should, but recruiting has to improve. The players and the game day coaching have to share some of the blame for the loses the last 2 weeks. But the root cause is the talent level on the field.

Having said that, I don't recall so many passes dropped and it is up to the coaches to correct that and they have not. These players could catch in the past. Most of us learned to do that in grade school. Seems like the coaches should be able to coach this receiving core up instead of throwing in the towel.

My biggest concern is that the defense will take a step back next season with the loss of Bentley,Ezechukwu, McCollum, and Hunte. Will the offense improve enough to compensate? Not sure how yet. Brohm's 1st recruiting class doesn't look to change things unless he is better at find the "diamonds in the rough" than the last two coaches. The Oline getting better with experience is the only hope.

I appreciate your thoughts and your perspective. My perspective is similar, one difference in the recruiting game that I understand completely is that when you're starting with a pathetic program as CJB was last year when he started recruiting don't expect many if any for star players. However just because there are three stars next to the players name does not mean that they are a three star player. We all know that four and five star players that are going to the likes of Ohio State, Miami, Alabama and others often were three star players until they committed to such schools.
This coaching staff will recruit just fine after what players have been able to see who might be interested in playing for such systems. The defensive approach this year has proven to be something that talent the defense of players who want to play under if they seek to go to the next level.
The offense has done remarkably well considering the lack of any type of talent whatsoever including quarterback. Our quarterbacks are average at best. I understand that David Blough have a terrific Elite 11 showing in high school. But that has not translated to the college game. However if you were I were playing quarterback with that offense of line for the past 12 years your stats would not look very good either and you would be incredibly gun shy as well. Tom Brady would not be an all star quarterback if you do not have a heck of a line blocking for him all these years.
The future is certainly bride, how can we all go from saying "in coach Brohm we trust" four weeks ago and now be bailing on him? Not happening here in Ohio. I have enough crazy Buckeye fans around me that I'm still sticking with my Boilermakers!

 

[Clubcar7]

1st, Brohm may not be able to spell Lombardi. 2nd, I put yesterday's loss, especially that last drive right on his shoulders. I had my doubts when he was hired and they're still there.

Amen!
Brohm has hurt his resume coming to Purdue. Probably should go back to WK if they want him.

 

[Clubcar7]

Folks I have the answer for Purdue Football...
All players and coaches new playbook.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/glossary_general

 

[FirstDownB]

I just posted on this, but I don't think we're exactly "in the clear" in terms of a lack of talent. Our current recruiting class may be Brohm's recruits and perhaps they fit in better with his ideal systems than some of our current players - but half of our recruiting class are 2 star recruits. That's the same general make up of Hazell's and Hope's classes. We have 0 four star commits.

So this notion that next year is going to be better because we'll have better depth - I mean, I guess it is how you define "better" (like I said, his own recruits vs. inherited recruits), but talent-wise I'm not sure we've seen a noticeable shift in recruiting. Doesn't mean it can't happen in the future, but I certainly wouldn't act as if it is fixed.

As long as half of our roster is made up of 2 star recruits, we're only going to get so far particularly when depth matters so much in this sport.

Agree with a lot of this, except the current depth issue is not solely due to recruiting 2 and 3 star players. You can win with 2 and 3 star players, if you develop them, redshirt as appropriate, coach them up, and fill your 2-deeps with Juniors and Seniors. What we have currently is a hodge podge of first year transfers (Wright, Zico, Smart, McCollum, Okonye, Steinmetz) and underclassmen (Hermanns, Anthrop, Sparks, Neal, Hardy, Barnes, Mosley) filling out the 2-deeps to supplement under-recruited and under-developed positional groups.

The recruiting classes of the previous coaching staff looked bad enough on paper, but in reality they were even worse. All 2 star players are not created equal. You can see that already with a quality one like Derrick Barnes. And you don't need to recruit 5 running backs every single damn year. Attrition was also a major issue. Once players saw the writing on the wall with Hazell, some of those that did not have professional aspirations pretty much checked out of football.

 

[Bippus33]

The final 2 and half minutes of this game was on the coaching. Pure and simple, we never should have lost this game. I could have coached us to victory in the last 2 and half minutes. Just let DJ Knox run the ball a few more times - get a second first down in that drive and we win. Go for it on 4th down if you have to. Nothing is 100% guaranteed, but why did Knox get pulled after he got the first down that caused Nebraska to start burning timeouts. Its killing me.

So do we blame the other 58 minutes on the players or the coaches???

 

[lbodel]

Agree with a lot of this, except the current depth issue is not solely due to recruiting 2 and 3 star players. You can win with 2 and 3 star players, if you develop them, redshirt as appropriate, coach them up, and fill your 2-deeps with Juniors and Seniors. What we have currently is a hodge podge of first year transfers (Wright, Zico, Smart, McCollum, Okonye, Steinmetz) and underclassmen (Hermanns, Anthrop, Sparks, Neal, Hardy, Barnes, Mosley) filling out the 2-deeps to supplement under-recruited and under-developed positional groups.

The recruiting classes of the previous coaching staff looked bad enough on paper, but in reality they were even worse. All 2 star players are not created equal. You can see that already with a quality one like Derrick Barnes. And you don't need to recruit 5 running backs every single damn year. Attrition was also a major issue. Once players saw the writing on the wall with Hazell, some of those that did not have professional aspirations pretty much checked out of football.

Like I have said, recruiting stars are like odds. A 4 star has a better chance of being a good college Big Ten player than a 3 star, a 3 star has a better chance than 2 star, etc.

It's not to say 2 stars cannot be developed or will ever be good. It's just a smaller percentage of them will, on average, than 3 star players or 4 star players.

So yeah, if we had really good coaching over the past 8 years, would we have produced more wins? Absolutely. But when half of your team are 2 stars, it's NOT a good chance that you'll have a competitive team in the Big Ten that competes consistently with the top 1/3 of the conference. You might get an upset here or there, but it's not going to be consistent.

 

[boilerdug]

brohm was supposed to be an offensive genius but he came out in the first quarter and played the most vanilla offense i have ever seen. to top it off, he played not to lose on our last meaningful possesion. whoever is coaching the defensive backs needs to be fired. we knew they were passing every down and still they were highly succesful. our "prevent defense" prevented nothing but allowed them to march down the field and score. put this loss squareley on the coaching staff

How does a defensive backs coach get fired when flat out that their wide receivers are more talented than our defensive backs?????

If you watched the game, you would have seen that we shifted the safety over to help on coverage with our weak corner. As soon as Nebraska saw that, they threw to where our safety was supposed to be. Next play, we shift our safety back and they throw at our weak corner. It was a cat and mouse game.
Bottom line, we can't afford to lose any of the starters. No depth of talent on either side of the ball.
Only way we could have stopped them in the 4th quarter was to put 12 guys on the field. As soon as you figure out how to do that, I will petition to name you the new coach.

 

[ossim]

The one that is evident to me, stars and ratings aside, is that Brohm likely had a better roster at WKU than he does at Purdue. Make no mistake the level of competition is higher now, but I didn't see Brohm struggling so much offensively with any of his teams even against power 5 competition at his last stop.

 

[FirstDownB]

Like I have said, recruiting stars are like odds. A 4 star has a better chance of being a good college Big Ten player than a 3 star, a 3 star has a better chance than 2 star, etc.

It's not to say 2 stars cannot be developed or will ever be good. It's just a smaller percentage of them will, on average, than 3 star players or 4 star players.

So yeah, if we had really good coaching over the past 8 years, would we have produced more wins? Absolutely. But when half of your team are 2 stars, it's NOT a good chance that you'll have a competitive team in the Big Ten that competes consistently with the top 1/3 of the conference. You might get an upset here or there, but it's not going to be consistent.

Yes. Better talent is going to win out more times than not. But I do think it is important to note that within the teams with 2 and 3 star recruits, some are maximizing on field talent by doing things such as red shirting, balancing class and positional needs, and finding late bloomers or guys who simply fit a scheme. The previous staff did those little things very poorly, so doing them well is an important step in improving the talent in the 2 deeps over the next few years. The next step is winning, which will attract more of those 4 star recruits. This is a multi-year process. I'm just saying there is hope for a better, deeper roster even before the recruiting takes a huge uptick.

For reference there are about 7 guys from the 2014 recruiting class that are getting significant playing time this season. Only 9 are still on the team. Those are your senior leaders. 2 stars or not, when half of your class is gone by their 4th year your depth is going to suffer and you are going to be forced to play those 2 and 3 star freshmen and sophomore recruits.

 

[lbodel]

Yes. Better talent is going to win out more times than not. But I do think it is important to note that within the teams with 2 and 3 star recruits, some are maximizing on field talent by doing things such as red shirting, balancing class and positional needs, and finding late bloomers or guys who simply fit a scheme. The previous staff did those little things very poorly, so doing them well is an important step in improving the talent in the 2 deeps over the next few years. The next step is winning, which will attract more of those 4 star recruits. This is a multi-year process. I'm just saying there is hope for a better, deeper roster even before the recruiting takes a huge uptick.

For reference there are about 7 guys from the 2014 recruiting class that are getting significant playing time this season. Only 9 are still on the team. Those are your senior leaders. 2 stars or not, when half of your class is gone by their 4th year your depth is going to suffer and you are going to be forced to play those 2 and 3 star freshmen and sophomore recruits.

Again, I agree that 2 star players can developed into good players. But how many of the top 1/3 of the Big 10 is relying on 50% of their players being 2 star players? (Hint: 0).

I'm not saying we need a team full of 4 star players. But the 2 star players, in general, are what have been killing Purdue. I'd rather 15% of our team be 2 star players and rely on a few of those to turn into good players, than 50%. This all goes back to depth - our depth over the past 8 years has been almost all 2 star players. It doesn't work. I don't care how good of a coach you are, it's hard to compete on a weekly basis in the Big Ten with that lack of depth. Not to mention, you're ASSUMING the player development will be at the top of the Big Ten if you think it can work (and I don't think we have reason to believe that).

That's why I point out the class differentials - Northwestern's current class is rated behind Purdue, but 100% of their class is 3 star and 1 four star. Purdue's class is 50% 2 star. I'd take NW's class.

 

[boiler2288]

The unwillingness to name and go with a starting qb from day 1 is always a recipe for ineffective offensive development. First guy goes 3 or 4 series and then when backup comes in he is under pressure to produce immediately with no margin for error or time to get in a "comfort zone" as far as original game plan was developed during week leading up to kickoff.

All coaches make lame brain play calls or down/distance mistakes throughout a 12 game season, but the primary and fundamental lesson Coach Brohm should've learned thus far this yr was his refusal to name a starter.

 

[Charliehorse 29]

How does a defensive backs coach get fired when flat out that their wide receivers are more talented than our defensive backs?????

If you watched the game, you would have seen that we shifted the safety over to help on coverage with our weak corner. As soon as Nebraska saw that, they threw to where our safety was supposed to be. Next play, we shift our safety back and they throw at our weak corner. It was a cat and mouse game.
Bottom line, we can't afford to lose any of the starters. No depth of talent on either side of the ball.
Only way we could have stopped them in the 4th quarter was to put 12 guys on the field. As soon as you figure out how to do that, I will petition to name you the new coach.

All we needed to do was make inbound tackles on two plays and the clock would have run out.

 

[mryankee2397]

How does a defensive backs coach get fired when flat out that their wide receivers are more talented than our defensive backs?????

If you watched the game, you would have seen that we shifted the safety over to help on coverage with our weak corner. As soon as Nebraska saw that, they threw to where our safety was supposed to be. Next play, we shift our safety back and they throw at our weak corner. It was a cat and mouse game.
Bottom line, we can't afford to lose any of the starters. No depth of talent on either side of the ball.
Only way we could have stopped them in the 4th quarter was to put 12 guys on the field. As soon as you figure out how to do that, I will petition to name you the new coach.

on any given play there are only 5 players who can catch a pass. the defense can rush four and have 7 back. simple math shows 7 on 5 and you should be able to single cover 3 and double cover two. you know they were going to pass. we also gave them too much ground before picking them up. so there you go. we need someone who can call the right coverage in obvious passing situations especially when the other team has no time outs. it is not a cat and mouse when you outnumber them

 

[FirstDownB]

Again, I agree that 2 star players can developed into good players. But how many of the top 1/3 of the Big 10 is relying on 50% of their players being 2 star players? (Hint: 0).

I'm not saying we need a team full of 4 star players. But the 2 star players, in general, are what have been killing Purdue. I'd rather 15% of our team be 2 star players and rely on a few of those to turn into good players, than 50%. This all goes back to depth - our depth over the past 8 years has been almost all 2 star players. It doesn't work. I don't care how good of a coach you are, it's hard to compete on a weekly basis in the Big Ten with that lack of depth. Not to mention, you're ASSUMING the player development will be at the top of the Big Ten if you think it can work (and I don't think we have reason to believe that).

That's why I point out the class differentials - Northwestern's current class is rated behind Purdue, but 100% of their class is 3 star and 1 four star. Purdue's class is 50% 2 star. I'd take NW's class.

We're in agreement. Better recruiting -> more talent -> more wins.. I'm just saying before we get to recruiting like the top 1/3 of the Big Ten (if we ever get there) there are some other steps that can be taken, which may or may not show up in star ratings, to improve the depth and win 6 or 7 games instead of 3 or 4 games. It just takes time when you aren't a helmet school. Northwestern and Fitz had several years head start on Brohm and not coincidentally have had much less attrition in their program. 9 Jr/Sr starters on offense and 7 Jr/Sr starters on defense, and that is not unusual for them.

Next year will likely be another issue of depth, but starting in 2019 Brohm should have some decent depth on both sides of the ball. Not sure when Brohm will start reeling in more 4 stars (2019 is off to a good start!) but in general he'll need to do some winning first.

 

[lbodel]

We're in agreement. Better recruiting -> more talent -> more wins.. I'm just saying before we get to recruiting like the top 1/3 of the Big Ten (if we ever get there) there are some other steps that can be taken, which may or may not show up in star ratings, to improve the depth and win 6 or 7 games instead of 3 or 4 games. It just takes time when you aren't a helmet school. Northwestern and Fitz had several years head start on Brohm and not coincidentally have had much less attrition in their program. 9 Jr/Sr starters on offense and 7 Jr/Sr starters on defense, and that is not unusual for them.

Next year will likely be another issue of depth, but starting in 2019 Brohm should have some decent depth on both sides of the ball. Not sure when Brohm will start reeling in more 4 stars (2019 is off to a good start!) but in general he'll need to do some winning first.

I'm not even saying we need more 4 stars. We need fewer 2 stars.

To give you some comparison - Northwestern's last 4 classes combined - had a total of 10 two star recruits. Purdue's current class alone has 9.

That talent differential really adds up. I know what you're saying - but the low-hanging fruit is dragging this team down.

 

[ossim]

If you excel at player development you can make 2 star players solid contributors but likely not until their third year. Unfortunately, we know the last staff was absolutely terrible so what we ended up with is a bunch projects from previous classes who are no longer here or just aren't able to play at a big ten level.