talent vs coaching vs motivation

[bonefish1]

From an overall talent perspective, I wonder where PU football players fall individually in the Big 10. Granted, they're probably not OSU level, but I don't think they are far and away the least talented players in the conference. Certainly not 50-7 vs Maryland type talent.
For example, I've love to see how the 40 times compare for our skill position players to the rest of the league. I bet the difference is negligible. Sure, there's probably a few outliers but overall, across the Power5 schools, every school's going to have some 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 guys.
I'd like to know similar stats on how they grade LBs, DLs, OLs, etc. Sizewise, (just ht/wt), every team in the B10 is similar (they all have 6'6, 325 right tackles, etc).

Obviously upgrading talent and getting better players is priority No 1 for most coaches.

So, that brings us to coaching and motivation. Are these coaches scheming properly? Are they utilizing guys strengths? Are the guys being 'coached' well? Do they make the same dumb mistakes? Do they make 'dumb' mistakes, penalties, turnovers, etc (things poorly coached teams do). This is where I think a major part of DH is failing.
While I think he definitely needs better talent, I don't think his teams are motivated or have the mind set for success.

 

[DG10]

From an overall talent perspective, I wonder where PU football players fall individually in the Big 10. Granted, they're probably not OSU level, but I don't think they are far and away the least talented players in the conference. Certainly not 50-7 vs Maryland type talent.
For example, I've love to see how the 40 times compare for our skill position players to the rest of the league. I bet the difference is negligible. Sure, there's probably a few outliers but overall, across the Power5 schools, every school's going to have some 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 guys.
I'd like to know similar stats on how they grade LBs, DLs, OLs, etc. Sizewise, (just ht/wt), every team in the B10 is similar (they all have 6'6, 325 right tackles, etc).

Obviously upgrading talent and getting better players is priority No 1 for most coaches.

So, that brings us to coaching and motivation. Are these coaches scheming properly? Are they utilizing guys strengths? Are the guys being 'coached' well? Do they make the same dumb mistakes? Do they make 'dumb' mistakes, penalties, turnovers, etc (things poorly coached teams do). This is where I think a major part of DH is failing.
While I think he definitely needs better talent, I don't think his teams are motivated or have the mind set for success.

I think there is validity to your point(s), but, I also think that Purdue is at a severe deficit from a talent standpoint relative to other programs in the B1G, including Maryland...I genuinely believe that Purdue has the least talented roster in the conference, and with the lack of coaching, development, inspiration and scheming, you get 50-7 against Maryland.

Purdue is legitimately one of the absolute worst teams in the country...they may not appear as inept and completely overwhelmed and outmatched if they had a marginally competent coach and staff, but, they would still be one of the worst teams in the country and the worst team in the conference.

 

[OhioBoiler3]

Jones, Bentley, Roos, King, Replogle, Wilson, Patterson. Those are guys I think could play at a majority of other B10 schools.

 

[TC4THREE]

Talent-wise, I'm of the opinion we're not far from 6 wins. Of course, six wins isn't a very high bar. Now if you're talking about talent to win the division or the conference, we're a good ways from that. I don't think the road back to bowl eligibility is a long one though.

 

[ossim]

We have some talent but also a lot of glaring weaknesses that this coaching staff doesn't even try to disguise. The secondary is awful so you know the opponents will be putting up points on the board. On the flipside, we have a mediocre o-line that has starters out due to off field issues or injury so the run game is likely to be ineffective. One would think offensively you would focus on a passing scheme out of shotgun or more misdirection plays that can put some points on the board. Instead, you got Hazell who insists running Jones into a wall, regularly passing into the 3-5 yard range where the linebackers are already playing nickel because they are playing primarily against the run, and forcing a young QB to consistently be in 3rd and long. At least when Tiller was unapologetically throwing it 50 times a game he did it knowing dam well it was because they would need 40 something points to win the game.

 

[nat100]

We have some nice players. We dont have enough (any) depth. Hazell hasnt recruited enough players to field a team that can withstand the natural attrition of a football season.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

From an overall talent perspective, I wonder where PU football players fall individually in the Big 10. Granted, they're probably not OSU level, but I don't think they are far and away the least talented players in the conference. Certainly not 50-7 vs Maryland type talent.
For example, I've love to see how the 40 times compare for our skill position players to the rest of the league. I bet the difference is negligible. Sure, there's probably a few outliers but overall, across the Power5 schools, every school's going to have some 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 guys.
I'd like to know similar stats on how they grade LBs, DLs, OLs, etc. Sizewise, (just ht/wt), every team in the B10 is similar (they all have 6'6, 325 right tackles, etc).

Obviously upgrading talent and getting better players is priority No 1 for most coaches.

So, that brings us to coaching and motivation. Are these coaches scheming properly? Are they utilizing guys strengths? Are the guys being 'coached' well? Do they make the same dumb mistakes? Do they make 'dumb' mistakes, penalties, turnovers, etc (things poorly coached teams do). This is where I think a major part of DH is failing.
While I think he definitely needs better talent, I don't think his teams are motivated or have the mind set for success.

Players aren't stupid.....okay, some may be....but they realize they don't have the horses, that they 're getting their ass kicked every week in the B10 (yes, they'll lose to the Illini), and that the guy who recruited them and hired the coordinators doesn't have a clue. So, that being said, how in the heck are you going to motivate them. As a guy who's coached 16-19 year old's, motivation is an innate function of the individual mind and not something that Hazell has the ability to provide to the entire team. Enjoy what parts you can enjoy until this guy's gone and pray that the next hire wants to be here, and is more intelligent than the football when putting a program together. DH2 has no clue on how to do any of it.

 

[nat100]

Jones, Bentley, Roos, King, Replogle, Wilson, Patterson. Those are guys I think could play at a majority of other B10 schools.

Yancey would play at most schools not named OSU or Michigan. He wouldnt be lauded in quite the same manner by the coaching staff though.

 

[Boiler Wolf]

Secondary may be weak, but I'm appalled at the play of our offensive and defensive lines. I think our skill players are average BIG talent, but the lines are far inferior. Combination of talent and motivation.

 

[FirstDownB]

Don't discount player development and depth. Combined they are possibly more important for a program like Purdue than raw talent.

To simplify, think of a 100-scale talent rating system where 1 is the worst freshman scrub in D1 and 100 is Bo Jackson circa 1985. Our incoming recruiting classes have been roughly comparable to some of the teams who blow us out. The difference is development. A 40 rating freshman becomes a 50 rating sophomore, a 60 rating junior, and a 70 rating senior at other programs. Here they go more like 40-45-50-55 or even regress in some cases.

On top of that due to lack of depth you are constantly playing underdeveloped players before they are ready to see the field. This is especially crucial on the O and D lines as most of them come in needing a lot more physical development than your skill positions.

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

As funny as it sounds, Hope and Nord did a great job scheming to what Purdue was good at. I am surprised at how poorly it seems Purdue, under Darrell Hazell, has schemed towards the strengths of the program. For example, why is Purdue employinig a 4-2-5 defense that takes a LB off the field and adds a DB when the DB's are known to be of limited skill right now and the LB's are probably the deepest/most experienced group on the team? That, simply put, is a dumb decision.