Would be $9 million and change if we cut bait after this season.
If this season goes like I think it will, you have to make the move.
If this season goes like I think it will, you have to make the move.
Walters Buyout
- Thread starter New Pal Boiler
- Start date
I just hate rewarding failure for these buyouts. It just doesn’t seem right.
We’d be punishing ourselves by letting him stay and “earn” the money.
If I'm the Purdue AD the most important factor of when to move on is when you can identify and land a coach who can be successful here. If I'm not sold on anyone after this season I may not make the move. I don't think there is a great fit every off-season and if you make another bad hire you bury the program for another 3 years. I actually think that was part of the problem that got us in this situation. Brohm left and we had no choice but to hire right then and I'm not sure there was a great candidate that would have come here at that time.
This is a good point. The sticky part is essentially offering the job (even if it’s thru a 3rd party ) to someone else while Walters still has it.
Every year, good hires are made that are good and some bad. The only reason you wait to make a move is when your sure hire tells you to wait one more season...
And avoiding the bad hire is paramount. You don't get to change every year. The bad hire costs you 2-4 years.
Never a zero chance but I'd agree it's very unlikely. There's always a chance that a coach gets caught up in a scandal or something like Pat Fitzgerald did.
If the effort and the schemes don’t improve, we are heading for 2-10. That means ticket sales tank for next season, and some pretty important JPC members write smaller checks. If you know he’s not the guy, why keep him to save $3 million?
No shit, that is why you avoid hiring a coach with no head coaching experience when your a Big Ten team.
There is a team on peacock right now that has a first year coach with prior head coaching experience, who is emplementing his proven system that is whipping the shit out of UCLA.......
Last edited:
…and I’m gonna hate to see how crowded the outgoing portal looks
I was at the game today… and I won’t miss a lot of them.
Yeah, but that's for cause. There's no evidence of that kind of scandal in the Walters program.
With the loss in revenue the next two years if CRW stays will be a lot more than his buyout.
IUs was double that and they had far less at stake.
Not sure I agree with the last part. Seemed more like Bobo got caught with his pants down when Brohm left. He should have had a short list in his hand at the end of every season with the situation he had with Brohm. Everyone knew it wasn’t if he left to go back home only when.
You would hope they have clear criteria for a head coach. Let's start with a proven track record as a head coach with some minimum length of service criteria that includes showing you can win with your recruits. I would prefer an offensive guy and one that can bring some of his staff to jump start the recruiting and portal process. No more coordinator or one year wonder coaches.
It is absolutely insane that a coach gets a $9 M payout to fail. Most jobs, with exception of anything government related, have set performance numbers.
Purdue wont make a change unless we are 0.5-11.5
Purdue wont make a change unless we are 0.5-11.5
What is the constant in all this coaching turmoil? It's the AD. Not prepared and doesn't care. This is his last job and he is just running out the clock. No different than Tiller and Keady when our only two revenue sports took a slide.
Everywhere I worked if didn't cut it , it was see ya , thanks for coming. How to be a millionaire without performing, sweet
It was the opposite. He indicated they anticipated it for weeks and already had the process well underway. The hire was actually rather quick.
This was a tough hire. You could go the IU route and get a proven winner at the lower ranks but that is very temporary. Cignetti is 63. He took this job as it’s his final retirement plan. How’s going out and recruiting 2026 players work out when they won’t graduate until 2031 (assuming a redshirt) when he is 70? Not sustainable.
This had the most upside. A school friendly contract that if it doesn’t work out we move on. We had a horrible NIL so you need a guy with some charisma that can recruit based on ability to relate with this young staff.
It’s easy to second guess the decision but let’s not pretend we are alabama…
Pretty fair assessment however, we've had success at least two times in recent history but had to go through bumps in-between. We most certainly aren't a destination program so getting a really good coach can be tough (which makes me REALLY appreciate Painter).
What we have to either be okay with being bad for multiple years while a brand new coach learns his way .. or.. be good for a few and be a stepping stone as a good coach will not stick around long. There has to be a middle ground in all of that somewhere IMO.
The Tiller route seems the best to me.
Hire the older guy who is a proven winner at the G5 level who it’s going to be his last job and have him have success here for that last 7-10 years of his career.
I agree.
Purdue shouldn't be a place where an up n coming coordinator learns how to be a HC. Let him do that somewhere else and then come to Purdue. The risk is too high with a program like Purdue that takes a long time to rebuild if you make the wrong hire.
Exactly. If 1 out of every 10 coordinators can become effective HCs, then we had a 10% chance for this to work.
Yeah. You also don’t want a head coach who just got fired, see Akers, Fred and DiNardo, Gerry.
Not sure I agree with all this. The situation required a guy either with a staff coming with him or a coach with lots of history and contacts to build a staff quickly. History at Purdue has PROVEN brining in a coach with an intact staff gets us the best results (Tiller/Brohm).
I get your points on IU but first and foremost a program has to win and continue winning to generate a fan base and increase revenue. The path they are on is the same one we had success with under Tiller and Brohm by brining in a guy with a proven staff that can hit the ground running. Instead of replicating the recipe that has worked for us Bobo created a train wreck trying to be cute. Charisma is about all we got with this hire and that doesn’t win games.
I generally agree, but might make an exception for an OC known for architecting high-powered passing offenses in whatever league they play, if they have an otherwise rounded résumé. I would rather have that than a ball control coach, or a defensive minded coach, because those specializations are nice at most schools, but not the specific skillset it takes for Purdue to have a fighting chance at winning this particular conference. Brohm and Tiller were both of that ilk, and though I didn’t watch Purdue football before those years, I understand most of our historic success has been tied to the passing game (cradle of QB’s)
Harrell as OC seemed to me to be a nod in acknowledgment of that need, though he’s not the HC and he also hasn’t proven as successful at engineering a really strong passing game since his time himself playing.
Last edited:
I loved the Harrell hire, but results have me seriously questioning it.
We hear the word "Air raid" all the time, and I'm not sure what that even means or what the philosophy is.
I'd take two successful coaches that stay five years each before retiring or moving on. That's why this program doesn't thrive. We can't stack good coaches on top of one another. We hit on a Tiller or Brohm and then end up with a dud or two before finding someone competent again. Top priority is putting a consistently competitive team on the field. Whether the coach is still here in ten years should not come into play in who to hire. It would be great if it were like basketball where we will likely go 50+ years with only two coaches but I don't think that is something to plan around.
Purdue should be a fairly good job. It's in the Big Ten. The fan base supports the team well and has very manageable expectations. Just beat IU and go to bowl games most years and most fans are satisfied. Attendance is never an issue unless the team on the field is awful. It may be a stepping stone job to the true elite jobs in college football but it shouldn't be as difficult to win 5-7 games a year here as we make it look sometimes. A coach who can do that at Purdue can likely stay as long as he likes, maintain a top 25 salary in his field, and be treated like a hero locally.
Great post... seems like for every 1 good coach we get, we have 2 duds after which kind of boggles my mind. Certainly seems like we'll pump money in to the program so either WL isn't that big of a draw, or the people doing the hiring just get lucky every once in a while. *shrugs*
Joe tiller was 8 years younger than Cignetti and had already been here earlier in his career, we had a connection. Jeff Brohm is a better example and he had no connection and left. Hazell and Hope had HC experience and it didn’t work out, although hazell didn’t have much time as HC at all. I think either way it’s not a sustainable model when you are a program like us, and it’s even more challenging with NIL. We may have been quickly rejected by our top guys and we have to learn to accept the lottery tickets.
The counter argument is indiana was able to get cignetti. We will see how that pans out in the long run.
You don’t think Jim Young or Jack Mollenkofp were really good coaches?
If any young coach has success at purdue it will be a stepping stone job. Hire the best guy now and plan for the future.
Agree. Just buy into the right lottery system to max your odds - some bets are better than others.
Similar threads
