With DH obviously coming back, will they finally change staff?

[RegionWarrior101]

Specifically, I am talking OC.

John Shoop was an odd hire to begin with for a multitude of reasons. 1. No ties to DH. 2. Was not in football the year prior to Purdue. 3. It was a relatively late hire. I get it; Morgan when hiring DH said he needed to bring in some "name" coordinators. John Shoop is a name for the wrong reasons. Granted I have followed him since the 2001 Chicago Bears days. In ONE of the 13 or so seasons you can talk about a good Shoop offense- 2001 when Jim Miller/Shane Matthews went on to win 13 games. He followed that up with a 4-12. People in football circles claim the offense is very basic, but he makes it very complicated with motions, reads, etc. Bottom line is it is not working and has not worked. In 3 years we have not developed ONE QB. I don't know why they keep him around.

 

[SIBoiler2]

After seeing that stupid fake punt screw up by the Colts last night I believe the mad genius of OC's may already be trying out for an NFL gig.

 

[RDUBoiler]

Specifically, I am talking OC.

John Shoop was an odd hire to begin with for a multitude of reasons. 1. No ties to DH. 2. Was not in football the year prior to Purdue. 3. It was a relatively late hire. I get it; Morgan when hiring DH said he needed to bring in some "name" coordinators. John Shoop is a name for the wrong reasons. Granted I have followed him since the 2001 Chicago Bears days. In ONE of the 13 or so seasons you can talk about a good Shoop offense- 2001 when Jim Miller/Shane Matthews went on to win 13 games. He followed that up with a 4-12. People in football circles claim the offense is very basic, but he makes it very complicated with motions, reads, etc. Bottom line is it is not working and has not worked. In 3 years we have not developed ONE QB. I don't know why they keep him around.

Why do you assume it's "obvious" that DH is coming back?

 

[RegionWarrior101]

Why do you assume it's "obvious" that DH is coming back?

Because there is no way Purdue will pay that buyout. And to be honest, as mad as I am, it is a colossal waste of cash to pay a guy to go away anyway, but with all the upgrades needed, use that money for something worthwhile. Shame on whoever wrote the contract that it would handcuff us so bad to get rid of someone. I think MB thought it was such a great hire that people would be trying to get their mits on our great football coach, and if they did, they were going to pay. But the flipside occurred. We are now stuck with him and cannot afford to get rid of him.

 

[lbodel]

Specifically, I am talking OC.

John Shoop was an odd hire to begin with for a multitude of reasons. 1. No ties to DH. 2. Was not in football the year prior to Purdue. 3. It was a relatively late hire. I get it; Morgan when hiring DH said he needed to bring in some "name" coordinators. John Shoop is a name for the wrong reasons. Granted I have followed him since the 2001 Chicago Bears days. In ONE of the 13 or so seasons you can talk about a good Shoop offense- 2001 when Jim Miller/Shane Matthews went on to win 13 games. He followed that up with a 4-12. People in football circles claim the offense is very basic, but he makes it very complicated with motions, reads, etc. Bottom line is it is not working and has not worked. In 3 years we have not developed ONE QB. I don't know why they keep him around.

A few things…

1. I don't get the fascination with singling out Shoop. Our defense is probably worse on paper. Why would you not be advocating for both to be fired?

2. The problem with this is that changing coordinators is not something you do after 3 unsuccessful years. You are essentially saying you wasted 2 years for something we knew after year 1. Hazell obviously does not have a problem with these 2 coordinators, and quite frankly, any of his staff. Has he fired any of them?

3. Even if you're still at this point wanting to keep Hazell around. Because you've waited 3 years to make changes, you're squarely on the hot seat. What respectable coach is going to come be a coordinator for what is practically a lame duck coach?

I'm not on the "torch" Morgan Burke bandwagon, but Morgan screwed this one up majorly if they are not able to buy him out after this year. MB should have made Hazell make these changes - at least after year 2 - and quite frankly, there should have been some changes after year 1. Now the problem is you've kept status quo for 3 years and there's no progress to be seen. When you get that far along, the blame goes straight past assistants and to the head coach.

We've missed the window of changing coordinators being something fans can buy into.

 

[RegionWarrior101]

I a

A few things…

1. I don't get the fascination with singling out Shoop. Our defense is probably worse on paper. Why would you not be advocating for both to be fired?

2. The problem with this is that changing coordinators is not something you do after 3 unsuccessful years. You are essentially saying you wasted 2 years for something we knew after year 1. Hazell obviously does not have a problem with these 2 coordinators, and quite frankly, any of his staff. Has he fired any of them?

3. Even if you're still at this point wanting to keep Hazell around. Because you've waited 3 years to make changes, you're squarely on the hot seat. What respectable coach is going to come be a coordinator for what is practically a lame duck coach?

I'm not on the "torch" Morgan Burke bandwagon, but Morgan screwed this one up majorly if they are not able to buy him out after this year. MB should have made Hazell make these changes - at least after year 2 - and quite frankly, there should have been some changes after year 1. Now the problem is you've kept status quo for 3 years and there's no progress to be seen. When you get that far along, the blame goes straight past assistants and to the head coach.

We've missed the window of changing coordinators being something fans can buy into.

I agree with everything you have said, but Purdue is so reactionary and a year late on things, they may try to change coordinators as a method to "stop the bleeding." I also agree both coordinators are not great, but did not want to get greedy. I thought maybe this TE coach, Malone? could be a OC for the remainder of this year and next year, having to bring in a QB coach.

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

I think a lot will told by the immediate aftermath of the season by which assistants stay and which leave. The good ones we do have (Malone, Freeman, Johnson, and Williams) may end up bolting because it is better to leave before a HC is fired. I think that will be the very telling aspect of the stance that Burke has taken with Hazell. If it is a clean washout of the entire staff with the exception of Hazell, I believe that is an admission of the AD that he wants to fire Hazell but can not afford (in his mind) to do so at this point in time. If just the coordinators are fired, I think that says that the AD buys in to what Hazell is selling overall and thinks the problems lie in the schemes being put in place by the coordinators.

 

[RDUBoiler]

Because there is no way Purdue will pay that buyout. And to be honest, as mad as I am, it is a colossal waste of cash to pay a guy to go away anyway, but with all the upgrades needed, use that money for something worthwhile. Shame on whoever wrote the contract that it would handcuff us so bad to get rid of someone. I think MB thought it was such a great hire that people would be trying to get their mits on our great football coach, and if they did, they were going to pay. But the flipside occurred. We are now stuck with him and cannot afford to get rid of him.

Arguably the lost value of low ticket sales could be enough to motivate PU to fire Hazell, but I agree that the buyout makes it much more difficult. I remember thinking that it was a terrible contract from Purdue's perspective, especially given how unproven Hazell was.