Very well stated.. A big gap between what I get upset about and what I am happy about. I am definitely going to borrow that.
Yes I’m predicting 6-6 next year if we come out having fixed a lot
- Thread starter BCfanatic2020
- Start date
When and where did I use the term "upset"? And BTW, fans, regardless of what they know, are part of who pay Brohm's check and fill the stands (outside of 2020). So glad to hear you're in the 10%, but you're the minority that doesn't matter...
Well Sir. I don’t know that you used the term itself however I am pretty sure if I looked through your post you used many terms and certainly tone that would be synonymous with upset.
And no matter how much you think you matter in relation to Brohm’s job..... you do not. Only a handful of opinions matter at Purdue as evidence by the previous coaching staff doing 1/10 the job Brohm has done and stayed 4 years.
And I like to think I remain rational and thoughtful regarding all things Purdue football. I certainly feel we aren’t doing well enough in some areas and better than I imagined in others. After all, progress is progress and I think if you got away from a message board where many rant just to rant, you might find that there are many more than 10% who are happy with progress of any kind.
Last edited:
I’m terrible during the game. Good or bad I get swept up .. I should follow the 24 hour rule. But that takes the fun out of it
Last edited:
Coach Tiller once told fans to manage expectations and was crucified for it. While I'm in the same boat as you, I believe we need to have better coaches establish quality two deeps across both OL/DL lines. OL seems to be shoring up. DL gets pushed around quite a bit even by Rutgers! Rutgers! "I can't believe I said Rutgers!" That is unacceptable.
It is not even a financial matter in my mind...it would not have been deemed acceptable under the likes of Hope or Hazell to be 5 years in and struggling to be .500 coming off of 2 years of being below .500 with the bad losses that there have been, and, it should not be deemed to be acceptable for Brohm, regardless of his salary...unless it truly is acceptable to those making the decisions.
I would contend that Brohm is more tolerable personally than those two, but, the attempts to be coy and the very lame statements made in press conferences this year have even brought that into question.
I feel like Brohm is generally more astute than either of them...that I have more faith in him than I ever did in either of them...that he seemed to be ridiculously better in about every way than either of them...that while both of them were in way over their head, that does not seem the case with Brohm...but, in the end, wins and losses matter...and 6-6 in year 5 sure seems like it is not enough wins.
Exactly .. too many people think the next coach will be a linear step up. What If he’s bob davie? Wasn’t Darrell hazell a hot coaching hire coming off a New Years bowl with Kent state!?
But Purdue is not playing "the top teams"...it would have been just about impossible to have had a better schedule than they have...they stole a win against a solid Iowa team, they barely beat a bad Illinois team, they lost to a lousy Minnesota team and more lousy Rutgers team, and, in the one game against a genuinely quality opponent in NW, they were largely dysfunctional in all facets of the game.
Until Saturday, I was right there with you (and presumably others)...I was happy initially with Brohm just to see functional and competitive, while generally entertaining, football...but what just happened on Saturday was as bad as anything that happened with either Hope or Hazell, to the point that it is concerning in that there is just no way it should have happened seemingly with this staff four years in, without even accounting for the fact that the talent available is (or certainly should be) far superior.
Northwestern still might end up as the 2nd best team in the Big. Iowa could end up as the 3rd or 4th best team. Nobody plays all the top teams typically. I readily admit that Rutgers was a bad loss. But as I have said in other posts, almost every single team has at least one bad loss each year. If they didn’t, the Alabamas, Clemsons and Ohio Sts of the world would not lose a game for a decade. Didn’t Illinois beat Wisconsin last year? It happens to every program almost every year. We are not talented enough yet to always crush or beat ANY team in the Big. I hope someday we will be at a point where we never lose or have close games against the bottom of the Big, but since even the likes of Ohio St loses to Purdue every few years, I doubt we will.
We are competing against everyone this year. Win lose or draw the last 3 and that is still a step in the right direction.
I never said "I" mattered in Brohm's job. I said "fans" matter. You can twist my words all you want. We have differing opinions, which is OK. You're apparently a lot more patient than I am with regards to progress.
Not trying to twist words at all.
I concur we can have different opinions. In my time as a Purdue fan which now spans 25 years.... I have only seen positive progress one other time. So yes I am ok with slow positive progress..... because of all the other alternatives, most are worse.
NW may indeed end up there, but, I have a difficult time stating that they are genuinely "better" than Purdue, more so to the extent that they appeared to be when they played.
To that point...Purdue is (in my mind at least) better than Minnesota and Rutgers to a point that neither of those games should have even been competitive, much less actual losses.
If it was a time-to-time thing...happened infrequently...I might be more encouraged, but, it has happened pretty frequently with this regime unfortunately. Minnesota/Fleck has dominated Purdue...NW has dominated Purdue...Rutgers is 2-0 with two of their worst teams...Illinois thumped them last year...staring at 2-2 against IU...those are the programs that Purdue, if truly better and progressing, should be experiencing success against.
I don't disagree that the program is better than it was when he/they arrived, but, it has lost momentum...on the field and off, and, that is going to be difficult to recapture.
I just think that for me at least, the game on Saturday was a low point to the point of feeling like Purdue is right back to where it was when this regime came in...to just be dominated as it was and be as inept as it was in all facets of the game...that, to me, set the program back and was incredibly bothersome.
Someone once told me if you have a complaint you better be ready with a solution. I see a lot of people complaining that, when pressed for solutions, have none. So what's the point? With something that is entirely elective and for entertainment such as this, you can choose to enjoy the process or you can complain about every little thing even when there is no obvious solution. I was 100% on the fire Hazell wagon once it was obvious that he wasn't the answer. But until that point (which we are nowhere near with Brohm) there is no reason to dwell on the negative. I can get my train on the negative tracks with the best of them. I foolishly called out AJ Hammons after the Little Rock game. So sure, everyone vents now and then, its part of being a fan, but you have to move on and focus on the positive. You have to. Otherwise, what's the point of this? Why would somebody choose to engage in something that constantly brings out negativity? I've learned just to back away from engaging with those type of people because it really doesn't accomplish anything. Constructive criticism where there is a problem and proposed solutions is one thing. Treating this forum like a verbal punching bag is another.
Okay, but wouldn’t you agree that there’s a difference between a team that chokes that game to rutgers and then plays nebraska tough and looks like a different team...
And a team that comes out and has Nebraska looking like a winning team?
I do agree. I have said over and over that the Rutgers game was real bad. The only excuse I offer for that is that games like that happen to everyone. I think talent wise we are on par with everyone else we have played and should be competitive and we are. Some bad plays have kept us from only having 1-2 losses.
I want to come out on top more just like everyone else but I am not going to lose my mind if we lose. I hope we come out and beat Nebraska. I believe we are similar talent wise and have a better coach. But lets not act like we are good enough to play them 10 times and win all ten. I put us at 6-4 or 7-3 in that scenario. So I believe we have a 60-70% chance to win.
without Barnes and Karlaftis it will be interesting on defense though. I want a win and will cheer my ass off for them on gameday, but I will not come in and bash everyone on the roster and coaching staff if we don’t.
Yes I agree with Saturday being a low point. Fingers crossed those types of games get fewer and fewer as time goes on!
My solution is for fans to have lower expectations for now and the future. Minnesota was a bad team to begin with and played without 22 of their players meaning they had almost zero bench. and they still won. We lost to Rutgers?
my biggest issue is the knowledge that unlike Hope and Hazell, Purdue will not fire Brohm. The only way he leaves Purdue is if he gets a better offer such as the Michigan job. Hope's contract was very easy to eat. many people said he was informed after the minnesota game that he wasn't coming back. it was very hard financially for Purdue to buy out Hazell's contract. it will be impossible for Purdue to buy out Brohm's contract. We are not Alabama or Auburn where people just come forward and say here's $10 million, find a new coach. So offering names of other coaches I'd rather have is a fruitless discussion.
there were a lot of expectations after Brohm's first season and what he was able to accomplish with Hazell's recruits. it was thought because of their bad record, that his players were not very good. Looking back, he had some very good players who just always found a way to lose. and his receivers couldn't catch. If his receivers had been able to catch, hazell probably could have produced some .500 teams. hazell's recruits have proven they could compete .
and then came the purge. in order to sign bigger recruiting classes, brohm encouraged mediocre players to leave. and out the window went your experience factor. at the beginning of last year, it looked like the class would be 15-18 players. But then Brohm kept adding recruits and encouraging players to leave. So now we have a lot of young, inexperienced players.
as for recruiting, many people still credit Hazell for what was brohm's first recruiting class. many people claim wasn't given enough time to recruit his class, and that he only had 6 weeks to put it together. The facts are he brought a bunch of recruits over from WKU. and if you look at WKU's recruiting offer records, brohm was recruiting the same players hazell was . So it's not like he started from scratch. he was already on the recruiting trail before he arrived at Purdue. he was just recruiting for WKU. and even though he was at WKU, was recruiting players that also had offers from other power 5 teams. and as part of his recruiting that year, he brought in several jucos and grad transfers and flipped several other players. he kept the hazell commitments and added to them. if you take a hard look at that class, there were less than 5 players who committed to Purdue prior to hazell's departure. the rest all came to purdue because of brohm. Barnes was a brohm recruit as were many others from that class.
one of my comments when hazell was coaching was why is he recruiting a player that no other BIG 10 team is recruiting or even interested in? Shouldn't purdue be recruiting players other BIG 10 teams are recruiting? rather thanlooking at stars, i was looking at their other offers and questioning the thought process of our recruiting. i also questioned the timing. in today's recruiting game, why confirm a commitment from a 2 star in july, when you can flip him inn December? I'm confident any 2 star that verbals to northern illinois could be flipped at a later date, so why get their commitment early? to me it's a better strategy to offer lower ranked players late in the process if there are openings. and some of those lower ranked players may even become walk ons rather than having to offer them a scholarship. if a player's best offer is eastern Dakota St< do we really need to make them an offer ? and if i'm that player and all i got is one low ball offer, I'm definitely going to accept one from purdue. to me, that presents the dilemma of filling up your class too early with too may mediocre players and doesn't leave room to sign a quality one late in the recruiting process. i bring this up because last year as we approached the signing deadline there were several quality players still looking for a team and we had no scholarships left to offer. We also had to be creative with two linebackers that we accepted offers from but had no scholarships to offer, so we used future scholarships.
why do I bring this up? because we accepted a commitment from a player whose other best offer was northern Illinois while allowing the better TE go to UK. We accepted a commitment from a RB whose best offer was South Dakota St while another 4star RB from Florida is still looking at us. We beat out bethune Cookman for a commitment. we beat out ball st and army/Air force for another recruit. if i was recruiting, I'd pursue the best players first and tell the others we'll get back to you later if we have room.
once again, i ask the question why is brohm recruiting players no other BIG 10 team is even interested in? Non of these players received an offer from any other BIG10 school. so why did purdue even bother recruiting them and accept their verbal commitment? this year it seems not only our recruiting class ranking will be lower, butt as recruiters, Purdue is setting their sights a lot lower than in previous years. as somebody said, you can't win in the BIG 10 with MAC talent. Well some of these players are not even receiving offers from MAC teams. In sharp contrast, painter recruits the same players other BIG 10 and top 20 teams recruit. Shouldn't brohm be doing likewise?
I'm sorry if i seem so negative. But to me great teams are forged in the off season. and they start with recruiting. I don't like what I'm seeing of the future.
my biggest issue is the knowledge that unlike Hope and Hazell, Purdue will not fire Brohm. The only way he leaves Purdue is if he gets a better offer such as the Michigan job. Hope's contract was very easy to eat. many people said he was informed after the minnesota game that he wasn't coming back. it was very hard financially for Purdue to buy out Hazell's contract. it will be impossible for Purdue to buy out Brohm's contract. We are not Alabama or Auburn where people just come forward and say here's $10 million, find a new coach. So offering names of other coaches I'd rather have is a fruitless discussion.
there were a lot of expectations after Brohm's first season and what he was able to accomplish with Hazell's recruits. it was thought because of their bad record, that his players were not very good. Looking back, he had some very good players who just always found a way to lose. and his receivers couldn't catch. If his receivers had been able to catch, hazell probably could have produced some .500 teams. hazell's recruits have proven they could compete .
and then came the purge. in order to sign bigger recruiting classes, brohm encouraged mediocre players to leave. and out the window went your experience factor. at the beginning of last year, it looked like the class would be 15-18 players. But then Brohm kept adding recruits and encouraging players to leave. So now we have a lot of young, inexperienced players.
as for recruiting, many people still credit Hazell for what was brohm's first recruiting class. many people claim wasn't given enough time to recruit his class, and that he only had 6 weeks to put it together. The facts are he brought a bunch of recruits over from WKU. and if you look at WKU's recruiting offer records, brohm was recruiting the same players hazell was . So it's not like he started from scratch. he was already on the recruiting trail before he arrived at Purdue. he was just recruiting for WKU. and even though he was at WKU, was recruiting players that also had offers from other power 5 teams. and as part of his recruiting that year, he brought in several jucos and grad transfers and flipped several other players. he kept the hazell commitments and added to them. if you take a hard look at that class, there were less than 5 players who committed to Purdue prior to hazell's departure. the rest all came to purdue because of brohm. Barnes was a brohm recruit as were many others from that class.
one of my comments when hazell was coaching was why is he recruiting a player that no other BIG 10 team is recruiting or even interested in? Shouldn't purdue be recruiting players other BIG 10 teams are recruiting? rather thanlooking at stars, i was looking at their other offers and questioning the thought process of our recruiting. i also questioned the timing. in today's recruiting game, why confirm a commitment from a 2 star in july, when you can flip him inn December? I'm confident any 2 star that verbals to northern illinois could be flipped at a later date, so why get their commitment early? to me it's a better strategy to offer lower ranked players late in the process if there are openings. and some of those lower ranked players may even become walk ons rather than having to offer them a scholarship. if a player's best offer is eastern Dakota St< do we really need to make them an offer ? and if i'm that player and all i got is one low ball offer, I'm definitely going to accept one from purdue. to me, that presents the dilemma of filling up your class too early with too may mediocre players and doesn't leave room to sign a quality one late in the recruiting process. i bring this up because last year as we approached the signing deadline there were several quality players still looking for a team and we had no scholarships left to offer. We also had to be creative with two linebackers that we accepted offers from but had no scholarships to offer, so we used future scholarships.
why do I bring this up? because we accepted a commitment from a player whose other best offer was northern Illinois while allowing the better TE go to UK. We accepted a commitment from a RB whose best offer was South Dakota St while another 4star RB from Florida is still looking at us. We beat out bethune Cookman for a commitment. we beat out ball st and army/Air force for another recruit. if i was recruiting, I'd pursue the best players first and tell the others we'll get back to you later if we have room.
once again, i ask the question why is brohm recruiting players no other BIG 10 team is even interested in? Non of these players received an offer from any other BIG10 school. so why did purdue even bother recruiting them and accept their verbal commitment? this year it seems not only our recruiting class ranking will be lower, butt as recruiters, Purdue is setting their sights a lot lower than in previous years. as somebody said, you can't win in the BIG 10 with MAC talent. Well some of these players are not even receiving offers from MAC teams. In sharp contrast, painter recruits the same players other BIG 10 and top 20 teams recruit. Shouldn't brohm be doing likewise?
I'm sorry if i seem so negative. But to me great teams are forged in the off season. and they start with recruiting. I don't like what I'm seeing of the future.
It’s like Atlanta Jim just talked to Dan brown all day and then brown banged away posts at a keyboard
Similar threads
