How many of you got to read the H-T's Allen article in...
- Thread starter IUCol
- Start date
That makes sense. Feel like you need at least 4 unless the first 3 are just god awful (*cough* Darrell Hazell *cough*)
I think a .500 regular season record in the next two years gets him both an extension and a hefty raise.
I can’t read the article, but I’d bet hyperbole, spin and context is involved in some of the conclusions.
Best example - nearly EVERY firing/hiring carries the expectation of taking a step back before getting better. It is the rule, not the exception.
I also sorta doubt Allen would agree that his only plan was telling guys “you are better” and waiting for the “poof, they’re better” to happen.
Last, I could not care less what Vol fans think. They chased Phil Fulmer in a “what have you done lately” moment of stupid. They are not football geniuses. They are front-runners and think a W means you played well and an L means you didn’t. Deep.
The worst IU blunders weren’t the hires. It was the refusal to keep up with facilities - the same whine heard when Memorial Stadium was built.
Imagine IU telling the library “you can’t have microfiche equipment” or “computers.” Or telling the medical school, “we gave you stuff years ago. Go away. Use what you have.”
If you do ANYTHING as an institution, do it right. But upgrades come with that decision. Staying current and competitive. Instead, when it came to football, IU said “we are not joining the facilities arms race.” Literally. They told football, “we gave you a Stadium. Dickens embarrassed us. Pont made civil rights errors. Go away - we don’t want to hear it. We aren’t spending money.” Took decades before they saw football did not harm academics at Michigan or Ahia State, or any other Big Ten school.
But that’s the past.
We stayed in the Big Ten.
We have benefitted from the first wave of BTN money.
Let’s hope that keeps us in striking distance.
But when you face nuclear weapons, you need more than an M-1.
A couple of lines from a few of my posts could've been misconstrued...I fully support CTA* and agree...four years (particularly as it relates to our program) is a fair and just contract/timeline to get a "body of work" and "trajectory assessment (if you will) in place.
*In the world of football...I would readily admit that I'm a 200 level student...
Brohm was smart in that he brought in some JUCOs to bolster the defense. I’m not one of these that subscribe to this notion that Purdue was completely depleted of talent. The DL and LB veterans had played a bunch of games and they were not as bad a roster as many tried to make it out. The two QBs had game experience, even under Hazell, Blough was a top 3 QB in the league from a yardage standpoint. They just needed a coach because Hazell was terrible. Will be interesting for them this year with a bunch of senior departures.
Purdue is also susceptible to “bench strength” like a lot of teams in this conference not named OSU.
Should be an interesting game in B-town this year. Depends how beat up both teams are at that point.
I’m not sure that Purdue would have bowled last year playing in the BIG East and I think most fans know that.
Good luck this year until that final game.
Hell....Wilson got 5 seasons before he got a bowl. 4 of those were supposed “rebuilding years.” That’s a long rebuild process in this day and age and tons of blown opportunities in 2012 and 2013: Ball State, Navy (2x), Minny, Michigan we score 47 points at their place but allow 63. Those are WTF moments.
Having all of 1 player drafted to the NFL, in the 5th round, means Purdue was talented on defense? Their 2 and 5 year recruiting ranks were 71 and 72 respectively, hardly B1G level talent.
Okay. But, they had some veteran players in key positions and I think Brohm is a good coach. I liked both Robinson and the LB. We both know, however, that they wouldn’t have bowled with an East schedule. That’s just the reality of it. Very good first season for Brohm with lost opportunities against Nebraska at home and Rutgers. However, no way they beat OSU, MSU, Penn State and the lost to Michigan as a crossover.
No worries though. The smack talk belongs to Purdue this off season. You earned it.
Yeah, IU loses at least 2 possible wins every year in the east. Definitely tough there. I wonder, though whether Purdue would have gone bowling with IU's schedule:
OSU - L
Virginia - W
FIU/CSU - W
PSU - L
GS - W
UM - L
MSU - L
MARY - W
IL - W
RU - L
IU - W
There's six wins there, assuming Maryland is equal to Minnesota. Purdue SP and Run D was better last year.
IU blew the Maryland game. Special teams were so unspecial that game. I mean, both IU and PU have very thin margins for error. Much like Illinois, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland. They have to play relatively mistake free and can’t have off games and expect to come out of places of victories.
The focus and intensity was not there for Maryland. Pure and simple. It was basically a mirror image of your game against Rutgers as far as focus. We get up 2 TDs early and then mailed it in.
Those type of games are clunkers. That’s why OSU, PSU, Wisconsin MSU don’t lose much. They don’t have clunkers. Clunkers are defined as games against opponents that you should beat and you find a way to lose.
I’m willing to give Debord more than one season like most of the armchair OCs on this board. Perhaps a bit too conservative at times but his offense was limited. I want to see him with an OL that can actually function. He wanted to run the ball and the line couldn’t block well.
Everybody uses Wilson as a benchmark but fail to realize that Wilson had the same struggles in 2016 with a new QB and the loss of really strong QB play in Sudfeld and the likes of Jordan Howard and Tevin Coleman before that. When Wilson didn’t have the veteran guys as was the case in 2016, his offense wasn’t that great. Don’t even get me started on the 2014 season when he mismanaged the QB position into a position where he had to turn to a 160 lb freshman who couldn’t throw the ball 15 yards.
The guy isn’t as inept as the gurus on this board make him out to be. Michigan hired him twice in the same role and had pretty good production. Tennessee did alright with him using Dobbs.
I think he needs better dual threat QBs to run his offense and that is what he is trying to build as his profile of offense.
If his OL is better and we use two of this guys that just came on board as a true dual threat QB, I think his offense will look very different. Coaches are geniuses when they have guys that can execute the offense. IU simply didn’t have a consistent backfield. A redshirt frosh QB, a senior QB who was immobile and pressured into mistakes. A true frosh RB. All banged up throughout the year. It was pretty limited back there.
I, personally, will wait to pass judgment until I see his offense with a much better OL and a QB that can get out of some trouble when the OL is like a sieve.
Which part of this is supposed to concern me?
https://www.hoosiersportsreport.com...ing-the-course/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
He’s confident but re-evaluated things, examined weaknesses in himself, and is trying to change them. That is literally what the best leaders do.
https://www.hoosiersportsreport.com...ing-the-course/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
He’s confident but re-evaluated things, examined weaknesses in himself, and is trying to change them. That is literally what the best leaders do.
Well, the part I worry about is those graduations on defense...
Bit I like our back 4 a LOT.
I like our Husky a LOT.
LB and DE and DL gotta step up. I can see a couple that I still think have it in them - just haven't shown it yet.
Po. Tenchul.
First, thanks for posting this. Most of us were responding to the original poster without the benefit of access to the article that he cited, so you've filled that void.
I'm with you. The article provides confirmation that the guy is an effective leader and was an excellent hire.
pu would not be bowling with our schedule. if they played in the big east, they'd be toast.
Wilson and Allen didn’t inherit the same programs. And Allen doesn’t have near the pedigree Wilson had. He won’t get near as long of a leash.
Where Wilson “won” the pedigree battle, Allen handily wins the “good guy” competition, and that will likely earn him considerable leeway and job security, regardless of his record.
Allen also wins the "smart guy" competition.
Unfortunately the pedigree of his predecessor never translated to a winning season.
I think the jury is very much out on that one, as Allen clearly acknowledged in the article that is the basis for this thread. And introspection takes on many forms, with a public airing of one’s shortcomings merely a single example.
He acknowledged in the article that he's not smart? I must have missed that.
In my experience, the smartest people are those who can admit mistakes and/or shortcomings, learn from them and make the necessary changes. Check, check, check.
He acknowledged in the article that he “missed” on a number of things, as I think most people who read it can understand. I never said he wasn’t smart, only that the jury is still out on your transparent and not-so-smart assertion that he won some imaginary intelligence battle over Wilson.
If you have a coach who cannot field a semi competitive defense by his 5th year, you got more than “pedigree” problems. All of that offense...gone to waste. Build up the defense first and the offense will get up to speed quicker.
Seen the commercial with the "DAD Support Group"? The one dude says "I started telling the kids that defense wins championships".
You compared personalities. I compared intelligence which, frankly, is a lot easier to do.
First, listen to both guys talk. (I rest my case). But there's much more. Look at the approach. CKW, for example, wasn't able to establish any depth at QB. And he inexplicably brought in guys with vastly different skill sets at the position (e.g. guys who couldn't throw competing with guys who couldn't move), making for difficult transitions for the offense when one was out and the other in. Allen, in year 2, has depth in the QB room, consistency (all are dual-threat guys) and was able to recruit a 4* QB, something the supposed quarterback whisperer was never able to do. Allen saw issues with special teams and took immediate steps to address them. He saw a rash of injuries and fourth quarter fades and brought in a highly respected S&C guy. He plugged holes and filled immediate needs by bringing in three grad transfers (something Wilson never did), all of whom could be impact players this season. He's nurtured his deep high school football ties in both Indiana and Florida, with immediate dividends. He didn't debut in Bloomington by getting lost on the way back to his room and cursing out an RA along the way. He's principled, professional, and treats people the right way.
No, pal, these aren't imaginary criteria. They're all clear indicators of an effective, bright football HC who knows what he's doing.
Well, we have the chicken or the egg conversation. Not sure a good-defense-first wins you any more games during the Wilson era. To be honest, I think the offense-first helped IU football. Of course I wish we had a strong offense and defense under Wilson, but if I were to select one or the other, it would be offense. I am a defensive driven guy but I am also a realist. What type of fan support (not that it is ever good) or Big Ten publicity would result from 10-7 or 13-3 with IU having the 7 and 3, as opposed to losing but scoring points. Like it or not, the attitude of fans have changed in football as well as baseball. Folks are not excited about sound or good pitching, they want the dingers. Same in football, sad to say. You can build momentum, more fan interest and more recognition (and even a couple bowls) with offense. Not sure that happens building defense first. I remember during Suddy's final year talking with an IU grad who was never much of a IU football fan. He mentioned he was watching all the games now. When I asked why, he said even though they were pushing for 500 win % they were fun to watch. Any offensive play could be a touchdown. I think the offense built some excitement (again considering IU standards).
None of our recent games have been 10-7, yet we still had a top 30 defense, and Allen’s first offense out scored Wilson’s last offense. We ran our offense at a faster pace last year than in 2016. We managed to have 2 shut outs last season, including our first conference shut out in 25 years, by a combined score of 68-0. None of our games were even remotely close to what you described, other than the 17-9 loss at Michigan State, which was a great game against a ranked opponent on their field.
It’s kind of hard to take you seriously as a “realist” when you don’t even seem to remember the scores of the actual games. Seriously, what games are you talking about? You can go back and look pretty easily. The key to our offense will be improved offensive line play, which has plagued us for two years under two different coaches, and consistent quarterback play.
Cameron did it before and even better, I might add, with a once-in-a-lifetime player with Randel-El. He was worth the price of admission alone....so much so that only 31,000 regularly showed up. Wins are built with defense. We have tried it through offense with every coach since Mallory. Time to change the thinking.
Fun is subjective, I guess. What's fun for one can be agony for another. I wasn't having fun the day we scored 52 points but blew a 25 point lead to Rutgers. Nor was it fun watching those Navy games - - in one of them, we didn't force a single Navy punt. Or the Southern Illinois game, where we scored 48 but they put up 47 and we won only because their receiver dropped a two-point conversion pass. Or the Bowling Green game, where we scored 42 but they scored three more. Or any of the other games (there were many) involving blown 4th quarter leads.
As others have said, the "offense first" philosophy hasn't worked for us. And it's not coincidental that our only winning season in the last 20+ years featured playmakers and closers on defense (including Greg Middleton, Tracy Porter and Leslie Majors). Allen's expertise and emphasis are just what we need. And it's not like he's abandoned the offense. While some, inexplicably, seem ready to write him off, the OC who Allen brought in has pretty impressive credentials. Let's see what this year brings. I think the offense will be more than adequate.
The interviews with Allen and Debord tell us exactly where we are going on offense: dual threat QBs. Any team worth their salt thrives on that style. The only way you get away with big, rangy QBs with limited mobility is if you have an outstanding, elite OL. That’s hard to come by for this program. I think the offense looks a lot different this season and it will be the same style we tried last year only we should have better pieces in the puzzle to run the thing.
Too many of you guys are studiously negative.
Come on, you know deep down you're dying to let that optimism surface.
Edit: Well obviously my first ever attempt to create a gif was a monumental failure.
Anyway, I stand by the sentiment even without the visual.
Come on, you know deep down you're dying to let that optimism surface.
Edit: Well obviously my first ever attempt to create a gif was a monumental failure.
Anyway, I stand by the sentiment even without the visual.
Last edited:
RBB89 You sir, are a message board disappointment and want-to-be-bully. I usually try to avoid such comments and stress that they should not be made, but enough is enough. Feel free to call for my banning. In the post you responded to, I was talking hypothetically of when Wilson started to build the program and whether the offense-first mentality was better or worse than a defense-first mentality at that stage. Nothing in my post referenced the CTA era nor was I was taking shots at his specific offense/defense focus. Does my reference to wishing we had both a good offense and a good defense during the Wilson era, not make that clear? Why the need to run to defense of CTA and staff? I believe, in an earlier post, I have even stated that I think the jury is still out on our OC. There are a couple folks on this board who are way to protective of the staff, even to the point of running to their defense when no attack is intended. I understand your administration point of view, but why comments like "[H]ard to take you seriously as a realist.."? A lot of good posters have left this board or rarely participate. My money is on the fact that a couple folks just can't allow anything opposite of their views to be posted without running to the staff/administrations defense and many just don't want to deal with this. I have been an IU football fan since the 1970s and I either attend or watch about every game (some are even watched multiple times via DVR). I need no allegations that I don't know last year's scores. Good luck board.
First, I'm not a mod and I've only been here for a year and a half but I get the sense that bannings are limited to people who are trolls, instigators and/or those who continually trash the program. My impression is that most posters and, more importantly, the mods are tolerant of everyone who doesn't fall within any of those categories.
Your comment that the jury is out on the OC is a fair call. However, there are other posters who, after just one season, want to run him (and the HC, for that matter) out of town. I don't think it's surprising, then, that there are posters here who react defensively to staff criticism.
I'll say this about last year's offense. It wasn't very good. But it wasn't very good the year before when our impressive pedigree/offensive genius HC was still at the helm. To your point earlier in the thread (about DeBord's offenses at Tennessee), talent can make coaches look really good. Conversely, when a coach's talent drops off and he loses guys like Spriggs, Coleman, Howard and Sudfeld to the NFL, the coach doesn't always look like such a genius.
I'm anxious to see what this year brings.
A long time. IU needs stability more than anything. He's good with defense and special teams. He's done good with hiring staff. He's done well in recruiting. In 2 years hes brought in more speed and more size. Hes good at finding grad transfers. I'm concerned with his knowledge of offense and Debord is a very conservative OC although with his age, I doubt he's around long. Bottom line here, is I see some Terry Heoppner in Tom Allen. Terry, himself was a HS coach and didn't exactly set the world on fire there or when he arrived in the MAC. He got a lot better. Allen will too. But I think he's more of a 6-7 win per year guy. Im not sure I see us going 11-1 and going to the Rose Bowl.
Hell, Kevin Wilson was a HS HC, went like 1-9, and we hired him from a coordinator job with no college HC experience.
It’s a dumb argument. TA has been coaching in college for 10 years, including the SEC.
I think the stars lined up for Indiana to get CTA as head coach. If Indiana go six and six for the next three years the CTA supporters will say Indiana has obtained respectability while his detractors will say Indiana is wallowed in mediocrity.
I have no idea how much Indiana has improved during the off-season compared to the rest of the Big 10. If the Hoosiers have another year like last year but continue to fill in the holes on the depth chart then I will consider it another good season. Many of us have watched too many starts and stops over the last few decades. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I have no idea how much Indiana has improved during the off-season compared to the rest of the Big 10. If the Hoosiers have another year like last year but continue to fill in the holes on the depth chart then I will consider it another good season. Many of us have watched too many starts and stops over the last few decades. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Watching Lagow roll out last season was like watching Mc Roberts getting an open look behind the three-point line. That’s going to change this year for both teams. The Hoosier offense is going to be much more difficult to defend the season because they are going to have a stable of mobile quarterbacks.
Correction: Wilson went 0-10 as a high school head coach. Never should’ve hired him, I guess.
Similar threads
