Trading MSU for Purdue in the divisions

[mushroomgod_1]

Why shouldn't this be done, at least on a 5 year basis until Nebraska gets its shit together?

You could drop IU-Purdue as the single protected crossover game and replace it with MSU-UM.

MSU's schedule would then be UM, ILL, Iowa, MN, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin + 1 more crossover annually. Right now it's UM, OSU, PSU, IU, Rutgers, Maryland, + 2 crossovers. From MSU's perspective it would give them a better chance to win a division. They don't play OSU & PSU every year, but pick up Wisky & Nebraska, 2 big games they can actually win.

Purdue probably wouldn't like it, but nobody cares what they think.

I can't see UM, PSU & OSU letting this imbalance continue much longer, nor should it. It was the right division at the time, but Nebraska & Iowa are fading, as least in the short run. Right now, the BT West may be the weakest division in college football, and the East the strongest.

 

[76-1]

Why shouldn't this be done, at least on a 5 year basis until Nebraska gets its shit together?

You could drop IU-Purdue as the single protected crossover game and replace it with MSU-UM.

MSU's schedule would then be UM, ILL, Iowa, MN, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin + 1 more crossover annually. Right now it's UM, OSU, PSU, IU, Rutgers, Maryland, + 2 crossovers. From MSU's perspective it would give them a better chance to win a division. They don't play OSU & PSU every year, but pick up Wisky & Nebraska, 2 big games they can actually win.

Purdue probably wouldn't like it, but nobody cares what they think.

I can't see UM, PSU & OSU letting this imbalance continue much longer, nor should it. It was the right division at the time, but Nebraska & Iowa are fading, as least in the short run. Right now, the BT West may be the weakest division in college football, and the East the strongest.

I like your thinking when it comes to not caring what pu thinks, and your concept is a solid one but the Big Ten front office is not likely to change anything as long as the league money makers are routinely getting into well paying Bowls. They could care less about "fair"... Ohio State and MI would never vote for it because they fear having to face another potentially difficult opponent in the Big Ten Championship at neutral site...

 

[ElMeson]

B1G East vs West

2014 7-7
2015 7-7
2016 11-10 West
2017 9-4 East
OSU/PSU/Mich 20-5
Rest of the East 13-24

We can’t beat Maryland. This is extremely over blown. We should beat Rutgers and Maryland in the East and Illinois and Purdue in the West. Nebraska is down a bit but how long? NW has been a much better program than us. Iowa? Right now OSU and PSU are head and shoulders above the rest of the east and Wisconsin is the same in the West. Outside of those 3 teams, everyone else is almost equal. This fan base has excuses for everything from AD, OC, recruits, B1G, refs and even media members. Jezzzz we are a bunch of pussies!!!

 

[76-1]

I don't think the staff feels this way. They appear to embrace the tough schedule. It's a selling point for the recruits: play the best and make em pay for not respecting you...

 

[ElMeson]

Why shouldn't this be done, at least on a 5 year basis until Nebraska gets its shit together?

You could drop IU-Purdue as the single protected crossover game and replace it with MSU-UM.



I can't see UM, PSU & OSU letting this imbalance continue much longer, nor should it.

I highly doubt this. Why would they schedule Florida and Oklahoma? If you paid attention, Wisconsin is being penalized for its week schedule. Do you honestly think they want to take a quality team out and replace it with a inferior school and risk not getting in the playoffs? Bottom line is we just need to get better.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Why shouldn't this be done, at least on a 5 year basis until Nebraska gets its shit together?

You could drop IU-Purdue as the single protected crossover game and replace it with MSU-UM.

MSU's schedule would then be UM, ILL, Iowa, MN, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin + 1 more crossover annually. Right now it's UM, OSU, PSU, IU, Rutgers, Maryland, + 2 crossovers. From MSU's perspective it would give them a better chance to win a division. They don't play OSU & PSU every year, but pick up Wisky & Nebraska, 2 big games they can actually win.

Purdue probably wouldn't like it, but nobody cares what they think.

I can't see UM, PSU & OSU letting this imbalance continue much longer, nor should it. It was the right division at the time, but Nebraska & Iowa are fading, as least in the short run. Right now, the BT West may be the weakest division in college football, and the East the strongest.

OSU, PSU, Mich, MSU, all want to play each other.

and Neb fans feel like they got bait and switched when they joined the B10, since they're now separated from the marquis schools in the east, who were the schools they most looked forward to playing every yr when they joined..

it would be great to play a 6th bowl game this yr.

the way i see it, IU plays at least 4 bowl games every yr, and PU, and a 5th one already with UW this yr.

embrace it.

 

[oldcougar77]

I highly doubt this. Why would they schedule Florida and Oklahoma? If you paid attention, Wisconsin is being penalized for its week schedule. Do you honestly think they want to take a quality team out and replace it with a inferior school and risk not getting in the playoffs? Bottom line is we just need to get better.

The problem with realignment is that the current system works well for 13 of the 14 teams. We are the lone red-headed stepchild in this conference setup. It makes sense geographically and everybody else gets a competitive setup. Maryland and Rutgers face the same uphill battle as us to win, but they want to be where PSU and OSU are. With the infusion of massive UnderArmour money and freebies, we are going to be looking up at Maryland as well. Right smack in the process of finally making a commitment to football and trying to build a competitive program, we got kicked in the 'nads by this realignment. Never has it been more apparent than this year. We got beaten up by having five of the best programs in the conference as the first six conference games. Getting physically beaten into submission by the first four played a huge role in our performance at Maryland imo - the one conference opponent we actually were favored to beat. In addition, that game was on the road.

It's just our fate, and the ongoing saga of IU football that we can't seem to catch a break in the schedule in a year when we are finally talented enough to perhaps have a winning record. I don't know if there is anything IU administrators could have done to prevent this particular conference alignment, but I am beginning to believe it was a death blow to our attempt to finally build a winning football program. The conference's decision to give both OSU and PSU less than minimal punishments for major transgressions, and the rebirth of Michigan as a national power under Harbaugh have sealed our fate. We can't compete with UM, PSU, OSU, or Maryland financially or from a recruiting perspective, and MSU has a huge head start on us from a respectability standpoint. I fear our best hope going forward is getting 3 conference wins (maybe 4 if we get a "down" MSU or Md at home and a favorable home game with somebody from the west) and trying to win our 3 noncons to get to 6 wins and a minor bowl.

 

[td75]

If they're going to do realignment, they need to do a North and South realignment. This East/West alignment is pitiful and embarrassing. The way it looks, Michigan is hurting over this current alignment. The resurgence of PSU with Franklin has hurt them. It's frustrating that PSU recovered so well from such heinous crimes.

I don't trust Jim Delaney or the Big Ten. I don't think they support IU football one bit.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

The problem with realignment is that the current system works well for 13 of the 14 teams. We are the lone red-headed stepchild in this conference setup. It makes sense geographically and everybody else gets a competitive setup. Maryland and Rutgers face the same uphill battle as us to win, but they want to be where PSU and OSU are. With the infusion of massive UnderArmour money and freebies, we are going to be looking up at Maryland as well. Right smack in the process of finally making a commitment to football and trying to build a competitive program, we got kicked in the 'nads by this realignment. Never has it been more apparent than this year. We got beaten up by having five of the best programs in the conference as the first six conference games. Getting physically beaten into submission by the first four played a huge role in our performance at Maryland imo - the one conference opponent we actually were favored to beat. In addition, that game was on the road.

It's just our fate, and the ongoing saga of IU football that we can't seem to catch a break in the schedule in a year when we are finally talented enough to perhaps have a winning record. I don't know if there is anything IU administrators could have done to prevent this particular conference alignment, but I am beginning to believe it was a death blow to our attempt to finally build a winning football program. The conference's decision to give both OSU and PSU less than minimal punishments for major transgressions, and the rebirth of Michigan as a national power under Harbaugh have sealed our fate. We can't compete with UM, PSU, OSU, or Maryland financially or from a recruiting perspective, and MSU has a huge head start on us from a respectability standpoint. I fear our best hope going forward is getting 3 conference wins (maybe 4 if we get a "down" MSU or Md at home and a favorable home game with somebody from the west) and trying to win our 3 noncons to get to 6 wins and a minor bowl.

I love your first sentence. I guess its not a popular opinion on here, but I think you're right. I would also say its not in MSU's interest either, but they're probably too proud to admit it.

It's only going to get worse. Michigan's going to be a lot better in 1-2 years. OSU & PSU are #s 1 & 3 in Rivals recruiting in the country. IMO, MD and Rutgers have more upside than Purdue and Illinois. MD has the $. Rutgers has the recruiting base. Meanwhile, Nebraska will struggle for at least 3 years with a new coach. Our roster next year may be more talented than theirs.

Here we are scheduling Ga Southern and FIU to get as many cream puffs on the schedule as possible, then we have a BT schedule that will have 3 top 10 and 1 top 20 team year end, year out. Plus whatever we get on the crossovers.

 

[snowling]

And what makes you think Nebraska is going to get it's shit together, Mushroom? Not feeling it where I live.

Go Hoosiers!

 

[mushroomgod_1]

And what makes you think Nebraska is going to get it's shit together, Mushroom? Not feeling it where I live.

Go Hoosiers!

My thought is that they couldn't have gotten a worse fit for their football culture than Mike Riley. He'll be gone after this year and it will take them 3-4 years to recover. If they get someone like Frost they have a chance to recover......but I agree it's iffy because they have no recruiting base. Right now it's probably a top 20 job only. But you also have a chance when you're getting 90000 people to your games.

 

[UncleMark]

The problem with realignment is that the current system works well for 13 of the 14 teams.

That says it all. It's not like we're in a position of influence when it comes to B1G football decisions. Give Glass credit for getting the PU-IU crossover game locked in.

 

[Bowlmania]

Give Glass credit for getting the PU-IU crossover game locked in.

And thank God for this, because our bowl-qualifying wins the past two years have come at the expense of bad Purdue teams.

Something tells me that bowl eligibility will, again this year, come down to the last game of the season, but the new and improved Boilers will not be an easy out.

 

[YOTHN]

I think the logic behind east and west is unnecessary. They should put the teams into different categories.

A
Ohio State

B
Michigan
Wisconsin
Penn State
Michigan State

C
Nebraska
Iowa

D
Minny
Northwestern

E
The rest

So an equal breakdown of:

Ohio State
Michigan State
Iowa
Minnesota
Northwestern
Illinois
Rutgers

Michigan
Wisconsin
Penn State
Nebraska
Indiana
Maryland
Purdue

 

[SCOOTER59]

My realignment


NORTH DIVISION - SOUTH DIVISION

MICHIGAN - OHIO STATE

MICHIGAN STATE - PENN STATE

RUTGERS - MARYLAND

ILLINOIS - PURDUE

NORTHWESTERN - INDIANA

MINNESOTA - IOWA

WISCONSIN - NEBRASKA

Each team plays every team in their division + (1) protected rival (team directly across)(ie Mich/OSU, IU/NW,etc) + (2) rotating teams from the other division.

 

[76-1]

Wellllll....., one more time, with more enthusiasm, here's my solution:

Toughen the West and water down the East by adding these 6 teams:
Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State in the West; along with, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Temple in the East.

Everyone plays everyone else in their respective division (that's 9 opponents), everyone plays a cross-divisional game (seeded by best to worst over the most recent 8 year stretch) [that makes 10 opponents], everyone can pick a protected cross divisional rivalry game to be locked in (that's 11 opponents), and everyone gets to schedule one out of conference opponent (that makes 12).

Fred, you can pitch it as your idea if you can make it happen...

A sample future IU schedule would look something like this:

Fl Int
UMass
CT
Rutgers
Temple
MD
Penn St
M$U
MI
O$U
IL
PU

That type of schedule gives us a routinely fair shot at 6-8 wins and a Bowl game and should do the same for all but the most downtrodden (i.e. Kansas)..., while not upsetting the status quo for the heavy hitters in most years (in my opinion).

 

[ElMeson]

I love your first sentence. I guess its not a popular opinion on here, but I think you're right. I would also say its not in MSU's interest either, but they're probably too proud to admit it.

It's only going to get worse. Michigan's going to be a lot better in 1-2 years. OSU & PSU are #s 1 & 3 in Rivals recruiting in the country. IMO, MD and Rutgers have more upside than Purdue and Illinois. MD has the $. Rutgers has the recruiting base. Meanwhile, Nebraska will struggle for at least 3 years with a new coach. Our roster next year may be more talented than theirs.

Here we are scheduling Ga Southern and FIU to get as many cream puffs on the schedule as possible, then we have a BT schedule that will have 3 top 10 and 1 top 20 team year end, year out. Plus whatever we get on the crossovers.

I understand your point but it honestly just simply means... Get better. Which we have to a degree.

Wellllll....., one more time, with more enthusiasm, here's my solution:

Toughen the West and water down the East by adding these 6 teams:
Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State in the West; along with, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Temple in the East.

Everyone plays everyone else in their respective division (that's 9 opponents), everyone plays a cross-divisional game (seeded by best to worst over the most recent 8 year stretch) [that makes 10 opponents], everyone can pick a protected cross divisional rivalry game to be locked in (that's 11 opponents), and everyone gets to schedule one out of conference opponent (that makes 12).

Fred, you can pitch it as your idea if you can make it happen...

Wellllll....., one more time, with more enthusiasm, here's my solution:

Toughen the West and water down the East by adding these 6 teams:
Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State in the West; along with, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Temple in the East.

Everyone plays everyone else in their respective division (that's 9 opponents), everyone plays a cross-divisional game (seeded by best to worst over the most recent 8 year stretch) [that makes 10 opponents], everyone can pick a protected cross divisional rivalry game to be locked in (that's 11 opponents), and everyone gets to schedule one out of conference opponent (that makes 12).

Fred, you can pitch it as your idea if you can make it happen...

The B1G didn’t add Rutgers for academics or athletes, it was simply for NY tv. OU isn’t going anywhere w/o OSU and the B1G already has the Philly market. I could see a scenario that eventually brings OU, OSU, Texas and UNC. Obviously OU, OSU and Texas to the West. UNC to the East along with Purdue and Illinois.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

the real problem here is having divisions at all.

the league will tell you that per NCAA rules we have to have 2 divisions, and have said divisions each play a round robin schedule, in order to play a conference champ game.

while technically that's true, it's only true because the B10 office wants it that way.

i have no doubt that rule could be changed tomorrow if Delany wished it. .

the B12 just had the rule altered so a conference with less than 12 schools can play a CCG.

the ACC has also expressed interest in changing the rule.

i have no doubt Delany wants MSU, Mich, PSU, OSU, all playing each other every yr, and all playing RU and UMd every yr, for TV reasons..

thus Delany doesn't want that rule changed.

i hate having divisions, as it basically made 2 separate conferences of the B10 for football.

further expansion, which Delany also wants, will only further divide the conference.

i hate no longer playing Iowa, Minn, Wisc, Ill, NW, on a regular basis, but i would also hate losing OSU, Mich, MSU, on a regular basis.

doing away with the 2 division round robin mandate would be best for B10 fans imo, but fans rarely enter into these type decisions, and even less so with Delany, who has no fan base, alumni, or donors, to answer to.

the problem everybody here sees could be fixed tomorrow with not much more than the snap of Delany's fingers.

it won't be, because Delany doesn't want it fixed.

Neb fans are pissed because they joined the conference thinking they'd play Mich/OSU/MSU/PSU on a regular basis, and got bait and switched when we went to divisions.

Wisc fans want to play the east elites as well.

i'm guessing Iowa and Minn fans as well.

(no, the coaches no doubt don't want to play the better teams at all).

just do away with the ridiculous outdated 2 division round robin mandate rule that was put in pre tv, (1930s maybe), and it will be a huge plus for Big 10 fans in both current divisions.

just do it, problem solved.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

the real problem here is having divisions at all.

the league will tell you that per NCAA rules we have to have 2 divisions, and have said divisions each play a round robin schedule, in order to play a conference champ game.

while technically that's true, it's only true because the B10 office wants it that way.

i have no doubt that rule could be changed tomorrow if Delany wished it. .

the B12 just had the rule altered so a conference with less than 12 schools can play a CCG.

the ACC has also expressed interest in changing the rule.

i have no doubt Delany wants MSU, Mich, PSU, OSU, all playing each other every yr, and all playing RU and UMd every yr, for TV reasons..

thus Delany doesn't want that rule changed.

i hate having divisions, as it basically made 2 separate conferences of the B10 for football.

further expansion, which Delany also wants, will only further divide the conference.

i hate no longer playing Iowa, Minn, Wisc, Ill, NW, on a regular basis, but i would also hate losing OSU, Mich, MSU, on a regular basis.

doing away with the 2 division round robin mandate would be best for B10 fans imo, but fans rarely enter into these type decisions, and even less so with Delany, who has no fan base, alumni, or donors, to answer to.

the problem everybody here sees could be fixed tomorrow with not much more than the snap of Delany's fingers.

it won't be, because Delany doesn't want it fixed.

Neb fans are pissed because they joined the conference thinking they'd play Mich/OSU/MSU/PSU on a regular basis, and got bait and switched when we went to divisions.

Wisc fans want to play the east elites as well.

i'm guessing Iowa and Minn fans as well.

(no, the coaches no doubt don't want to play the better teams at all).

just do away with the ridiculous outdated 2 division round robin mandate rule that was put in pre tv, (1930s maybe), and it will be a huge plus for Big 10 fans in both current divisions.

just do it, problem solved.

I agree this would be better.

You could still have each team playing 2 of the schools each year so that rivalries are maintained----um would play MSU & OSU, Minnesota to play iowa & wisconsin, OSU plays UM & PSU, and so on

 

[mushroomgod_1]

I agree this would be better.



































You could still have each team playing 2 of the schools each year so that rivalries are maintained----um would play MSU & OSU, Minnesota to play iowa & wisconsin, OSU plays UM & PSU, and so on

Actually, thinking about this further, the 9 game BT schedule has helped a lot with regard to playing the WD teams more frequently. Now, every team other than IU & PUR plays each other division team an average of 1/2 years. For IU & PUR, its an average of 1/3 years. So we still play RU & MD 3 times as often as Illinois, NW, Iowa et al, which is pretty ****ed up but better than it was.

There is nothing preventing IU from playing one of ILL, NW, or Iowa every year as a "non-conference" game.....I'd try to do that if I was Glass.

 

[jsglenn4]

the real problem here is having divisions at all.

^^^ The heart of the problem.

It's futile to chase a balanced alignment unless you revisit it every 6 or 7 years and no one wants that either. We're not going to contract if it means sacrificing revenue. I favor just putting everyone into the same pile. There will be scheduling inequities for sure, but no worse than we have now.

 

[crossfire74]

Why shouldn't this be done, at least on a 5 year basis until Nebraska gets its shit together?

You could drop IU-Purdue as the single protected crossover game and replace it with MSU-UM.

MSU's schedule would then be UM, ILL, Iowa, MN, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin + 1 more crossover annually. Right now it's UM, OSU, PSU, IU, Rutgers, Maryland, + 2 crossovers. From MSU's perspective it would give them a better chance to win a division. They don't play OSU & PSU every year, but pick up Wisky & Nebraska, 2 big games they can actually win.

Purdue probably wouldn't like it, but nobody cares what they think.

I can't see UM, PSU & OSU letting this imbalance continue much longer, nor should it. It was the right division at the time, but Nebraska & Iowa are fading, as least in the short run. Right now, the BT West may be the weakest division in college football, and the East the strongest.

The true issue is the crapfest that Nebraska football has become, so to balance it out, the best option is for MSU and Michigan to go west and Northwestern and Purdue to go East. That gives each division 3 really good programs in each division and a little more fairness to those at the bottom end trying to work their way up.

You'd still have your marque match ups each week and you are much more likely to get someone to a playoff game. That will be the driving force at the end of the day for realignment. If the Big Ten keeps missing the playoffs like they will this season, then financially they will make the change. Wisconsin will likely still be part of the New Years 6, but I don't see them going into the Big Ten championship game and beating either OSU or PSU or MSU. Not going to happen.

 

[indy1203]

I don't think the staff feels this way. They appear to embrace the tough schedule. It's a selling point for the recruits: play the best and make em pay for not respecting you...

How can L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L etc.
possibly be a selling point?

 

[Dick nixon]

How can L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L etc.
possibly be a selling point?

You get to put out tape against high end competition.

As for the big division argument do you think Arkansas fans feel the same way?

I say embrace the fact the B10 has some great coaches and talent right now. it will push our ceiling higher.

 

[OldStyle1902]

I think the logic behind east and west is unnecessary. They should put the teams into different categories.

A
Ohio State

B
Michigan
Wisconsin
Penn State
Michigan State

C
Nebraska
Iowa

D
Minny
Northwestern

E
The rest

So an equal breakdown of:

Ohio State
Michigan State
Iowa
Minnesota
Northwestern
Illinois
Rutgers

Michigan
Wisconsin
Penn State
Nebraska
Indiana
Maryland
Purdue

During the most recent alignment MSU and Purdue were historically considered the middle teams and that is why the two schools were split. This was obviously pre-hazell... IU was in the bottom tier with Illinois, NW, Minnesota, Rutgers and UMD.

IU

 

[YOTHN]

During the most recent alignment MSU and Purdue were historically considered the middle teams and that is why the two schools were split.

lol That's why it's so funny. PU a middle of the pack team. ha Right!

 

[boiler1987]

lol That's why it's so funny. PU a middle of the pack team. ha Right!

We’re in the 8-10 range so a little worse than middle of the pack but not in the bottom. Below us would be IU, NW, Rutgers, and Illinois. Maryland and Purdue are pretty similar for that 9/10 spot. If you looked at things a decade ago, Purdue is likely a few spots better but they’ve slipped due to Hazell and Hope.

 

[indy1203]

You get to put out tape against high end competition.

As for the big division argument do you think Arkansas fans feel the same way?

I say embrace the fact the B10 has some great coaches and talent right now. it will push our ceiling higher.

I fail to see any advantage in putting out tape showing
the team getting pounded.

Arky is not complaining about their division
assignment, but they are complaining about
their coach.

While a rising tide lifts all boats it does not
change the fact some are yachts and others
are a dinghy.

 

[td75]

You know what annoys me about this free board?? Purdue people coming here and preaching to this board about how purdue is a really decent football program.

No you're not! IU has a great opportunity of beating you people for the 5th straight time. You folks have a sucky town and campus, sucky facilities that Harbaugh called out, and truthfully, mediocre results throughout history. What a recruiting nightmare that place must be, sheesh.

Let me tell you the truth, Kentucky has a better football story than you people. One more thing, IF KW would've had any kind of appreciation for defense at all, he would've had a bunch of 8-10 win seasons in 12', 13', 14', & 15', won the conference outright in 15', and left you folks in the dust forever. Wilson actually proved that it can be done at iu.

 

[boiler1987]

You know what annoys me about this free board?? Purdue people coming here and preaching to this board about how purdue is a really decent football program.

No you're not! IU has a great opportunity of beating you people for the 5th straight time. You folks have a sucky town and campus, sucky facilities that Harbaugh called out, and truthfully, mediocre results throughout history. What a recruiting nightmare that place must be, sheesh.

Let me tell you the truth, Kentucky has a better football story than you people. One more thing, IF KW would've had any kind of appreciation for defense at all, he would've had a bunch of 8-10 win seasons in 12', 13', 14', & 15', won the conference outright in 15', and left you folks in the dust forever. Wilson actually proved that it can be done at iu.

You really do enjoy repeating yourself don’t you? You claim it’s a recruiting nightmare. If that’s the case, why did our newest commitment from Staten Island say that “The campus was great and it was big and diverse.” I’ll take what an actual recruit says over your thoughts any day of the week. What will you say when we continue to land good recruits? And no Kentucky does not have a better history than Purdue since they are a sub .500 team historically while Purdue isn’t. Do you actually do any research before posting?

8-10 win seasons?! That might be the funniest thing I’ve heard in a long time. Wilson proved he could have a good offense (Tiller did the same) but it’s not realistic to expect you would’ve had a bunch of 8-10 win seasons. Tiller had a great offense and a great defense and never won 10 games.

 

[td75]

I don't know why you can't believe that 8-10 win seasons were there for the taking with just an average defense. I don't see what's funny about it.

IU led the conference in offense, if Tom Allen was around in 2015 to coach the defense, iu probably wins the Big Ten East. Most people are unaware of that fact. That does sound weird, I'll admit that.lol

 

[Dick nixon]

I fail to see any advantage in putting out tape showing
the team getting pounded.
.

It’s not always about the team for recruits. For some it’s about building skills for the next stop.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

How can L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L etc.
possibly be a selling point?

looks like you over exaggerated the Ls there guy.. did you think your case needed that much exaggeration?

that said, some people would rather play Augusta National and shoot 90, than play the local muni and shoot 75.

others are just the opposite.

for those who'd rather shoot 75 at the local muni, there just is no way for those who'd rather play Augusta to explain it to them.

either you have that ultra competitive gene that makes you prefer to compete against the best and risk more and greater defeat, or you don't.

that said, while watching IU football the last few seasons has had too many gut wrenching losses, on the whole i can't remember watching that many really fun games against really good opposition, that had me on the edge of my seat to the last or near last play, over several yrs, than the last several yrs.

that said, don't underestimate the west.

all i care about is beating Ill right now.

 

[oldcougar77]

We’re in the 8-10 range so a little worse than middle of the pack but not in the bottom. Below us would be IU, NW, Rutgers, and Illinois. Maryland and Purdue are pretty similar for that 9/10 spot. If you looked at things a decade ago, Purdue is likely a few spots better but they’ve slipped due to Hazell and Hope.

Since 1970 Purdue has enjoyed exactly seven winning seasons when anybody not named Joe Tiller was coaching. Three of those were bunched together under Jim Young from 1978-1980. It seems to me that in the past 50 years Purdue has been pretty dismal when anybody else was coaching. That makes Joe Tiller, not Darrell Hazell, the exception and the statistical outlier.

Bottom line, other than the Tiller years, PUke has been right there with us among the bottom feeders. So much for that proud historically relevant bs you guys pretend to possess.

 

[PurdueTiger]

Since 1970 Purdue has enjoyed exactly seven winning seasons when anybody not named Joe Tiller was coaching. Three of those were bunched together under Jim Young from 1978-1980. It seems to me that in the past 50 years Purdue has been pretty dismal when anybody else was coaching. That makes Joe Tiller, not Darrell Hazell, the exception and the statistical outlier.

Bottom line, other than the Tiller years, PUke has been right there with us among the bottom feeders. So much for that proud historically relevant bs you guys pretend to possess.

And in this decade Purdue has only 14 conference wins,with IU having 13 Big Ten victories.Pretty sad for both teams isn't it?The conference started letting teams go to bowls other than the Rose Bowl about 1975,and I think 1979 and 2007 were the only years both teams went bowling.Is it any wonder basketball has been the main focus of the rivalry for the last 30 plus years?

 

[boiler1987]

Since 1970 Purdue has enjoyed exactly seven winning seasons when anybody not named Joe Tiller was coaching. Three of those were bunched together under Jim Young from 1978-1980. It seems to me that in the past 50 years Purdue has been pretty dismal when anybody else was coaching. That makes Joe Tiller, not Darrell Hazell, the exception and the statistical outlier.

Bottom line, other than the Tiller years, PUke has been right there with us among the bottom feeders. So much for that proud historically relevant bs you guys pretend to possess.

No we haven’t been “right there” with you guys. We’re not trying to act like we’re some historical powerhouse. We’re a middle of the road program so average. That’s a far cry from a bottom feeder.

 

[oldcougar77]

Purdue is the 35th football ranked program of all time and IU is the second worst program of all-time ahead of NW. The 4 year haze is over...

Kevin Wilson got you to your high water mark of 6-7 and you canned him for a high school coach.

And that doesn't change who you have been in the last 50 years. As I tell my students, just because the kid next to you got an F and you got a D, that doesn't make you smart.

Nobody here has made the assertion that IU is better than anybody. I'm just busting the illusion that you PUke trolls on here keep trying to sell that Purdue suddenly went from penthouse to outhouse in four years under Darrell Hazell. Joe Tiller had a special run at Purdue. Everybody else since Jack Mollenkopf was no better than mediocre. You guys aren't at the top of anything football-wise since players stopped playing two-ways and started wearing facemasks.

The fact that you continue to lurk here obsessing over every perceived slight that IU fans might toss at your beloved Boilers in any thread is pretty convincing evidence that you epitomize the little brother syndrome so rampant among your faithful.

 

[indy1203]

looks like you over exaggerated the Ls there guy.. did you think your case needed that much exaggeration?

that said, some people would rather play Augusta National and shoot 90, than play the local muni and shoot 75.

others are just the opposite.

for those who'd rather shoot 75 at the local muni, there just is no way for those who'd rather play Augusta to explain it to them.

either you have that ultra competitive gene that makes you prefer to compete against the best and risk more and greater defeat, or you don't.

that said, while watching IU football the last few seasons has had too many gut wrenching losses, on the whole i can't remember watching that many really fun games against really good opposition, that had me on the edge of my seat to the last or near last play, over several yrs, than the last several yrs.

that said, don't underestimate the west.

all i care about is beating Ill right now.

DiNardo picking ILL.

 

[PurdueTiger]

DiNardo picking ILL.

If IU loses to Illinois,I will be totally shocked.The Illini are awful.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Purdue is the 35th football ranked program of all time and IU is the second worst program of all-time ahead of NW. The 4 year haze is over...

Kevin Wilson got you to your high water mark of 6-7 and you canned him for a high school coach.

What are you talking about?!? Purdue is barely a .500 program. Purdue has had multiple dud coaches as of late: Burtnett, Colletto, Akers, Hazell. Danny Hope was nothing to write home about.

As of right now, Brohm hasn't done anything that Hazell hasn't done, even while having the advantage of not being in the BT East. Yes, Tiller was the anomaly. You would have a hard time seeing a difference between him and Mallory if Tiller plays UM and OSU during his first couple years and he coaches another year or two at the end.