Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--...medium=twitter

    Pat Forde seems to think it's a foregone conclusion that Hope is gone. Good news for Boiler fans.
    Better than keeping him. But you're not gonna get much better when Burke keeps letting the general fund siphon 3 million off the BTN money and still have to make the athletic department at least break even. Big conference athletic departments don't work like a steel company so stop making Burke pretend they do.

    Get what we pay for. Pay out or keep sucking. And keep sucking in football that eats into every sport's budget, including mens hoops. We ain't Kentucky, we can't spend an entire football year's recruiting budget on our Midnight Madness like them.

    Comment


    • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

      17/5/2 for Smooge tonight. Guy's been killing it.

      Comment


      • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

        Football, but I thought this might be interesting to some of those guys wondering "so whats next"

        Ranking top head-coaching candidates
        November, 7, 2012
        NOV 7 12:20 PM ET


        Sonny Dykes will likely have the attention of several athletic directors this offseason.
        If you have not seen or read Sonny Dykes' name by now, it might be time for familiarization. Dykes, the 42-year-old coach of the Louisiana Tech Bulldogs, is quickly becoming one of the more buzzed-about names for open or soon-to-be-open coaching jobs. Yes, the college football hot stove season has arrived.

        I'd venture to say that Dykes is the No. 1 name to watch in this cycle of the carousel. (Read on for my ranking of the other sitting head coaches and top coordinators who will soon be considered for new gigs.)

        While the possibilities for Dykes and others -- Arkansas and Kentucky are among the current vacancies in the country's top conference -- are considered, he still has a job to do.

        "You can't worry about that. It's not something you're in control of," Dykes said Tuesday night. "You owe it to your players and Louisiana Tech to put 100 percent of our focus into doing the best we can. There's a time later to think about other things."

        Dykes said it's flattering to hear his name surface, although he assigned credit for that to his flourishing Louisiana Tech program and his coaching staff.

        When Derek Dooley left Tech for the Tennessee Volunteers, he was 17-20 there, including 4-8 in his third season. Many looked at that, shrugged and said, Well, it's hard to win in Ruston.

        Dykes, previously Arizona's offensive coordinator and the son of longtime Texas Tech coach Spike Dykes, didn't see it that way.

        "I always thought Tech had potential because it's such a great area to recruit in," said Sonny Dykes, the 2011 WAC Coach of the Year. "On the outside looking in, you thought it would be a good place, just being in Louisiana and [close to] Texas and Arkansas and Mississippi, just the surrounding states play such good football. If you've got a recruiting base, you've got a chance to be good."

        Like under Dooley, the Bulldogs went 8-5 in Dykes' second season. But unlike Dooley's tenure, they've built upon that in Year 3.

        Louisiana Tech is 8-1. At 19th in The Associated Press poll and 20th in the BCS standings, the Bulldogs are the highest-rated non-AQ program, and their only loss is to 15th-ranked Texas A&M.

        Dykes' senior quarterback, Colby Cameron, has thrown 24 touchdowns and zero interceptions in 358 attempts. Senior receiver Quinton Patton is already at 1,000 yards, backing up his 1,200-yard season in 2011.

        Offense is pacing the Bulldogs. They're second to Oregon in scoring (52.4 points per game). They needed all of those points, and then some, to try to claw back in that one loss. Texas A&M led 39-13 in the second quarter of the teams' Oct. 13 track meet. Tech came up a two-point conversion shy in a 59-57 defeat. Losing to A&M is far from criminal; everyone on its schedule has, except Florida and LSU (by a total of eight points).

        Expect Kentucky to make one of the first pushes for Dykes. Offensive-minded coaches inherently provide a boost to beleaguered fan bases (see: James Franklin at Vanderbilt), and Dykes spent the 1997 and 1999 seasons as an assistant coach at Kentucky.

        One subplot: Should Dykes land in the SEC, it could provide for an ironic return for Louisiana Tech offensive coordinator Tony Franklin. Franklin's stay at Auburn lasted only a year and a half before he was fired.

        Other current head coaches
        With Dykes holding down the No. 1 spot, here is the rest of my ranking of the current head coaches who are most likely to be moving on to bigger and better jobs after the season.

        2. Willie Taggart, Western Kentucky Hilltoppers
        A couple of years ago, ESPN The Magazine had me doing anonymous Sun Belt surveys, and the majority of those polled agreed that Western Kentucky was the worst job in the league. It had just made the leap from the Football Championship Subdivision, and hope was rather bleak in basketball-centric Bowling Green.

        Taggart has altered perceptions in a short period of time. After an 0-4 start in 2011, Western won seven of its final eight games, the exception being against then-No. 1 LSU. This season, the Hilltoppers are 6-3 and have a win at Kentucky.

        It's assumed that Taggart could get a look from Southern programs, but his three years as an assistant at Stanford (2007-09) broaden his prospects to other parts of the country.

        3. Tommy Tuberville, Texas Tech Red Raiders
        It wasn't long ago that Tuberville was on the hot seat. Now he is one of the more popular names for the Arkansas job. A 6-1 start for the Red Raiders, including wins against West Virginia and TCU, was the boost he needed.

        Tuberville would be a fit in Fayetteville, given his background in the division -- he was at Ole Miss and Auburn from 1995-2008 -- and because of whom he could potentially bring along with him. Red Raiders offensive coordinator Neal Brown is a rising star, and first-year defensive coordinator Art Kaufman has resurrected a Tech unit that was buried a season ago.

        With that whole package, Jeff Long at Arkansas should absolutely have Tuberville in his crosshairs.

        4. Dave Doeren, Northern Illinois Huskies
        The Huskies are a one-point loss to Iowa in the season opener from being 10-0. Doeren is 20-4 since taking over last year, as the program was 27-35 in the five years before his arrival from Wisconsin, where he served as the defensive coordinator from 2006 to 2010.

        It's rare that a coach would come in and immediately rack up a 13-1 league record. NIU's balance -- 10th in the country in scoring offense and 18th in scoring defense -- is particularly noteworthy.

        If a place like Purdue opened, given Doeren's Big Ten background, it might be a good fit.

        5. Mike MacIntyre, San Jose State Spartans
        The progress in San Jose has been remarkable: 1-12 in 2010, 5-7 last season and a 7-2 start in 2012. Athletic directors love to see that sort of growth, especially at a program with no real semblance of tradition.

        MacIntyre is from Florida and went to Georgia Tech, so look for him to come up for jobs in the Southeast -- heck, maybe even in Atlanta if the incoming athletic director eventually moves on Paul Johnson.

        [+] Enlarge

        Mark Zerof/US Presswire
        Would Dan Mullen consider leaving Starkville for another SEC job?
        6. Dan Mullen, Mississippi State Bulldogs
        Mullen seems content at Mississippi State, but it's worth wondering because of the ceiling in Starkville, where he is 28-19 in three-plus seasons with a high-water mark of 9-4 in 2010. The Bulldogs are 7-2 but have been hammered in back-to-back weeks by Alabama and Texas A&M, and LSU is next.

        No one is really talking about it, but it'd be interesting to see what Mullen could do at a place like Arkansas or Tennessee (if it opens). Yeah, we know. His name came up similarly when Will Muschamp got the Florida job, though he was reportedly never a candidate even after his time there as offensive coordinator under Urban Meyer.

        They're different levels of jobs, really. Based on a variety of factors, Coaches By The Numbers ranks Florida as the No. 3 job in the country, while Tennessee is 13th and Arkansas is 20th. Mississippi State, by the way, is 41st.

        7. Art Briles, Baylor Bears
        The school is in the process of building a new on-campus, riverside stadium, which makes it less likely that Briles would be interested in making a jump. Less likely, however, does not mean out of the question. He is a Texas guy, but I asked him in the spring if he'd ever think of coaching outside the state and he didn't really flinch.

        Like with Mullen at Mississippi State, where is the ceiling for Baylor? And how much does a new stadium raise that ceiling? That's the question for Briles and his staff, which have churned out 11 draft picks the past three seasons. That's 14th among active coaches, according to Coaches By The Numbers.

        Briles is just 18-53 in his career against teams above .500 -- but 10 of those wins have come since 2010. Perhaps now is the time to field a few phone calls. A raise would be another good reason; he is making less than $2 million in a top-three conference.

        8. Butch Jones, Cincinnati Bearcats
        After going 4-8 in his first season in 2010, Jones' teams have won 16 games to stabilize the underrated program. At 6-2 this season, Jones is getting frustrated about support.

        "Sometimes you take things for granted," he told the Cincinnati Enquirer this week, after about 26,000 fans attended the win against Syracuse at the school's 35,000-seat stadium. "We have a great product here in Cincinnati. For our football program to grow, Nippert Stadium needs to be sold out."

        That's the constant uphill battle in Cincy, where it's largely a pro audience -- a big reason why Brian Kelly and Mark Dantonio left for jobs in more visible college spots.

        Although Jones has undoubtedly wanted to distance himself from those before him, be his own man and all that, it probably helps in hiring circles to see Kelly and Dantonio doing well in high-profile jobs. If a good Big Ten job comes open in the next few years, Jones would be a solid option.

        9. Charlie Strong, Louisville Cardinals
        "Wait a second," you're thinking. "Why is Strong so low?" That's because it's becoming less and less likely that he is going anywhere, for now.

        Louisville seems prepared to open the checkbook to keep a coach who has the program off to its best-ever start at 9-0. With a number of returning players coming back in 2013, including Heisman candidate Teddy Bridgewater, it's not the best time to bolt. He has been linked most often to Arkansas -- he is from the state and played at Central Arkansas -- but that's almost too obvious.

        10. Gary Patterson, TCU Horned Frogs
        Like Strong, Patterson is a signability issue or he would be ranked far higher. It's going to take a really special job if Patterson is ever going to leave TCU, which just opened a new stadium and overhauled the football facility.

        We're talking Oklahoma- or Texas-level special. Patterson's 115-32 record has earned him that, if he's willing to wait. He seems prepared to do so.

        Others to watch: It's probably a year early for a few coaches who could wind up being the 2013 version of Dykes.

        Toledo's Matt Campbell (8-2) and Fresno State's Tim DeRuyter (7-3) have done excellent jobs in their first seasons. Kent State's Darrell Hazell (8-1) and Ball State's Pete Lembo (7-3) are two more to keep an eye on in the MAC.

        Those names could come up sooner rather than later at a place such as NC State, should it part ways with Tom O'Brien. The potential opening at Boston College is also intriguing for MAC coaches, since the new AD there came from Miami (Ohio).

        Oklahoma State's Mike Gundy has come up a few times, including at Arkansas, but his new deal at his alma mater seems to have satisfied him, and the resources in place have made the school competitive against its in-state rival and the rest of the Big 12. There's no reason to bolt.

        Top coordinators
        [+] Enlarge

        Marvin Gentry/US Presswire
        Kirby Smart has been waiting for the right head-coaching opportunity.
        1. Kirby Smart, Alabama defensive coordinator
        For years, it was Muschamp and Smart as the next generation of SEC coordinators to become SEC head coaches. Muschamp took a detour through Texas before landing at Florida, a top-three job in the league, and Smart has been patient for the right opportunity. Is it this year? The jobs that are open, or potentially opening, don't seem to suggest the timing is right.

        Tennessee, though, might be the most intriguing for Smart. It would seem to follow the Muschamp trail: play at Georgia, be a coordinator in the SEC West and become head coach of one of UGA's division rivals.

        2. Chad Morris, Clemson offensive coordinator
        The Tigers had to boost the second-year OC's salary by more than a million dollars -- amazing, considering he was a high school coach in 2009 -- to keep him from looking elsewhere last season. As long as he is succeeding with Clemson, and the offense is chugging again this year, he'll continue to remain a target.

        How much money does Clemson have? If Morris keeps going, he'll be making more than head coach Dabo Swinney.

        3. Mark Stoops, Florida State defensive coordinator
        Could Mark be the next of the Stoops boys to get a head-coaching job? It's clearly worked well for Bob, but not so much with Mike, now back at Oklahoma.

        Jimbo Fisher said this week during his news conference that he'd like to turn FSU into a launching pad for future head coaches, and Mark Stoops would be a good place to start.

        The Noles are first in the country in total defense, giving up just 3.5 yards per play.

        4. Todd Monken, Oklahoma State offensive coordinator
        Evidently the job requirements to be a Cowboys OC are as follows: foul mouth, big-time offense.

        It worked for Dana Holgorsen, now at West Virginia. And it's working for Monken, in his second year running the OSU offense.

        The Pokes are averaging more yards per game this season without Brandon Weeden and Justin Blackmon. The team began the season with an 18-year-old freshman quarterback, Wes Lunt. When he was injured, redshirt J.W. Walsh came off the bench to star. When Walsh was lost for the season to injury, third-string QB Clint Chelf and Lunt combined to rack up yards last week at Kansas State.

        It's a testament to the level of quarterback play at Oklahoma State, sure, but credit Monken's system too. The Cowboys have scored more than 30 points in a stunning 95.2 percent of their games under Monken, according to Coaches By The Numbers.

        When another Big 12 school needs a coach -- say, if Baylor or Texas Tech happened to open a position -- he'd be an intelligent call.

        5. Kliff Kingsbury, Texas A&M offensive coordinator
        Kingsbury, the former Texas Tech quarterback, is an up-and-comer who is going to keep rising as Kevin Sumlin does at A&M.

        He could still use a year or two in the new league to sharpen his chops. It will be interesting to see what the Aggies do this week against Alabama.

        "If they take care of the ball, I think they'll have a chance. I really do," Dykes said of the Aggies' shot at upsetting the Tide. "A&M can make some plays. The tempo will give them problems. It's going to be something so different than what they've seen."

        6. Neal Brown, Texas Tech offensive coordinator
        Youth is certainly working on the side of this 32-year-old. If Tuberville does wind up getting the Arkansas job, it would put Brown in an even more visible place with more toys with which to play. He'll eventually get a job, but it's a matter of locating the right one.

        7. Brent Pease, Florida offensive coordinator
        He is in his first year at Florida after being lured from Boise State, so he might want to stay a bit to let his stock rise, but some schools might soon begin kicking the tires -- Kentucky, for example.

        The first instinct is to say, "Oh, Florida's offense has been pretty abysmal this season," but anyone who has watched the team knows that 1) it's 8-1, and 2) the staff has gotten some good mileage out of a so-so amount of talent on offense. Sophomore quarterback Jeff Driskel is still young, and the older receivers have been underachieving players from the previous regime's recruiting classes.

        Pease has done a lot with a little, and athletic directors have taken note. Now it's just a matter of waiting for the right opportunity.

        8. Mark Helfrich, Oregon offensive coordinator
        He was all set to take over for boss Chip Kelly when Kelly was all but gone to Tampa Bay last offseason, but Helfrich is still in wait-and-see mode. No one is questioning Helfrich's acumen; it's just a matter of whether he wants to hang on until Kelly's next NFL overture. But even elite programs will be interested in what Helfrich has soaked up working alongside Kelly.

        9. Pat Narduzzi, Michigan State defensive coordinator
        His stock was on the rise when this season started -- Narduzzi nearly left to be Sumlin's defensive coordinator at Texas A&M -- but a middling year for the Spartans hasn't done anything to spark interest. Still, Narduzzi is an engaging individual with a bright football mind.

        10. Justin Wilcox, Washington defensive coordinator
        Wilcox might be an intriguing name to consider a year from now. Washington's defense is so young, and subsequently pretty poor, that he is not going to get rave reviews in his first season at U-Dub. But if he can turn it around in the near future, the affable 35-year-old should soon be a candidate for some West Coast positions.

        Former coaches
        We won't rank those in this category because there are so few, compared to last year when you would have found Ohio State coach Urban Meyer, Arizona coach Rich Rodriguez and Washington State coach Mike Leach here.

        • Bobby Petrino has to be considered the prime candidate currently out of the game. His cause for termination at Arkansas will be a deterrent, but his 75-26 career record could ultimately speak louder for some program. There are some decent options for the 51-year-old, but he might hold out another year, a la Rodriguez and Leach, to see if a bigger job opens.

        If not for the previous flirtation, secret planes and whatnot, Auburn would actually make the most sense. Maybe it still goes after him anyway.

        • Butch Davis isn't a name getting a lot of traction, but he wants back in the game. He could find a Conference-USA-type job -- UTEP could be open, for instance -- and build from there.

        • Phillip Fulmer has made no secret for several years that he would like another opportunity to coach, but he remains the Jon Heder of college coaches. Heder will always be Napoleon Dynamite. Fulmer will always be Tennessee.

        • Jon Gruden still seems far-flung, although some Tennessee alums are convinced he is a viable option. One question comes to mind: Why? Gruden was known as a veteran hoarder in the NFL, someone who seemed to like to work with more seasoned players over rookies. Does that translate into a successful college coach?
        Why so SERIOUS

        Comment


        • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

          Doeren, Taggart, Dykes in that order

          Comment


          • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
            Doeren, Taggart, Dykes in that order
            I can respect that, I think my top target would be Charlie Strong, already has ties with Florida, where we do a lot of our recruiting, as well a good pedigree, and with him coming up to Kentucky(the state), he is now better suited to recruit in the midwest, he has already gotten a decent amount of players from IN, OH, and FL, so that would fit right in. He is also used to working with teams that play games with players speedy players.

            Not sure Purdue would be willing to cough up the money, but I believe this is Morgans last year so you never know.
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment


            • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

              Ready for Purdue Basketball season! Boiler up!

              Comment


              • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                Originally posted by Really? View Post
                Not sure Purdue would be willing to cough up the money, but I believe this is Morgans last year so you never know.
                Strong'd be high on my list too, easily ahead of those 3, but until I see them spend money on football I'm not going to get my hopes up.

                Anyway, even if they ponied up there's no reason for Strong to come to Purdue, unless it's a substantial raise. Louisville's a better program.
                Last edited by Heisenberg; 11-08-2012, 01:39 PM.

                Comment


                • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                  Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                  Strong'd be high on my list too, easily ahead of those 3, but until I see them spend money on football I'm not going to get my hopes up.

                  Anyway, even if they ponied up there's no reason for Strong to come to Purdue, unless it's a substantial raise. Louisville's a better program.
                  Yeah, I think it is more a prestigious job, and it is Big Ten football which has a strong history and a lot of tough teams, but I guess first we will have to wait until hope is fired, the team this year has looked out right bad.

                  Ready for friday though, bring on the basketball.
                  Why so SERIOUS

                  Comment


                  • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                    so, it'd be pretty sweet if we didn't lose to Bucknell

                    Comment


                    • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                      Did any of you guys watch the game? What went wrong? Who looked good/bad?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                        Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                        so, it'd be pretty sweet if we didn't lose to Bucknell
                        would've been pretty sweet if we didn't lose to Bucknell.


                        does Mike Brown want to coach some college?

                        Comment


                        • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                          I consider you guys losing to Bucknell karma for mackey poking fun at our sweet 16 rings
                          Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-09-2012, 10:12 PM.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                            Bucknell's good. They returned pretty much every one from a 25 win team. Should be in the tourney.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                              Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                              Bucknell's good. They returned pretty much every one from a 25 win team. Should be in the tourney.
                              25 wins in the Patriot League!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Purdue 2012-2013 Athletics thread

                                Purdue Athletics is becoming LOL.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X