(11-11-2018 04:00 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Louisville board claiming a near-impeccable insider says Brohm preemptively agreed to a deal in principle.

Seems logical. What else would explain Purdue’s 41-10 beatdown in Minnesota other than Brohm had one foot out the door?

It would be hilarious if none of it was true and Brohm stayed a Boilermaker.

Just to clarify, the "Louisville board" did not claim that. One person, who does not have that sort of track record, claims another stated it.

I think most would assume Brohm would be the top targer for reasons listed here. But I don;t think anyone thinks it is a deal that is already done. Although some think it is just a formality (I don't, but some do). Personally I don't think Brohm would make any sort of decision prior to the end of the regular season, if that's the path he wants and the school wants.

Unless I've missed Purdue has yet to pay anyone a million for a money game. Not claiming I track the Boilermakers closely but I hadn't found a million dollar deal when I was looking at their scheduling.

(11-12-2018 04:33 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Unless I've missed Purdue has yet to pay anyone a million for a money game. Not claiming I track the Boilermakers closely but I hadn't found a million dollar deal when I was looking at their scheduling.

Yeah, they aren't paying anyone big to come to them. They'll come to your house for the right price.

I firmly believe it when there has been talk within the Big Ten about the ten-game conference schedule and how there are teams who "only want to play each other." I'd buy it that Purdue is one of those schools. With the exception of Notre Dame, it's not like these guys had history with schools outside of the Big Ten.

Regarding the frugality of Purdue overall, and Brohm, consider this article from April. Claiming Purdue is committed to football is one thing when you pay your coach in that $3-4 million/year range; the guy's got under four million to pay ten assistants. You're not keeping his sideline stocked with that, and his job shouldn't include replacing top assistants annually because the university isn't quite onboard with big time football spending yet. It's come a long way, granted...it's seen more as a marathon over there, however, than a sprint.

Louisville will spend. And, if it likes its coach, it will spend to make him AND the assistants happy. Shame for Purdue (I mean it, they look like they're having fun out there, and that's awesome), but, maybe they'll get there eventually...or more schools may adopt their former view of the sport's upkeep.

(11-12-2018 04:51 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(11-12-2018 04:33 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Unless I've missed Purdue has yet to pay anyone a million for a money game. Not claiming I track the Boilermakers closely but I hadn't found a million dollar deal when I was looking at their scheduling.

Yeah, they aren't paying anyone big to come to them. They'll come to your house for the right price.

I firmly believe it when there has been talk within the Big Ten about the ten-game conference schedule and how there are teams who "only want to play each other." I'd buy it that Purdue is one of those schools. With the exception of Notre Dame, it's not like these guys had history with schools outside of the Big Ten.

Regarding the frugality of Purdue overall, and Brohm, consider this article from April. Claiming Purdue is committed to football is one thing when you pay your coach in that $3-4 million/year range; the guy's got under four million to pay ten assistants. You're not keeping his sideline stocked with that, and his job shouldn't include replacing top assistants annually because the university isn't quite onboard with big time football spending yet. It's come a long way, granted...it's seen more as a marathon over there, however, than a sprint.

Louisville will spend. And, if it likes its coach, it will spend to make him AND the assistants happy. Shame for Purdue (I mean it, they look like they're having fun out there, and that's awesome), but, maybe they'll get there eventually...or more schools may adopt their former view of the sport's upkeep.

I went to grad school at Purdue. They definitely want a 10-game Big 10 schedule. The whole Big Ten West was ticked when Rutgers and Maryland were added.

And yes, Purdue is very frugal. When I started at Purdue (2011), their non-revenue sports facilities were about the same quality as my poor Catholic high school. Since then they've built a lot of new ones, but they didn't break the bank.

A second story: Purdue did not have permanent lights at their football stadium until 2017. They figured that it was cheaper to rent lights for the one game a year that they'd use them. That should tell you how bound to Big 10 traditions (such as games always starting at noon) they are.

(11-12-2018 03:16 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Just to clarify, the "Louisville board" did not claim that. One person, who does not have that sort of track record, claims another stated it.

I think most would assume Brohm would be the top targer for reasons listed here. But I don;t think anyone thinks it is a deal that is already done. Although some think it is just a formality (I don't, but some do). Personally I don't think Brohm would make any sort of decision prior to the end of the regular season, if that's the path he wants and the school wants.

The one person you mention I have known for over a decade. I trust his judgement of the information he posted yesterday.

He’s not concerned with what he writes being popular. He was very critical of Jurich. Actually wrote a piece for Charlie Springer’s site criticizing Tom using his real name, when criticizing Tom wasn’t as acceptable as it is today.
CJ

(11-12-2018 06:15 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(11-12-2018 03:16 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Just to clarify, the "Louisville board" did not claim that. One person, who does not have that sort of track record, claims another stated it.

I think most would assume Brohm would be the top targer for reasons listed here. But I don;t think anyone thinks it is a deal that is already done. Although some think it is just a formality (I don't, but some do). Personally I don't think Brohm would make any sort of decision prior to the end of the regular season, if that's the path he wants and the school wants.

The one person you mention I have known for over a decade. I trust his judgement of the information he posted yesterday.

He’s not concerned with what he writes being popular. He was very critical of Jurich. Actually wrote a piece for Charlie Springer’s site criticizing Tom using his real name, when criticizing Tom wasn’t as acceptable as it is today.
CJ

And there are several "Louisville Boards" ... 3 of which I know are run by solid journalists. Distinguishing a "board" with some individual poster on a message board is important, if you want to be taken seriously.

(11-11-2018 01:00 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-11-2018 12:36 PM)Shox Wrote:  Was there more to the story then just his record this year? I don't see Louisville replacing him with someone that can accomplish what he has there. Did the new AD just not want to deal with all the baggage?

It's been a multiple year decline, not just this year. Lamar Jackson was able to mask it somewhat, but the decline was there.

Yeah it's hard to capture that lightning on a second go at a school. Look at Edsall at UConn.