Gary Nord Says You Should All Zip It About Playing Multiple QBs

Many of us have had issues with the QB rotation we've seen at Purdue over the past year, especially since it sounds like it's simply going to continue unabated this year. While there were some differing opinions over who should be the starter last year, one thing I think we all realized was that shuttling QBs in and out with little predictability or apparent strategy was not a good thing.

At the center of some of this nonsense is offensive coordinator Gary Nord. Nord is frequently labeled as an exciting OC ("Gary Nord will never allow a defense to get comfortable." -- GBI), yet I know that we have often felt frustration at the vanilla nature of things. Sure, I know there have been injuries, such as two years ago when the QB position was a mess and Rob Henry had certain passing limitations and Sean Robinson simply wasn't ready. And then last year, Caleb was thrust into the starting role after Rob's knee was injured and Marve wasn't completely recovered. HOWEVER, at some point, you need to show us why you're a supposedly clever and offensive-minded OC. Don't you? I think this season there are absolutely zero excuses to not open things up, at least in the sense of mixing it up and catching defenses off-guard. If opposing D's can begin to accurately predict what Purdue is going to do and capitalize on those predictions, then Nord has failed in my eyes. This is a team with seniors and a team with more returning starters than anyone in the conference. It's time to deliver. But I'm digressing.

More concerning to me than Gary's unimpressive tenure thus far were some comments he made recently in GBI's season preview issue. On the subject of using multiple quarterbacks, Nord got a bit prickly at Neubert's continuing pressing him on the issue, ultimately suggesting that a) the other players probably don't care who is under center and b) that rotating QBs in and out is no different than any other position. I sincerely hope he does not believe this. But let's look at the quotes.

"We practice them the way we are going to play them and they know what their roles are, so there should not be any change of momentum and there shouldn't be any trouble. I don't believe the other ten guys in the huddle even give a damn which one is in there. I really don't."

Wow. Just.... wow. I'd love to hear from people who have played organized football at almost any level on this. But from my uneducated opinion (I never played organized football), it would seem that stability at the QB position would be desirable by most players. Like any sport, you learn tendencies, you get comfortable, you begin to be able to communicate non-verbally, etc. I would think the guys even care about the punter, since the more reliable and better he is, the better your field position will be. So if you could argue that even kickers are important to the other guys, it would seem a bit disingenuous to say nobody cares which QB is in there.

Coach Nord continued...

"No one said anything about it when we rolled Ralph (Bolden) and (Akeem) Shavers in there last year. No one even made a stink about it at all. No one said anything when Gabe (Holmes) and Crosby (Wright) rolled in and out at tight end. It gave us some different momentum and gave us a different personality, but it is one of the 11 positions. It's just the one that gets the most publicity, the one that gets the most talked about."

What the what?

Do I really need to address this like a lucid human being said it? Okay, fine.

Ralph Bolden had a history of injuries and getting banged up easily. Also, you always rotate RBs. Unless you have an absolutely workhorse like Mike Alstott, you have multiple options at RB. Sometimes one guy just needs a breather.

And TE is the same as QB? Just "one of the 11 positions"? Are you fricking serious? This entire line of thinking makes me actually angry, because it just sounds belligerent for the sake of being belligerent. It also sounds ignorant. If you're a football coach at the Big Ten level and you think a QB is no different from the RBs or the TEs, then, frankly, I have serious concerns about your competence.

That said... I'm not a coach. I am not qualified to pass judgment as an expert. But I am qualified to pass judgment as a fan and a witness to mediocre season after mediocre season.

If Gary Nord was doing great things here and his offenses were always clicking and he was always doing innovative things... well, then, fine. In that case, he would have earned the right to a) be different and b) be cranky when his methods are questioned. However, he has most assuredly not produced good results at Purdue.

I don't like what I've seen from Coach Nord and I don't like his attitude when he's questioned. As we've been saying for a while, this is a big year all around at Purdue -- mainly because continued futility will not be tolerated. I'm not saying Morgan Burke or Danny Hope have the stones to can this guy, but the fans have spoken over the course of the past 5 or 6 years as attendance has taken a nosedive. Another year of boring, predictable offenses run by indecisive coaches and QBs who don't know where they stand will push this program further towards the brink of complete irrelevance.

Prove me wrong, Coach Nord.

Coach Matty Talks Big Three, Incoming Guys, Injuries and More

GBI has a story up right now about Matty's conference this morning with the media. It's a good read, but for those who are lazy, here are the highlights:

The coach has already talked to the Big Three about the potential of going to the NBA and will continue to talk to them and their families, as needed. Seems as though not much has changed: Hummel's knee guarantees he's back, Smooge has made no comments to indicate he thinks he's ready and JJ has publicly said he's planning to come back, though last week he hedged just a bit after the Duke loss. We'd be surprised if any of them left, honestly.

Donnie Hale's situation hasn't changed: if a scholarship opens up, he's getting it, but as of now none is necessarily expected to open up. While there's nothing to see here -- for now -- it's not the first time we've heard the remark that he gets a schollie if one opens. Is someone transferring? We haven't heard any specific rumors and any names we could come up with would be pure speculation.

Hummel's knee is progressing fine and he remains on a 4-6 month timetable, which would mean back to full use by late summer most likely, especially given Rob's work ethic. That's good to hear.

LewJack will have surgery next week to get the broken screw pieces out of his foot, and he "had damaged the screws to the point they caused him great discomfort." Yeesh. I'll bet. Painter also said that once Jackson is healthy, the coach wants to see him become a perimeter scoring threat (don't we all, coach):

"He's got to be able to make a shot," Painter said. "It's just that simple. Once he's able to make an open shot and get something to his intermediate game, whether it's a floater or a runner ... I think he has a chance to be one of the best point guards in our league."

Matty is excited about the size for next year, especially since it might allow Rob Hummel to play the 3 instead of the 4 and turn Purdue into a terrific rebounding team. I loved this quote:

"I don't care who it is on our team, you have to rebound the basketball. If you can't see that as a void on our basketball team, you've been blind-folded this year."

Coach Matty also isn't letting anyone get too comfortable, saying about DJ Byrd that while he's versatile, "he has to have a hell of an off-season, just like a lot of other returners."

Good stuff.

Basketball Season Preview With Sports Illustrated and Rivals

In an effort to give you exclusives and rich content, your friends at Boiled Sports have really outdone themselves this time. How, you ask? Well, we got some really big time smarty-pants writers to weigh in on the upcoming season.

I'm always interested to see how the media views my Boilers and how opinions vary from the national scene all the way down to the most local of outlets. If this intrigues you too, you'll like this article.

Our panel consists of Luke Winn of Sports Illustrated, Brian Neubert of Gold and Black (Rivals) and J and myself of the best site in all of the land. Granted, there's a lot of reading in this entry, but the info is chocked-full of goodness and might get you as excited as all of us for the basketball season, that begins this evening (with no one watching since it's on ESPN360). Away we go...



-Who is the Purdue basketball player, that the national media isn't talking about, that will "make noise" this year for the Boilers?

(SI) E'Twaun Moore was named preseason all-conference, so it's clear that folks in Big Ten country are aware of him ... but I don't see his name popping up on the fringes of any national All-America lists. He's one of the smoothest "big" guards out there, and he's going to average more points than the one Purdue guy national folks do know already, Robbie Hummel. There's such a star void in your league right now -- we just did a four-writer draft of our dream teams on SI.com and not a single Big Ten guy was taken, justifiably -- that there's room for there to be two high-profile names on the Big Ten's best team.

(GBI) Keaton Grant. It's easy to overlook him, with Robbie Hummel and E'Twaun Moore being so good so fast and with Chris Kramer obviously, deservedly, getting so much attention for his defense and leadership. But Keaton Grant is pretty damn good, and he should be better this year now that he's healthy and even more confident. I think the knee issue really kept him from getting to the basket more and locking down his man. And, it wore on him mentally. The sky's the limit this year, but he may not necessarily stand out as much because of Purdue's balance and other starpower.

(BS) Depends on how we define someone the national media isn't talking about.... If you go literally, it rules out the baby boilers of a year ago mainly. And as such, I think (seriously) that if LewJack gets playing time he could make people like Dickie V go bananas. Little, fast, exciting... mainstream media loves guys like that. To me, he's a lot like Kalin Lucas or Dee Brown, but a few inches shorter...and like those two, if he decides to, he can simply dish out assists for a year or two at a rapid rate until he's needed in the scoring column.

But a more likely candidate in my opinion is Keaton Grant. Keaton is now a co-captain and he saw his points increase last year from 4.4 ppg to 11.2 ppg and also saw improvements in his rebounding, steals and shooting percentages. That last one is huge... Keaton's FG%/FT%/3Pt% in 06-07 was 37/61/27 and it rose last season to 43/85/44. Even a slight improvement this year makes him a big time player.

-With IU in a serious state of rebuilding and only playing Purdue once, is the rivalry diminished? Is there another rival that can temporarily absorb some of the vitriol that the Purdue fans want/need to vent?

(SI) I think it's going to take 2-3 seasons for the IU rivalry to pick back up, but once it does, it could be fierce -- you're going to be recruiting a lot of the same players, and Crean is a large personality who has been known to ruffle road crowds (like at Louisville, which was his nemesis in the Big East).

In the meantime, you have to look at Michigan State as your temporary rival. The two Boilers-Spartans games -- especially the first one, at Mackey -- are going to be the league's biggest national showcases, so they better be good. And there's no real national consensus on who's going to win the Big Ten, so you have a decent amount of intrigue. At least I know there's intrigue in our office: When I wrote -- after visiting Purdue practice in October -- that I'd be shocked if the Boilers didn't win the league, Seth Davis e-mailed me to bet a steak dinner on his pick of Michigan State. I'm mostly a vegetarian ... so the terms will have to change ... but there will be some kind of official wager.

(GBI) No. If anything, this is an even more exciting time in the rivalry, because a new age of winning at Purdue is beginning just as Indiana's beginning a new era itself. Matt Painter and Tom Crean are the faces of the rivalry now, and could be the new generation's Gene Keady and Bob Knight in that this could be a long-standing matchup. Just because one team is down - the shoe was on the other foot not too long ago - doesn't mean it means any less to the teams themselves and their fans. Recruiting is an issue too. Both teams want to really gain a foothold in their home state. Beating the other on the court is an important part of that.

(BS) Yes, it's diminished, and it has a lot to do with the one-time-a-year b.s. going on right now. I don't think the complete disdain Purdue fans have for IU has diminished, but the rivalry just isn't as solid because we don't see each other as much. But seeing what a disgrace they've made of themselves is all the more reason to dislike them and root against them. They deserve to lose and have a few years of bottom-of-the-conference finishes. Sadly, they won't, though, as the Big Forehead is already loading up 4-stars for next year. Amazing that the IU name still carries weight. I guess if I lived in Indiana I'd get it more.

I don't think anyone else can absorb the vitriol completely... though I know we've got a nice little thing going with Wisconsin lately. They were the class of the conference last season (and several seasons) and we swept them... that's how some rivalries develop.

-With Painter's teams now winning home games at a similar percentage to Keady's teams of the mid/late 90s, has Mackey Arena returned as one of the toughest places in America for the opposition to visit?

(SI) What I like about Mackey is that it has old-gym intimacy -- it's still a classic bleacher arrangement, with the seats close to the floor -- and a rowdy, organized student section (the Paint Crew). It doesn't seem to get mentioned along with the Camerons and the Phogs, but it's a legit home-court advantage. That said, your crowd better bring it when Duke shows up in December. Everyone is going to be watching, and your rep will be on the line.

(GBI) Absolutely. The exhibition games this year illustrated that Purdue fans are back into this. There were crowds at the two exhibitions Purdue wouldn't have gotten for most non-conference regular season games just two years ago. Matt Painter has really endeared himself to fans and Purdue's done an outstanding job cultivating an amazing student section which really sets the tone for the entire crowd. Fans appreciate the effort they're seeing. Winning doesn't hurt, either. It's going to get very loud in Mackey Arena this season.

(BS) I think so, but clearly, I'm biased. But I do have one caviat. For the Mackey of the 00s to be compared to that of the 90s and before, more consistency is needed, from an attendence standpoint. There were stretches of seasons where a ticket could only be found at Mackey during Christmas break games...now, only two games are sold out (as of earlier this week). That's gotta change, in my opinion, for the comparison to hold water.

But, when compared to all the new-ish massive money-making arenas out there, Purdue still has an old-school feel. And I've been to many arenas and stadiums and big games in all sports around the country... and I don't know of many louder than a packed Mackey with everyone screaming.

-Can Purdue live up to the lofty expectations that have been placed on it by multiple national outlets?

(SI)
(I'm going to combine [questions] 4-5, if that's OK ... just to avoid being redundant.)

(GBI) I don't see why not, but I don't think they're a top-five-caliber team just yet. On paper, at least, Purdue has to show it's a better rebounding team and it has to defend better than it did at the end of last year. Otherwise, Purdue should be a better team than it was a year ago sheerly due to natural progress.

(BS) Yes, I think they can. Expectations are high but not ludicrous, as far as magazines and such are predicting...but top-5 may be a bit much, this season.

-If so, what's Purdue's final record and ranking going to be and in what round will they be knocked out of the dance?

(GBI) It's way too early to tell. But I think Purdue's better than it was a year ago. How many wins better, I don't know. Last year's twenty-five wins were a lot of wins. I do think Purdue will get through the conference season with no more than one loss, if that. I can't guess who'll they'll lose to, but between a solid Preseason NIT field and the Duke game at home, I'm just guessing they'll trip up at some point. In Big Ten play, I don't see them losing more than two or three times, but that's just off the top of my head, having not seen most other league teams play.

(BS) I look at the schedule and I honestly think it could go as well as 25-3. But I know everything will not fall right because of injuries and the timing of when you play a team (as Coach Keady used to say). So I'll say 22-6 heading into the tourney with a #11 ranking nationally.

As for what round our Boilers are knocked out... the lack of size worries me a little, even though college ball is really a guard game now. Assuming a fortuitous seed (and at #11, you project a #3 or 4 seed), I actually do think this team could make the Final Four. But I'll assume they fall short and officially say Elite Eight.

-If not, how many seasons will it take for this team to do just that?

(GBI) Purdue's pretty well established now. If they're not as good as people think they are this year, then they should largely have the same team back the year after. Painter and his staff are recruiting very well. I think Purdue is definitely well established now for the long term as an annual Big Ten contender and NCAA Tournament team. Whether they're an annual top-10 team, I'm not sure I'd go that far just yet.

-What, in your opinion is a successful season for the Boilers?

(SI) I think I ranked them sixth -- and ahead of Michigan State -- when I voted in the magazine's top 20, so a Big Ten title and an Elite Eight appearance is I guess what I'm predicting. But I would still consider a second-place league finish and trip to the second weekend of the NCAA's "successful." Reaching the Sweet 16 would be another step forward, and I think it would set you up well for 2009-10, when -- as long as everyone sticks around -- you have a legitimate shot at finally getting back to the Final Four.

(GBI) Probably a Big Ten regular season championship and no worse than a Sweet 16 NCAA Tournament appearance. I figure you just want to see Purdue go a step further than it did a year ago in both cases.

(BS) A successful season is winning some big prime time games, maintaining a top 15 ranking all season, earning a top 4 seed in the NCAA tourney, and advancing to at least the Sweet 16.


Many Thanks, once again, to Brian Neubert from Gold & Black and Luke Winn from Sports Illustrated.