You really summed that up well!! Still trying to find anyone that wants to step up and be a leader for years now! Give me some fight and emotion out there!Team plays like their coach...
Are you willing to settle for being average?
- Thread starter Summy1
- Start date
This is a valid point and I think if you look at the type of players Painter is getting and going after, there is a change going on. To me it seems we are going more athletic and offensive minded and I welcome that change.
I was a defense first for the longest time and I don't like how things have changed, but they have so we adapt and move on.
Anyway I will say that I too think Painter is an above average coach. I think the things you listed earlier, would make him a great coach if they were consistently happening here.
Also quite honestly, for me I don't really care what happens during the season much as long as we make the tourney and have a decent seed. Once we get to the tourney that is when things matter for me and Painter has shown he can make a deep run but another first round exit would be very concerning.
the problem as i see it is and has been for several years is that the team is hesitant. no one is trying to score but just trying to pass it around the perimeter and force feed the middle. IH and biggie are the only players that try to score when they get the ball.
after years of the same stuff it may be time to tweek the offense a little.
after years of the same stuff it may be time to tweek the offense a little.
He has shown he can make a deep run? 2 sweet 16s. The last being the '09-10 season. He hasn't won a tourney game since 2012.
Here's the deal: I don't think Painter ever makes a final four, but he will continue to put "good" teams on the floor. As long as Mackey is mostly full, that will probably be OK with the powers that be.
Especially since we are currently all-in trying to extinguish the tire fire that is raging on the other side of Wooden Drive.
I guess getting back to the original post, I am ok settling for this average, especially when you look at football, but I really just want more post season success. 28-9, 4th in the conference, does not bother me, but the hopelessness of post season is the killer. Not a National Title but making the Final Four one lousy time. Every year playing the 2nd weekend of the tournament with a chance we could shoot 70% from 3 for one game and make the Final Four. That would be awesome. That is kind of what was like as a student post-three peat. We would go 22-12, beat IU at home, get in the NCAA as a 6-11 seed, play tough through the first weekend, THEN get heartbroken.
Why am I bummed December 1? Because I have seen flaws against good teams, (and average teams at home) that historically don't get fixed as the year goes on. I know how the movie will end. Prove me wrong Matt Painter.
Why am I bummed December 1? Because I have seen flaws against good teams, (and average teams at home) that historically don't get fixed as the year goes on. I know how the movie will end. Prove me wrong Matt Painter.
If they said it, they were wrong. Purdue won at #11 Michigan in 2012. It won at #9 OSU and #10 MSU in 2010.
It's possible they meant top 15 road wins against non-conference teams. That may be correct, but I'm not sure. Of course, playing non-conference games at top 15 teams almost never occurs and was only the 3rd time a Painter coached team has done it (@ #4 Memphis in 2005 and @ #11 Xavier in 2011).
It isn't the fact that they can't hit the outside shots. It is the fact that offensively, Purdue has and consistently becomes very stagnant and doesn't move the ball OR move without the ball. No matter how good or bad your players are, unless you have a Russel Westbrook type wing player who can simply create on his own (and let's be honest, Purdue has none of the caliber players), an offense is going to stink.
I see your point but I think he will make a final four one day. And I base that off of the sheer potential of the Baby Boilers had Hummel not gone down. I think we all can agree that we most certainly were favored to going that deep and losing him was quite detrimental to the team. We saw how valuable he was when he was back on the court and could basically carry the team to a win.
I don't bring that up as an excuse more that the potential has already shown itself to be there. So that is why I think he can get us there one day and he seems to be recruiting what we need to start that process.
I also look at what is going on with the football program and some of the things rumored to be said about coaches not wanting to come here and simply it is because WL is not a "destination" location. All of us that cherish the campus disagree, but in reality that alone can hinder us getting a high caliber level coach to come here. I know some disagree and that is fine, but there is evidence to show there is some truth to that notion.
As I have said, if we exit the first round again this year I will most certainly be more critical of Painter and start to lean towards potentially replacing him. I am fine with him being above average in the overall scheme of things, but he needs to make some deeper runs to further progress us as a program. Otherwise being good pre-tourney is rather irrelevant at that point.
I don't know what you said nor do I care. You must be CMP's Mom based on he way you blindly defend him even after a dozen years of mediocrity. I can't imagine why else you would be so passionately defending 2 sweet 16's and 1 co-B1G championship in 12 years. That is NOT above average. I'd say we have at least 5 or so schools better than that, 5 or so schools worse, and a few that haven't been in the conference that whole time.
I get this, but we haven't landed a class even close to the Baby Boilers in a decade. Two top 50 guys, and 4 total top 75 kids in one class to go along with a kid named Kramer who wasn't ranked but most would take over anyone on this roster not named Biggie (our only other top 50 kid Painter has landed outside of the baby boilers). It takes supreme talent for most schools or a few can do it with supreme coaching (such as Stevens) and we don't have either.
CMP must of stolen a girl from you based on how you blindly attack him even after majority years of above average results. I can't imagine why else you would be so passionately attacking him regardless of the awards, top tier finishes in conference and steadily improving. That IS above average. I'd say we have very few schools that are better than that. The majority of them are worse.
You are so blinded by your IU bias and Painter hatred that reality is lost on you.
While true we have gotten the parts that we need based on the fluidity of the game. Just look at CE and Eastern as examples of that.
As far as having supreme talent and coaching, you are right we don;t have that. But neither does 90% of the college teams based on that definition.
We all want Purdue to be elite and I get the frustration, but for now I still think that Painter is the answer and frankly there is nothing you or anyone else is going to say that will change my mind just like I won't change yours. The only way I change my line of thinking is when I do it myself and I am not there yet, not as long as things keep progressing forward and we don't have continuous first round exists.
I sometimes share that sentiment, BBG. And, I'm sure Indiana beating (housing, really) North Carolina last night just makes worse the angst of Purdue fans.
But, I have to admit, until Purdue starts breaking through in these big-time games we're going to hear the "same old Purdue" refrain.
Just my $.02, but I think there's a mental aspect to this. As another poster pointed out above, Purdue has won road games against top B1G teams under Painter. I feel like our guys believe they can compete with anybody in the B1G most of the time. Heck, they even beat a ranked Wisconsin team at the Kohl Center in 2013, a year Purdue finished with a losing record.
I'm not sure they have that same level of confidence against elite non-conference teams. Can't really explain it, but I often noticed it in Keady's teams as well.
Add two road wins over ranked Wisconsin teams under Painter.
The Baby Boilers won @#8 Wisconsin in 2008; and a so-so Purdue team won @#17 Wisconsin in 2014.
Again, Painter has had some success against ranked B1G teams on the road. I think Purdue, in general, feels more confident in conference games. Maybe it's the familiarity with opponents. Maybe it's Purdue's historic success in the B1G.
Excellent points. Your last one about Keady is pretty interesting as well because I remember the same thing happening. Not sure why it is either as it spans more than just Painter.
Painter had a team that probably would have went to final four , but Hummel went down. Can't say for sure but it was looking good that year
It is much more about recruiting than coaching and a coach does NOT control all the aspects of why a player may or may not want to attend Purdue. Here is what we know rather than conjecture. Matt recruited a nice group of baby boilers when Gene was coaching and he could dedicate all this time or at least much more to recruiting. Once at Purdue, Matt's recruiting was horrible even though he had shown an ability to recruit really good players and that Purdue was VERY good with good players. Matt loses coaches due to budget and threatens to leave himself seeing who was recently recruited and obviously thinking hsi stock would diminish with who he was able to recruit. Matt looks at Missouri and Purdue offers a more similar to the Big coaching salaries. Matt without his coaches improves the recruiting and brings in better players...and Purdue improves. Those players are more skilled, but not athletic adn overall slow as a team. Rule emphasis for those players change to protecting drivers and create a more slashing excitement offensive team. Along with that rule, the shot clock is reduced penalizing the original team approach that requires more time. Today, the team is slow and has less time to work to get a good shot. The game has become a little more individual and the options are reduced due to shot clock.
This team would be much better with a 45 second clock, but it is what it is under the rule emphasis that has existed during most of their time at Purdue. Matt understands this as well and tries to recruit a quicker, better athlete going forward. He doesn't get two in Indiana that Purdue fans were hopeful to get. Both go to programs that haven't had the ups and downs of Purdue and further strengthen those programs. Matt does pick up two more athletic players and a 7'2" versatile offensive player along with a versatile guard..and perhaps a center in the spring. The names of players most knew and wanted never came to Purdue, but it is obvious that a different player...more suited to the rule emphasis changes has been recruited for the future.
Had Purdue retained the coaches and improved the recruiting budget with the baby boilers I wonder where the program would be? Anyway, it is obvious that a different and more athletic player is being recruited and Matt has done much better than the players that sent Purdue in a downward spiral a few years ago. Anyone that considers a historical perspective of Purdue may be forgetting the things that have transpired previously.
Purdue is night and day better than just a few years ago and on a given night capable of beating anyone, but the margin for error is thin against the top teams in the country...and losing Jacquil has not helped. Purdue is capable of beating Lousiville, but not there last night and I don't think anyone thinks Purdue has more talent than Lousiville under the rule emphasis change after these players were recruited. Keep everything the same and get teh clock back to 45 seconds or at least 35 seconds and that is a boost to Purdue.
The effects of budget on Purdue basketball is not a whole lot different than the effects on budget during the later Tiller years. I'll enjoy this team and not write them off. They can beat any team in the Big and they caqn lose to many teams as well. The player deficiencies are what they are and they will get better, but the physical attributes will still be there and exploitable by all teams than play them.
That does make more sense admittedly, as I could not believe it had not happened in more than 30 years...and the point about there not being a lot of opportunities is valid as well.
really? I thought it was a joke. Vince took 2 threes early in the shot clock, and Carsen 1. All horrible, all missed. Caleb didn't even attempt a shot through something like the first 6 minutes and Caleb, Vince, and Isaac combined for 1 fing point and our coach is talking about missing open 3 point shots!??!?!? I don't even know what to say.
he also said their length was bothering us, which was a problem underneath, it sounds like he wants them to take open 3's , regardless of the time on clock
I liked what tjreese said as well. A good summary of where we are. The changes to the college game have hurt Purdue's traditional style we have played since Keady was coach. We need to adapt. Keady's teams would surprise opponents with their defensive style and intensity. Now, that style no longer works because the hacking and clawing we did on D is now fouling. I even wonder how Cardinal and/or Kramer would do with today's rules. So everything Matt knows and the principals he employs need to be adjusted. I think he is getting there, but can't land the players he needs to play that style.
At the beginning of the season I had Nova and Louisville as the only losses in the non conference schedule, so I'm not too disappointed. Have to beat the Domers though and have a solid BIG to get to the 4 or higher seed line. Then I think we can get to a sweet 16. But talent wise, that is the ceiling for this team.
At the beginning of the season I had Nova and Louisville as the only losses in the non conference schedule, so I'm not too disappointed. Have to beat the Domers though and have a solid BIG to get to the 4 or higher seed line. Then I think we can get to a sweet 16. But talent wise, that is the ceiling for this team.
AVERAGE?!?!?!
ya'll think you're AVERAGE?!?!?!??!?! that's awful cute.. if ya'll were average ya'll would be jumpin for joy!
Thomas Crean
ya'll think you're AVERAGE?!?!?!??!?! that's awful cute.. if ya'll were average ya'll would be jumpin for joy!
Thomas Crean
Keady won a lot of games and was a tough out, with less talented teams (1995-96). He really ran a system.MP needs great, top level talent, to win a Big Ten or make a Sweet 16.
With MP may be staff turnover has hurt recruiting. He was better recruiting with Paul Lusk and Rick Ray.
I would argue that any coach does in today's game. Coach K and Calipari aren't exactly winning national titles with walk-ons.
It's like you haven't even watched Purdue play this year. Purdue has played a lot of high ball screen pick and roll this year.
You really think that would fit our current team? Haas and Swanigan aren't guys we want rolling to the basket.
The high ball screen never beat Purdue last night adn only accounts for a few possessions in a game. Change the emphasis on protecting the dribbler on the perimeter and the high ball screen loses some flavor for those that want more two men games
LOL dude it's even in the game highlight reel on espn. mustard?! don't let's be silly!
Problem is that the Chicken littles on this board would be looking to fire the best of coaches whenever the team struggles. Look at Izzo right now, they would want him fired despite their brutal schedule. The fact is, they will never be happy. We win a National Championship, and they will bitch because we haven't won 2.
Similar threads
