INDIANAPOLIS ? Spirit of full disclosure: I did not see the final 10 minutes of Purdue's loss to Notre Dame Saturday in Indianapolis.
In an attempt to cover as many bases as possible, I left Consec err, Bankers Life Fieldhouse early to get to Basil Smotherman's game at Tech on time. Luckily, our Stacy Bureau was on hand to handle post-game.
And now here I am writing a blog about a game I only saw three-fourths of. That was enough.
When I left, I think Purdue was down 20, so it was pretty evident what the outcome was going to be.
The Boilermakers curled up in a ball on offense again and the older, more experienced and, yes, better Irish went on to win, but not without freshman Rapheal Davis (apparently) putting on a bit of a show from that point on.
This was Purdue's sixth loss of the season and thus the sixth time (or thereabout) that I've sat through our Game Day Live blog ? another mission aborted tonight thanks to shoddy Internet connections at Cons uh, Bankers Life ? and dodged the hand grenades being thrown by fans who may or may not actually want Purdue to win.
Anyway, a familiar refrain has been about recruiting, about how "awful" it's been. Love that term.
No, it hasn't.
If you're not someone who can simply accept the fact that Purdue is enduring a painful transitional year ? the win at Clemson keeping Games 1-10 from being the worst-case scenario from a won-loss perspective ? because of its youth and new-ness, then I'd stand by another familiar refrain: Purdue isn't losing because of an utter lack of ability. It's losing because of a significant lack of experience in a rebuilding year.
Does Purdue have great players? No. But I would not write off the chances some of these young kids might have to become great.
But Purdue has good players.
Are some of them limited in some ways? Absolutely.
People want to rip on Travis Carroll all the time, and I hate to legitimize it by sticking up for him. But if anything right now, Purdue needs more Travis Carroll.
I don't mean Travis Carroll needs to play more, but rather Purdue collectively needs to play more like Travis Carroll. He has very obvious limitations, yes, but he doesn't try to do anything he can't do; he plays hard; he makes simple plays; he's unselfish; he's heady; and he keeps his damn mouth shut.
I know you are what your record says you are ? per Bill Parcells ? but this team is going to be good at some point, as long as it doesn't fracture and accept losing. Purdue, under Matt Painter, has never accepted losing, not even when it actually was awful when it had no players in Year 1.
Now, Purdue has players.
I know people want to harp on the guys Purdue didn't get. Well, the guys Purdue didn't get are guys who can play at literally any school in the country.
And they are going to schools that have gone to Final Fours.
Purdue had its chance to join that club. You know what happened.
Excuses, I know. "Typical loser mentality," the guy who asked last week why Purdue wasn't trying to hire Bob Stoops will tell me on Twitter.
But again, what's the difference between an excuse and what happened?
Coaches don't just turn into idiots, contrary to popular belief.
Painter put together two Final Four-capable rosters at Purdue and there's no reason to rule out it happening again. He might have the core of another one in the program right now for all we know. It's just nowhere near ready yet.
Teams win with freshmen in college basketball all the time. It's the new normal.
But it's not easy, not even at Kentucky, where they can just turn their transcendent talents loose and stomp people.
Right now, it's a struggle. The freshmen are struggling with structure and the simplest elements of fitting into it. Upperclassmen are adjusting to new roles with a new playing style, at least offensively where the emphasis is now on the interior.
And had Kelsey Barlow not, predictably, gone sideways on the Boilermakers, maybe things are a bit different. There's a talented guy who might have been Purdue's best player had he not melted down.
This might end up being a long, long season, but I will maintain that this is a Purdue team that can and should get better as the season goes on, even if it isn't right now. The light could come on at any time for a group this young. It just has to figure out how to pass a freaking basketball first.
It's going to be a process, but Purdue should improve as the season goes on, even if it doesn't seem to be right now.
Davis is the face of where Purdue is right now. In the limited minutes he's gotten this season, he hasn't been productive. He's struggled on defense, turned the ball over some and been a relatively easy guard because of his jumper isn't yet where it needs to be.
But he's talented enough to do what he did against Notre Dame in the second half.
The ability is there.
But maybe we talk about "talent" too much.
What Purdue needs, other than experience, is more toughness, more basketball savvy, more intangibles.
How "talented" was Chris Kramer?
How "talented" is that Butler team that just beat No. 1 Indiana in overtime without half its team?
Talent is just part of it.
Sorry for the rambling and the random shadow-boxing with invisible haters. Long night.
In an attempt to cover as many bases as possible, I left Consec err, Bankers Life Fieldhouse early to get to Basil Smotherman's game at Tech on time. Luckily, our Stacy Bureau was on hand to handle post-game.
And now here I am writing a blog about a game I only saw three-fourths of. That was enough.
When I left, I think Purdue was down 20, so it was pretty evident what the outcome was going to be.
The Boilermakers curled up in a ball on offense again and the older, more experienced and, yes, better Irish went on to win, but not without freshman Rapheal Davis (apparently) putting on a bit of a show from that point on.
This was Purdue's sixth loss of the season and thus the sixth time (or thereabout) that I've sat through our Game Day Live blog ? another mission aborted tonight thanks to shoddy Internet connections at Cons uh, Bankers Life ? and dodged the hand grenades being thrown by fans who may or may not actually want Purdue to win.
Anyway, a familiar refrain has been about recruiting, about how "awful" it's been. Love that term.
No, it hasn't.
If you're not someone who can simply accept the fact that Purdue is enduring a painful transitional year ? the win at Clemson keeping Games 1-10 from being the worst-case scenario from a won-loss perspective ? because of its youth and new-ness, then I'd stand by another familiar refrain: Purdue isn't losing because of an utter lack of ability. It's losing because of a significant lack of experience in a rebuilding year.
Does Purdue have great players? No. But I would not write off the chances some of these young kids might have to become great.
But Purdue has good players.
Are some of them limited in some ways? Absolutely.
People want to rip on Travis Carroll all the time, and I hate to legitimize it by sticking up for him. But if anything right now, Purdue needs more Travis Carroll.
I don't mean Travis Carroll needs to play more, but rather Purdue collectively needs to play more like Travis Carroll. He has very obvious limitations, yes, but he doesn't try to do anything he can't do; he plays hard; he makes simple plays; he's unselfish; he's heady; and he keeps his damn mouth shut.
I know you are what your record says you are ? per Bill Parcells ? but this team is going to be good at some point, as long as it doesn't fracture and accept losing. Purdue, under Matt Painter, has never accepted losing, not even when it actually was awful when it had no players in Year 1.
Now, Purdue has players.
I know people want to harp on the guys Purdue didn't get. Well, the guys Purdue didn't get are guys who can play at literally any school in the country.
And they are going to schools that have gone to Final Fours.
Purdue had its chance to join that club. You know what happened.
Excuses, I know. "Typical loser mentality," the guy who asked last week why Purdue wasn't trying to hire Bob Stoops will tell me on Twitter.
But again, what's the difference between an excuse and what happened?
Coaches don't just turn into idiots, contrary to popular belief.
Painter put together two Final Four-capable rosters at Purdue and there's no reason to rule out it happening again. He might have the core of another one in the program right now for all we know. It's just nowhere near ready yet.
Teams win with freshmen in college basketball all the time. It's the new normal.
But it's not easy, not even at Kentucky, where they can just turn their transcendent talents loose and stomp people.
Right now, it's a struggle. The freshmen are struggling with structure and the simplest elements of fitting into it. Upperclassmen are adjusting to new roles with a new playing style, at least offensively where the emphasis is now on the interior.
And had Kelsey Barlow not, predictably, gone sideways on the Boilermakers, maybe things are a bit different. There's a talented guy who might have been Purdue's best player had he not melted down.
This might end up being a long, long season, but I will maintain that this is a Purdue team that can and should get better as the season goes on, even if it isn't right now. The light could come on at any time for a group this young. It just has to figure out how to pass a freaking basketball first.
It's going to be a process, but Purdue should improve as the season goes on, even if it doesn't seem to be right now.
Davis is the face of where Purdue is right now. In the limited minutes he's gotten this season, he hasn't been productive. He's struggled on defense, turned the ball over some and been a relatively easy guard because of his jumper isn't yet where it needs to be.
But he's talented enough to do what he did against Notre Dame in the second half.
The ability is there.
But maybe we talk about "talent" too much.
What Purdue needs, other than experience, is more toughness, more basketball savvy, more intangibles.
How "talented" was Chris Kramer?
How "talented" is that Butler team that just beat No. 1 Indiana in overtime without half its team?
Talent is just part of it.
Sorry for the rambling and the random shadow-boxing with invisible haters. Long night.
