Bruce Webber

[TMA62]

I wondered what would have happened to Purdue Bball if Bruce Webber was hired as the HC. I think he was the likely heir to Keady but when the Illinois job opened up, Webber jumped for it.

What do you think would have happened if Webber was hired instead of Painter? Would the program be better or worse now?

Just curious.

 

[*4purdue*]

probably about the same. Bruce couldn't recruit as well as CMP has, but he was a better bench coach. Under Bruce, I would say we would probably have had about the same success. CMP hasn't set the bar real high with what we've done in the 11 years he's been here.

 

[Dryfly88]

At the time I was in favor of getting Kevin Stallings. In hind sight I don't think he, Bruce or Painter would have been drastically different.

 

[PaBoiler78]

At the time I was in favor of getting Kevin Stallings. In hind sight I don't think he, Bruce or Painter would have been drastically different.

I was for Lavin and think things would be about the same

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I wondered what would have happened to Purdue Bball if Bruce Webber was hired as the HC. I think he was the likely heir to Keady but when the Illinois job opened up, Webber jumped for it.

What do you think would have happened if Webber was hired instead of Painter? Would the program be better or worse now?

Just curious.

Yeah, Weber didn't recruit many studs at Purdue. Pass.

Keady was a better recruiter than CMP, in my opinion, at least if you compare the first 11 years.

 

[SIBoiler2]

Yeah, Weber didn't recruit many studs at Purdue. Pass.

Keady was a better recruiter than CMP, in my opinion, at least if you compare the first 11 years.

Not sure Keady was any better. Was before the Internet and instant 24/7 news as well as AAU teams. Recruiting was a lot different and few fans had any idea of what was really happening before the class was signed.

 

[TC4THREE]

Recruiting was an entirely different animal back then. One thing I do feel comfortable saying is I believe Painter works 10 times harder at recruiting than Keady did and he needs to. Recruiting is far more difficult in 2016 than it was in 1996 and everything I ever heard or read suggested Keady liked to spend his summers on the golf course. That wouldn't fly today and I actually think that started to cost him towards the end of his career at Purdue. Say what you will about him, but you can't deny that Painter travels all over the place for recruiting.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Recruiting was an entirely different animal back then. One thing I do feel comfortable saying is I believe Painter works 10 times harder at recruiting than Keady did and he needs to. Recruiting is far more difficult in 2016 than it was in 1996 and everything I ever heard or read suggested Keady liked to spend his summers on the golf course. That wouldn't fly today and I actually think that started to cost him towards the end of his career at Purdue. Say what you will about him, but you can't deny that Painter travels all over the place for recruiting.

Let's not confuse effort with results.

 

[Illinisully]

believe me Purdue fans, you wouldn't have wanted Weber. He did an excellent job with Self's players but after that? All down hill from there. Absolutely could NOT capitalize on going to the National Title game . He couldn't recruit to save his life (I lost count on how many whiffs he had lol)

 

[New Pal Boiler]

believe me Purdue fans, you wouldn't have wanted Weber. He did an excellent job with Self's players but after that? All down hill from there. Absolutely could NOT capitalize on going to the National Title game . He couldn't recruit to save his life (I lost count on how many whiffs he had lol)

He signed some highly rated players but most of them ended up being knuckleheads.

 

[TC4THREE]

Let's not confuse effort with results.

I'm fine with our recruiting. If you want to continue to whine about it, feel free. My point was that Keady didn't put much effort into recruiting when it was a far easier thing to do. There's no way he'd get away with that now and no way that he's a better recruiter than Painter.

 

[punaj]

Let's face it, Purdue isn't a destination coaching job. Painter probably loves Purdue as much or more than any of us die hard alums. He averages more than 20 wins per season, something a lot of programs would kill for, and we make the tournament around 75% of the time under him. I'd love a post season run, and want to believe this is the year, but if it's not I am happy to have Painter for as long as he wants to stay.

 

[punaj]

To follow up my last post, if Painter were to leave then I'm far more afraid we end up with a string of Hazel type coaches than a Tiller. That said, I don't think Tiller ever had a 10 win season... we got lucky with a new approach to the B1G with basketball on grass. And Brees hurting his knee in high school and deciding to come to Purdue helped a bit.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I'm fine with our recruiting. If you want to continue to whine about it, feel free. My point was that Keady didn't put much effort into recruiting when it was a far easier thing to do. There's no way he'd get away with that now and no way that he's a better recruiter than Painter.

Not whining, just stating facts. Keady worked his tail off his first 11 years also, and signed at least as many good players than Matt did, and probably more. 3 McD AAs for GK to 1 for MP.

Yes, things tailed off the last 5-6 years or so, but we are only comparing the first 11 years here.

 

[TC4THREE]

Not whining, just stating facts. Keady worked his tail off his first 11 years also, and signed at least as many good players than Matt did, and probably more. 3 McD AAs for GK to 1 for MP.

Yes, things tailed off the last 5-6 years or so, but we are only comparing the first 11 years here.

You can't even compare recruiting in the 80's and 90's to today. Back then, the competition for local kids was mostly local. Today, the world is so much smaller that you have to compete and put in time (not something Keady was really noted for when it comes to recruiting) against all kinds of programs who have a much greater platform than they had 20 years ago. Keady wasn't a great recruiter at that time and would be absolutely terrible today if he took the same type of approach.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

You can't even compare recruiting in the 80's and 90's to today. Back then, the competition for local kids was mostly local. Today, the world is so much smaller that you have to compete and put in time (not something Keady was really noted for when it comes to recruiting) against all kinds of programs who have a much greater platform than they had 20 years ago. Keady wasn't a great recruiter at that time and would be absolutely terrible today if he took the same type of approach.

You obviously haven't read Passion Play. Keady worked his tail off back then. Ask Mark Montieth.

Recruiting wasn't any easier back then. 15 scholarships allowed the blue bloods to stockpile players, and they were on TV way more than everyone else.

It was about relationships then, and it still is.

 

[TC4THREE]

Recruiting wasn't any easier back then.

You're nuts.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

You're nuts.

Way to back up your claim.

 

[TC4THREE]

Way to back up your claim.

You're nuts.

 

[*4purdue*]

Let's face it, Purdue isn't a destination coaching job. Painter probably loves Purdue as much or more than any of us die hard alums. He averages more than 20 wins per season, something a lot of programs would kill for, and we make the tournament around 75% of the time under him. I'd love a post season run, and want to believe this is the year, but if it's not I am happy to have Painter for as long as he wants to stay.

Not to pick on you, but I hate when people say that. Was Wisconsin a coaching job?

 

[New Pal Boiler]

You're nuts.

I get it. You made a baseless claim and can't back it up, so that's all you can come up with.

 

[TC4THREE]

I get it. You made a baseless claim and can't back it up, so that's all you can come up with.

Why bother? If you don't already understand it, you're nuts so explaining it (which I've already done) is a waste of time.

 

[Dryfly88]

Not to pick on you, but I hate when people say that. Was Wisconsin a coaching job?

I think you meant to say "destination coaching job". While I agree I don't like the way it sounds, I have to agree with punaj. By that I mean: My definition of a destination job is that when it becomes open there is no shortage of already successful power 5 coaches actively pursuing the opportunity.

For example: If old Roy gave it up at UNC, K at Duke, Self at KU. They would not have any trouble what so ever getting candidates that were already consistent winners at big schools wanting to interview for the job. If Painter were fired tomorrow do you honestly think that would be the case for Bobinski? Doesn't mean that he wouldn't be able to get a good coach and one that would end up better than Painter. But if you think the list of candidates would be the same as the previous schools I listed then I guess there is no swaying you.

To your question about Wisconsin, I think their AD would end up with the same group of candidates as PU. So no, I don't consider Wisconsin a destination job before Bo or now after Bo. If it were a true destination job they wouldn't have hired Gard no matter how well he did as "interim" coach. They would have opened it up and got a big name to replace Bo. They knew better than anyone that they weren't going to get a big name. Bennett would have been the one but I'm sure they checked that out before hiring Gard.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Why bother? If you don't already understand it, you're nuts so explaining it (which I've already done) is a waste of time.

You keep saying Keady didn't put in a lot of time, which is flat out incorrect, and you have not backed up that assertion.

There are a whole bunch of ways that recruiting was harder back then, but I'm sure you don't want to hear about those, because it doesn't fit your "poor CMP" narrative.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I think you meant to say "destination coaching job". While I agree I don't like the way it sounds, I have to agree with punaj. By that I mean: My definition of a destination job is that when it becomes open there is no shortage of already successful power 5 coaches actively pursuing the opportunity.

For example: If old Roy gave it up at UNC, K at Duke, Self at KU. They would not have any trouble what so ever getting candidates that were already consistent winners at big schools wanting to interview for the job. If Painter were fired tomorrow do you honestly think that would be the case for Bobinski? Doesn't mean that he wouldn't be able to get a good coach and one that would end up better than Painter. But if you think the list of candidates would be the same as the previous schools I listed then I guess there is no swaying you.

To your question about Wisconsin, I think their AD would end up with the same group of candidates as PU. So no, I don't consider Wisconsin a destination job before Bo or now after Bo. If it were a true destination job they wouldn't have hired Gard no matter how well he did as "interim" coach. They would have opened it up and got a big name to replace Bo. They knew better than anyone that they weren't going to get a big name. Bennett would have been the one but I'm sure they checked that out before hiring Gard.

Look at Illinois. They think their job is a destination, and it maybe is, until Kansas comes along.

 

[Heller]

You keep saying Keady didn't put in a lot of time, which is flat out incorrect, and you have not backed up that assertion.

There are a whole bunch of ways that recruiting was harder back then, but I'm sure you don't want to hear about those, because it doesn't fit your "poor CMP" narrative.

I'm not trying to diss you but Weber was the primary recruiter under Keady.

 

[TC4THREE]

I'm not trying to diss you but Weber was the primary recruiter under Keady.

He doesn't want to hear that because it doesn't fit his my-internet-ego-is-bruised-so-CMP-sucks-at-everything narrative.

 

[TC4THREE]

You keep saying Keady didn't put in a lot of time, which is flat out incorrect, and you have not backed up that assertion.

There are a whole bunch of ways that recruiting was harder back then, but I'm sure you don't want to hear about those, because it doesn't fit your "poor CMP" narrative.

I can't give you a link to anything if that's what you want but I have heard/read many accounts of Keady not liking to put alot of time in on recruiting and letting his assistants do the work. You are the first person in about 30 years of following Purdue sports that has speculated otherwise, and in fact the complete opposite.

As far as recruiting being more difficult back then, that's just a complete joke. In the 1980's probably through the early 1990's the kids in the state of Indiana, which has been a traditional basketball recruiting hotbed, were far more inclined to end up at IU and Purdue for a number of different reasons which I've posted on this board recently. If we were talking about recruiting for Butler then yes, it is easier now. Recruiting for Purdue has become much more difficult for the exact opposite reason. Other programs have greater access to recruits we used to hold a big advantage with and those recruits are more aware and receptive to those programs. Do you think Big Dog comes to Purdue in 2016 with Keady as coach? Do you think Kyle Young chooses Butler in 1985?

 

[kevindub]

I wondered what would have happened to Purdue Bball if Bruce Webber was hired as the HC. I think he was the likely heir to Keady but when the Illinois job opened up, Webber jumped for it.

What do you think would have happened if Webber was hired instead of Painter? Would the program be better or worse now?

Just curious.

This isn't exactly so.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

He doesn't want to hear that because it doesn't fit his my-internet-ego-is-bruised-so-CMP-sucks-at-everything narrative.

It isn't the case. Weber can't recruit his way out of a paper bag. Keady, Kendrick and Stallings were all much better recruiters than Weber.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I can't give you a link to anything if that's what you want but I have heard/read many accounts of Keady not liking to put alot of time in on recruiting and letting his assistants do the work. You are the first person in about 30 years of following Purdue sports that has speculated otherwise, and in fact the complete opposite.

As far as recruiting being more difficult back then, that's just a complete joke. In the 1980's probably through the early 1990's the kids in the state of Indiana, which has been a traditional basketball recruiting hotbed, were far more inclined to end up at IU and Purdue for a number of different reasons which I've posted on this board recently. If we were talking about recruiting for Butler then yes, it is easier now. Recruiting for Purdue has become much more difficult for the exact opposite reason. Other programs have greater access to recruits we used to hold a big advantage with and those recruits are more aware and receptive to those programs. Do you think Big Dog comes to Purdue in 2016 with Keady as coach? Do you think Kyle Young chooses Butler in 1985?

This is just flat out wrong in every way:
Purdue beat out:

UNLV, Syracuse and Michigan for GRob

UCLA and Pitt for Todd Mitchell

Kansas (with Larry Brown) for Troy Lewis

Kentucky and Iowa for Everette Stephens

There were fewer restrictions on how often you could call or visit recruits, so Keady was known to outwork other staffs for players by going to see kids more often.

Back then, there were no AAU tourneys and no Internet, so you had to go scout each kid individually, with the exception of a few summer camps.

No cell phones or GPS, so road trips were much harder than they are now.

A dominant IU program with Bobby Knight in his prime, getting every instate recruit they desired, winning his 2nd national title in your first season. And all the factors you listed above made it harder to go out of state and get good players.

Can Painter catch up and pass Gene? Absolutely. But he needs to find his Kendrick, in my opinion, to do so.

 

[TC4THREE]

This is just flat out wrong in every way:
Purdue beat out:

UNLV, Syracuse and Michigan for GRob

UCLA and Pitt for Todd Mitchell

Kansas (with Larry Brown) for Troy Lewis

Kentucky and Iowa for Everette Stephens

There were fewer restrictions on how often you could call or visit recruits, so Keady was known to outwork other staffs for players by going to see kids more often.

Back then, there were no AAU tourneys and no Internet, so you had to go scout each kid individually, with the exception of a few summer camps.

No cell phones or GPS, so road trips were much harder than they are now.

A dominant IU program with Bobby Knight in his prime, getting every instate recruit they desired, winning his 2nd national title in your first season. And all the factors you listed above made it harder to go out of state and get good players.

Can Painter catch up and pass Gene? Absolutely. But he needs to find his Kendrick, in my opinion, to do so.

And they beat out those programs because........................................

 

[New Pal Boiler]

And they beat out those programs because........................................

For a variety of reasons. Point is, it wasn't like GRob was too far away for Tark or Boeheim to visit him, or that Kansas was too far away for Lewis to make an official visit there. (And he said if Brown had pulled out an LOI at a local ice cream joint he would have signed on the spot)

Don't think Painter sucks, nor do I want him fired. But there is no excuse for him not to recruit at least as well as Keady did.

 

[TC4THREE]

For a variety of reasons. Point is, it wasn't like GRob was too far away for Tark or Boeheim to visit him, or that Kansas was too far away for Lewis to make an official visit there. (And he said if Brown had pulled out an LOI at a local ice cream joint he would have signed on the spot)

Don't think Painter sucks, nor do I want him fired. But there is no excuse for him not to recruit at least as well as Keady did.

Variety of reasons yes. You don't think familiarity with those programs had anything to do with it? Familiarity with the players in those programs and other recruits in those programs?

Today these kids grow up with the world at the tips of their fingers and the ability to watch a game between Creighton and Marquette every bit as easily as Purdue and Minnesota. Social media allows them to communicate and stay in touch with recruits halfway across the country as easily as the they player at a high school just down the road.

I know, I know. In your world, the recruit isn't actually a relevant factor in choosing their school. It's all about the coach and whichever coach makes the best pitch gets the player. I'm to the point where I'm just going to let you keep believing that even as ridiculous as it is.

 

[Inspector100]

And they beat out those programs because........................................

I don't think this is the question you intended to ask. It is more like "what does he do now to get those results?" That answer is even more illusive, because if he knew, he would have done it and championships would be happening. The answer to your original question doesn't matter.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Variety of reasons yes. You don't think familiarity with those programs had anything to do with it? Familiarity with the players in those programs and other recruits in those programs?

Today these kids grow up with the world at the tips of their fingers and the ability to watch a game between Creighton and Marquette every bit as easily as Purdue and Minnesota. Social media allows them to communicate and stay in touch with recruits halfway across the country as easily as the they player at a high school just down the road.

I know, I know. In your world, the recruit isn't actually a relevant factor in choosing their school. It's all about the coach and whichever coach makes the best pitch gets the player. I'm to the point where I'm just going to let you keep believing that even as ridiculous as it is.

Yes - but that goes both ways: the kid in FL, TX, or NJ can watch Purdue as easily as the Indy kid can watch Syracuse.

And it's all relative: the coaches that Keady and Painter recruited against were all dealing with the same set of advantages and disadvantages.

Besides, Painter isn't losing these kids to schools on the coasts: he's losing them to MSU, St Louis, Butler, Louisville, etc.

Complaining that recruiting is harder now than it was 30 years ago is just a copout. It was hard then, it's hard now. That's why they get paid so much.

 

[TC4THREE]

Yes - but that goes both ways: the kid in FL, TX, or NJ can watch Purdue as easily as the Indy kid can watch Syracuse.

And it's all relative: the coaches that Keady and Painter recruited against were all dealing with the same set of advantages and disadvantages.

Besides, Painter isn't losing these kids to schools on the coasts: he's losing them to MSU, St Louis, Butler, Louisville, etc.

Complaining that recruiting is harder now than it was 30 years ago is just a copout. It was hard then, it's hard now. That's why they get paid so much.

When you're positioned in a basketball hotbed, that's not a good trade off. We're better off with more access closer to home. And the elevation of mid major programs just like Butler is the other part that has changed that hasn't been touched on yet. In the 1980's a team like Butler was almost never on tv unless they they were playing a big school like IU or Purdue. Today all these mid-major conferences have their teams on tv all the time.

And you can call it a cop out or an excuse if you want but that doesn't make it any less true. I honestly am just baffled that anyone would try to argue the point.

 

[TC4THREE]

I don't think this is the question you intended to ask. It is more like "what does he do now to get those results?" That answer is even more illusive, because if he knew, he would have done it and championships would be happening. The answer to your original question doesn't matter.

The debate between recruiting today vs 30 years ago doesn't matter but if people want to debate that point I'm happy to engage them.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

When you're positioned in a basketball hotbed, that's not a good trade off. We're better off with more access closer to home. And the elevation of mid major programs just like Butler is the other part that has changed that hasn't been touched on yet. In the 1980's a team like Butler was almost never on tv unless they they were playing a big school like IU or Purdue. Today all these mid-major conferences have their teams on tv all the time.

And you can call it a cop out or an excuse if you want but that doesn't make it any less true. I honestly am just baffled that anyone would try to argue the point.

That's your opinion.

I noticed you didn't address any of the disadvantages Keady had to deal with back in the 80s, Bobby/IU being at their peak, (not to mention a very strong ND program also instate) the additional travel, lack of technology, etc. I honestly am baffled that you would go to such lengths to make excuses for CMP.

 

[Mandeville LA]

Not whining, just stating facts. Keady worked his tail off his first 11 years also, and signed at least as many good players than Matt did, and probably more. 3 McD AAs for GK to 1 for MP.

Yes, things tailed off the last 5-6 years or so, but we are only comparing the first 11 years here.

GK was not a recruiter. Frank Kindrick was Pirdues big time recruiter until Lynn Dunn did him in. GK hated Lynn and told me so face to face one time.