Burke being Burke
- Thread starter nagemj02
- Start date
Out of the blue? As opposed to a public, protracted negotiation?
You have got to be the whiniest person I have seen on here. You PMSing or something?
Painter got an extension because he deserved it and it is one of the few things Burke did right. I know it flies in the face of you wannabe coaches, but that just shows even more how right the decision was. You know you can always go root for another team right?
Some of you need to get laid in the worst way.
Nothing out of the blue about it. If you want a kid to make a 4 year commitment his coach has to have a contract that extends beyond that. I'm not a CMP fan, but if you don't want him to recruit with one hand tied behind his back, this was a must.
Your understanding of the contract process mirrors your understanding of the team dynamic.
So you guys think it was a good decision for Burke to sign him for SIX MORE YEARS? LOL You guys can continue to be happy with T-3rd place finishes and 1st round NCAA exits. I believe the program can do better than that. It appears there's a large contingent of settlers in this thread. Hooray! The opportunity to settle for mediocrity could last another 6 seasons! Yay!
Last edited:
Apparently Morgan just realized today that Painter's contract was going to expire in three years.
Like Versyp's extension, that was even less deserved, the extension is actually a three year one, although it keeps them each under contract for 6 more years.
People support the extension announcement with the notion that it will assist in recruiting...and while it will eliminate a potential issue, it will take more than a contract extension to make a difference in recruiting...never mind that anyone that was allegedly using the fact that their respective contracts were expiring in three years will also point out that the extensions were made by a lame (duck) AD on his way out.
Yep. That's what that means. You've figured it out.
Perhaps, but the lack of the extension with 3 years to go would be a much bigger negative than the fact that the extension was given my a lame duck AD. The extension not only signals that the school plans to keep the coach around, but it signals that the coach plans to stay around, which is an equally significant concern. After all, considering that he has averaged 11 Big Ten conference wins over the past 10 seasons, Painter would have many options if he wanted to leave Purdue.
That's fine with me. Let him walk. He has not taken the program to a higher level or further in the tournament than even Keady did. Just like with Burke, it's time for a change.
Some of you guys act like you're afraid every current player, newcomer, or prospect will look elsewhere if Painter isn't there. I would bet the truth would surprise you. I'd be willing to bet that most of the guys would stick around under those circumstances.
So your only real rebuttal is to compare Painter to a coach that has had a longer tenure than he has? Yet more proof you have no basketball knowledge and have no business even suggesting that Painter should be fired. You don't have future telling abilities have no clue whether Painter will ever get to a final four or not. What we do have is a coach that learned from his mistakes, pulled the team up and got it to a top ranking and is still showing signs of improvement. That is enough to warrant an extension whether you like it or not.
You most certainly are thinking about this more emotionally than logically. I don't know if you are just that wrapped up in your life that it has no meaning if Purdue doesn't get a final four or if you are just being whiney for the sake of being whiney.
Either way one thing is for sure, if the extension upsets you this much, it is most certainly the right thing to do because it does the opposite of what you want. Like I said, there are plenty of other schools you can go root for. I highly doubt you would be missed here.
You are missing the point. The point isn't that the extension prevents Painter from walking. Rather, the point is that the extension gives recruits tangible evidence that Painter intends to stay for a long time.
Painter has been recruiting several of these guys in the 2017 class for years. They aren't going to come to Purdue if they don't think that he is going to be the coach for long. Why would they? They all have plenty of options.
In hindsight this was pretty much a given after the Versyp extension. There obviously is a desire to allow the new AD focus on fixing the football mess. Perhaps getting the bball coaches tied up signals they are indeed targeting a "football guy".
I usually stay out of these threads but.....
A couple of you keep talking about a lame duck AD making this decision. There is no way Burke made this decision on his own. This was a University decision. Like it, don't like it, just realize Burke didn't "do this" by himself.
A couple of you keep talking about a lame duck AD making this decision. There is no way Burke made this decision on his own. This was a University decision. Like it, don't like it, just realize Burke didn't "do this" by himself.
Good point. I really hope that is the case because that program needs that kind of focus.
in fairness, there are worse things than being slightly above average...there's always coach hat. At least I can enjoy watching bball. football?
Someone please take Burke's crayolas away before he extends Hazel's contract.
Maybe not a 'University' decision, but I guarantee you the schedule and baseline terms for contract extensions are outlined and agreed upon way in advance. Not like Burke just made this decision in a vacuum or this was a surprise for anyone involved.
You got it right. This extension absolutely was the right thing to do. It does not prevent a new AD replacing Painter if there is a catastrophic collapse of the program, so the whiners can relax.
The whole idea that a coach who has shown he can recruit and coach a team into a top 20 position, multiple times, is not in any danger of being fired is rediculous. Painter is young, aggressive, and competent. His teams are getting better as he learns and recruits better. He definitely has the potential for making multiple FF's so let's calm down here.
If that's the
I'm not arguing that Painter needed an extension for recruiting. But what's missing in all of this for me is that Purdue leadership should have seen this day coming and moved Burke out earlier. Instead, he hangs around too long and is forced to 1) Keep Hazell 2) Hire a new baseball coach and 3) extend both basketball coaches in his last year here. Terrible timing. Have some foresight and make the change earlier so the new AD can handle all of this while setting expectations along the way. Another example of poor planning by Purdue.
I'm not arguing that Painter needed an extension for recruiting. But what's missing in all of this for me is that Purdue leadership should have seen this day coming and moved Burke out earlier. Instead, he hangs around too long and is forced to 1) Keep Hazell 2) Hire a new baseball coach and 3) extend both basketball coaches in his last year here. Terrible timing. Have some foresight and make the change earlier so the new AD can handle all of this while setting expectations along the way. Another example of poor planning by Purdue.
You got it right. This extension absolutely was the right thing to do. It does not prevent a new AD replacing Painter if there is a catastrophic collapse of the program, so the whiners can relax.
The whole idea that a coach who has shown he can recruit and coach a team into a top 20 position, multiple times, is not in any danger of being fired is rediculous. Painter is young, aggressive, and competent. His teams are getting better as he learns and recruits better. He definitely has the potential for making multiple FF's so let's calm down here.
Many subjective statements there. They young moniker is almost up. I would not classify him as aggressive in play style or recruiting. Maybe on defensive philosophy. His recruiting is not getting better. It's flat to down from the Baby Boilers and if you judge by NCAA standards they are not getting better. Other than that, you are spot on.
The team scored a high average in points last season, so yes offensively things are getting more aggressive. Recruiting most certainly is getting better or did you just simply forget we have a 5 star recruit on the roster surrounded by one solid class with some exceptional players?
Some of you are really reaching for things to whine about Painter over and things that are based off of your perception and not fact.
What the Burke retirement timing tells me is that Hazell will probably get a fifth season because Purdue won't want to pay the 4.45 million dollar buyout in 2017. Unless there is drastic improvement, Hazell will be let go at the end of the 2017 football season. What that allows is for the new AD to be ready to move quickly at the end of 2017 season with money to spend on a proven coach. As bad as things are, the most attractive thing about the job at that point is that there probably still will be nowhere to go but up and the right coach will have a chance to build some momentum and generate some excitement early on.
I'm certain that the university will have no interest in also buying out Painter during this timeframe, so his extension was practically a forgone conclusion. Even if the new AD had been in place now, buying out Painter now while leaving Hazell in place for two more years would make absolutely no sense.
Last edited:
He is still young compared to his contemporaries - fact, not subjective. His recruiting dipped after the baby boilers, but then has consistently improved since then - fact, if you look at ratings (I would agree with you if you wanted to say the rating are subjective). His offensive production is going up and he has recently fielded some of the most offensively efficient teams in the NCAA's - fact. He is considered by his peers as a good coach on the rise, based on his participation in several national teams - fact.
Now, if you look at only the NCAA performance, then I would say you have a point. The problem with looking only at the NCAA's is that the whole contest is a single elimination format with games that are often decided by strange events, chance, and one team simply getting hot at the right time. It is a poor measure of the health of a program. Painter has us in great position to make a run, but NCAA runs are never a guarantee, no matter who is coaching - see Izzo, re 2016.
Offensive efficiency does not equal aggressiveness. How many top guards are turned off by his style of play? I could care less how he is perceived by his peers. How did the USA team do when he was the head coach? What is our recruiting class ranked this year? Why are we 5th year guard central? Recruiting is not a strength no matter how you measure it. At the end of the day, NCAA tourney success is all that matter and all that has mattered since it came into prominence. It separates the men from the boys as much as we don't want to admit it.
People don't need to make up reasons to be down on Painter. He gives us plenty of ammunition on his own. If he gets this team to play to its potential in the tournament and delivers on '17 then we are talking. He couldn't do that last year on the court or on the recruiting trail. And unfortunately that is more the norm for him on both fronts over his career here any way you slice it.
You just simply are not either watching Purdue or just ignoring real facts because very little of what you say is true. He had maybe two years of bad recruiting which hardly makes it a norm. He landed a 5 star recruit and CE is no slouch either.
It stuns me how you think you see all these things that have little basis in anything more than your failure to properly understand what it is you are watching.
Believe me, I remember what I saw during the Little Rock game. Do you remember? We finished 12-6 in conf and 3 games behind IU last year with one of Painters best teams. What about the other meltdowns we had last year. What was I watching then? That is when coaching and offensive efficiency and recruiting and every other stat people on this board throw out to prove or disprove points comes to a head and equal results. Our results with Painter have been overwhelmingly average by Purdue standards.
Once you start talking about where we are headed, it's subjective. Its whatever lens you choose to look at the data through. Look, I don't begrudge anyone for being optimistic about Purdue basketball. I used to be there. I was a Trust in Painter guy, but time and reality has set in. Do I think he can have a lot of 20+ win seasons? Yes. Do I believe Painter will take us to the Final 4? No.
I'll start off by saying that I am a 2000 Purdue Computer Science graduate and a Painter fan. I don't think Purdue is a great sell as a place to live if you aren't a hardcore Purdue fan and really love being around the Purdue campus. Sure, it's close to Indy and Chicago, but not that close. West Lafayette and Lafayette don't have a lot of things going for it "city-wise", and the weather isn't that good. Therefore, I think it would be pretty hard to get someone as successful as Matt to come to Purdue. He's won the B1G, BTT, finished in the top more than in the bottom and has gotten to the NCAA 8 out of 11 times (I think). There are lots of teams that never make the NCAA tournament, one being in the B1G. I get the frustration of not going far in the tourney. He's had some really good teams at Purdue and the probably should have gone farther, but $hit happens.
I was digging around and found this:
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/
I didn't realize he was in the top 20 paid college coaches in the country. But at 17, he is fourth in the B1G... pretty close to where his average finish in the conference might be.
That article might be more damning that good for a Painter fan. That said, I am happy being a 20-25 win team a year with a Cub fan optimism that maybe this year is the year. Who knows who might come next. Could be a miracle man like Brad Stevens was for Butler, but more likely we get another Hazel.
I was digging around and found this:
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/
I didn't realize he was in the top 20 paid college coaches in the country. But at 17, he is fourth in the B1G... pretty close to where his average finish in the conference might be.
That article might be more damning that good for a Painter fan. That said, I am happy being a 20-25 win team a year with a Cub fan optimism that maybe this year is the year. Who knows who might come next. Could be a miracle man like Brad Stevens was for Butler, but more likely we get another Hazel.
It's too bad that you think you have to be a Painter fan to be a Purdue fan. I am a Purdue fan.
Here is fact and not perception...
Arkansas Little Rock outscoring Purdue 21-7 over the last 5 minutes of the game.
Cincy outscores Purdue 10-3 in last 48 seconds of the game
Wow. Great point. Totally refuted anything he tried to prove there. Good work Bob.
Interesting. You accuse other of being "subjective", then pose these statements. Sorry, but I just have to rise to the bait. I mean you no harm, and we could probably enjoy an adult beverage over this discussion, were it live.
First, who says "top guards" are turned off by his style of play? Did you gather that "fact" by just reading some of the more strange posts on this board? Is this just your opinion? How did you decide this was a "fact"? You do realize that most of the NCAA final four teams play pretty good defense, right? Most FF teams have 3 & 4 star guards, right? Almost all FF teams are efficient on offense. Man, I just can't get this argument to work right when I apply facts.
Second, how good does our 2016 class need to be? We have the starting point guard coming in from the #1 high school team in the country. He is a 4* player who may be a real sleeper. By the way, did you read the article on how the top 10 players rarely translate into tourney success? - statistically not a good idea to recruit these guys. But hey, who needs facts when random message board opinions support your arguments so much more conveniently.
You got me with the NCAA tourney success as a measure. I agree with you that we need to do better than we have. The real question is, are we on the right path to do so? The answer can only be an opinion - yours or mine - both have equal weight. We can agree to disagree about Painter and I am okay with that.
I'm to the point that when someone says they want Painter replaced I just roll my eyes, take note of who said it, and then pay very little attention to what they say going forward. Either the person has an agenda or is flat out dumb.
The way Purdue collapsed to end regulation in both of those 2 tourney losses is what troubles me most about Painter's coaching philosophy & his execution of that philosophy.
-Purdue lost to Cincy by giving up 10 pts in the last minute of regulation (only 2 of which came immediately after a Purdue TO). Cincy scored 5 of the last 6 times they got the ball in regulation.
-Purdue lost to LR by allowing 21 pts in the last 5 1/2 mins of regulation. Purdue didn't get a single defensive stop during the last 4 mins of regulation as LR scored the last 9 times they got the ball to force OT (only 2 pts came within 13 secs of a Purdue TO).
I think Purdue needs to fire Painter & hire a coach who actually cares about defense!
I think this extension was based on the fact that Painter has a really good squad, somewhat young, and is in good shape on a lot of great recruits in 2017. With the schedule we have coming up looking like one of the tougher schedules in the NCAA this year, the talent we have currently, and potentially coming in, it just lines up nicely for Painter to get some more confidence from the university, basically saying that you're not in the hot seat because of one poorly played game in the NCAA Tournament last year. We like what we see from you, you snagged the first (or one of the very few) burger boy in nearly 20+ years (since G-Rob, right?), and seem to be heading in the right direction.
I'm okay with it. I like Painter, he's a Purdue guy, it's not like he's a horrible coach. The coach can only do so much, and although Purdue has great history as a basketball program, it's not like we've been known to dominate the NCAA, make FFs, E8s, even S16s on a regular basis. What we do is recruit hard-working 4 year kids, pride ourselves on defense, and do things the right way. Painter has done that near perfectly. It's just that people see Izzo, Coach K, Roy Williams, Bill Self, Calipari, all the blue blood programs (no IU, you're not one of them), and want what they have. We all want a top 5 team year in, year out, but it's not going to happen to Purdue, IU, Michigan, OSU, or any team not named UK, Duke, UNC, KU, or MSU. If you think a coaching change will do that, you're wrong. Hell, even Billy Donovan wasn't having the success he had in the late 2000s.
I'm okay with it. I like Painter, he's a Purdue guy, it's not like he's a horrible coach. The coach can only do so much, and although Purdue has great history as a basketball program, it's not like we've been known to dominate the NCAA, make FFs, E8s, even S16s on a regular basis. What we do is recruit hard-working 4 year kids, pride ourselves on defense, and do things the right way. Painter has done that near perfectly. It's just that people see Izzo, Coach K, Roy Williams, Bill Self, Calipari, all the blue blood programs (no IU, you're not one of them), and want what they have. We all want a top 5 team year in, year out, but it's not going to happen to Purdue, IU, Michigan, OSU, or any team not named UK, Duke, UNC, KU, or MSU. If you think a coaching change will do that, you're wrong. Hell, even Billy Donovan wasn't having the success he had in the late 2000s.
Similar threads
