Can CMP Close The Deal

[Boilers2525]

13 years for CMP. A long time to make progress. He has successfully built us into contenders. We have won league championships, he has also had some brutal bad luck with player injuries just when we are on the verge of something greater. I feel for him. On the other hand, CMP has not been able to regularly close the door on prime recruits, which translates into the struggles we see on the court with athletic teams. I believe the question at this point is does our administration want a Top 25 team each year or do they seriously want to challenge for a national championship? If the latter, I believe CMP needs to at least make the final 4 in the next 2-3 years, and if he can't accomplish that, we need a change. Of course being long time, hungry for a Final 4 Purdue fans, CMP will then accomplish getting to the Final 4 somewhere else. He is pretty young by standards of national title coaches at 47. I'm not complaining, just an observation. If we're happy being a perennial Top 25 team, we have our coach for as long as he wants to remain here. How do you see it?

 

[chiboiler7]

This is as good as it's going to get for Purdue, especially since we are competing with a dozen schools for recruits in our area. In our state alone you have IU, Butler, Notre dame that we have to compete with, just outside of Indiana it's UM, MSU, Ohio $tate, Kentucky and Loui$ville. We could very easily be a B10 bottom dweller, like tomorrow, if Painter left. The b10 is not even the premier basketball conference anymore. Sure we can compete but the big east/acc teams have been the bball conferences for awhile now. Izzo is the only coach that gets any sort of mainstream cred because he won the tourney once like 50 years ago. Realistically, Painter has us primed for a final four run about once every 5 years. And injuries have derailed pretty much every one of those high potential seasons. He will rip one off eventually, I have faith.

 

[Boiler Buck]

13 years for CMP. A long time to make progress. He has successfully built us into contenders. We have won league championships, he has also had some brutal bad luck with player injuries just when we are on the verge of something greater. I feel for him. On the other hand, CMP has not been able to regularly close the door on prime recruits, which translates into the struggles we see on the court with athletic teams. I believe the question at this point is does our administration want a Top 25 team each year or do they seriously want to challenge for a national championship? If the latter, I believe CMP needs to at least make the final 4 in the next 2-3 years, and if he can't accomplish that, we need a change. Of course being long time, hungry for a Final 4 Purdue fans, CMP will then accomplish getting to the Final 4 somewhere else. He is pretty young by standards of national title coaches at 47. I'm not complaining, just an observation. If we're happy being a perennial Top 25 team, we have our coach for as long as he wants to remain here. How do you see it?

FF??? We are not a FF team this year.....now occasionally some crazy unexpected team gets on a run and luckily makes it....is that what you are hoping for this year?......

IMO....For the next 3 years we will struggle to be top 3 in the B1G, let alone a FF team......with this year a possibility, and the years following CE...... no way IMO.

But we have a well coached, solid top 25 team with some nice pieces that happens to be in a very, very strong league this year.

 

[cropper81]

13 years for CMP. A long time to make progress. He has successfully built us into contenders. We have won league championships, he has also had some brutal bad luck with player injuries just when we are on the verge of something greater. I feel for him. On the other hand, CMP has not been able to regularly close the door on prime recruits, which translates into the struggles we see on the court with athletic teams. I believe the question at this point is does our administration want a Top 25 team each year or do they seriously want to challenge for a national championship? If the latter, I believe CMP needs to at least make the final 4 in the next 2-3 years, and if he can't accomplish that, we need a change. Of course being long time, hungry for a Final 4 Purdue fans, CMP will then accomplish getting to the Final 4 somewhere else. He is pretty young by standards of national title coaches at 47. I'm not complaining, just an observation. If we're happy being a perennial Top 25 team, we have our coach for as long as he wants to remain here. How do you see it?

Built you into contenders for what? The big10 I’ll agree but you’re not good enough to make a final 4 without a lot of help.

 

[Do Dah Day]

Built you into contenders for what? The big10 I’ll agree but you’re not good enough to make a final 4 without a lot of help.

Only four teams will be FF teams this year. Pretty elite company

 

[lbodel]

Only four teams will be FF teams this year. Pretty elite company

I'm sure he had Loyola in his Final Four last year....

 

[lbodel]

13 years for CMP. A long time to make progress. He has successfully built us into contenders. We have won league championships, he has also had some brutal bad luck with player injuries just when we are on the verge of something greater. I feel for him. On the other hand, CMP has not been able to regularly close the door on prime recruits, which translates into the struggles we see on the court with athletic teams. I believe the question at this point is does our administration want a Top 25 team each year or do they seriously want to challenge for a national championship? If the latter, I believe CMP needs to at least make the final 4 in the next 2-3 years, and if he can't accomplish that, we need a change. Of course being long time, hungry for a Final 4 Purdue fans, CMP will then accomplish getting to the Final 4 somewhere else. He is pretty young by standards of national title coaches at 47. I'm not complaining, just an observation. If we're happy being a perennial Top 25 team, we have our coach for as long as he wants to remain here. How do you see it?

Purdue fans that are "disappointed" with Painter better be careful what they wish for.

Look at IU - that's a program that should be a piece of cake to be perennially ranked in the top 25 and it's been a hot mess.

They've only made the tournament 4 years out of the last 10 years. Purdue's been in the Sweet 16 four times in the last 10 years, and in the tournament 8 of the last 10 -- so twice as many times as IU.

To complain about "just" being a regular top 25 team is pretty stupid these days in college basketball. That's no easy feat.

 

[ss32000]

Purdue fans that are "disappointed" with Painter better be careful what they wish for.

Look at IU - that's a program that should be a piece of cake to be perennially ranked in the top 25 and it's been a hot mess.

They've only made the tournament 4 years out of the last 10 years. Purdue's been in the Sweet 16 four times in the last 10 years, and in the tournament 8 of the last 10 -- so twice as many times as IU.

To complain about "just" being a regular top 25 team is pretty stupid these days in college basketball. That's no easy feat.

This is spot on. While fans might get frustrated with Painter, you could be one hire away from the bottom of the Big Ten. I do think it’s fair to say there needs to be a tweak if you feel a ceiling is hit. Purdue has had some bad luck with injuries, but the idea is to not build a team for a run every 3/4 years where an injury derails eberything. If you put yourself in a position to be a top 4 seed 3 out of 4 years, you will eventually breakthrough.

 

[Boilers2525]

It's interesting to see how people get on tangents. The responses to the original post...some on subject, some not so much. I happen to believe 13 years or 15 years to reach a final 4 is much too long w// the resources we offer. Granted it's a tough biz to get to a Final 4. I believe Matt might want to consider a book about high performance sales success. Challenger Sale is a great read and is a learned science and process. CMP IS everything one could hope at Purdue. His kind of talent is unique and much preferred by this Purdue fan, but as in life Matt can improve and I'm sure he strives to be better by his actions. Closing is science and art. Challenger Sale is a great read for anyone who sells whether ideas, products, services etc...Boiler Up, Hammer Down!!!

 

[New Pal Boiler]

This is spot on. While fans might get frustrated with Painter, you could be one hire away from the bottom of the Big Ten. I do think it’s fair to say there needs to be a tweak if you feel a ceiling is hit. Purdue has had some bad luck with injuries, but the idea is to not build a team for a run every 3/4 years where an injury derails eberything. If you put yourself in a position to be a top 4 seed 3 out of 4 years, you will eventually breakthrough.

This is big business, and firing a coach as successful as CMP who is pretty much filling up Mackey would be pretty risky. I think MBob is still trying to solidify Football, and is satisfied with Basketball for the time being. If things go downhill next season, that obviously could change.

 

[mathboy]

It's interesting to see how people get on tangents. The responses to the original post...some on subject, some not so much. I happen to believe 13 years or 15 years to reach a final 4 is much too long w// the resources we offer. Granted it's a tough biz to get to a Final 4. I believe Matt might want to consider a book about high performance sales success. Challenger Sale is a great read and is a learned science and process. CMP IS everything one could hope at Purdue. His kind of talent is unique and much preferred by this Purdue fan, but as in life Matt can improve and I'm sure he strives to be better by his actions. Closing is science and art. Challenger Sale is a great read for anyone who sells whether ideas, products, services etc...Boiler Up, Hammer Down!!!

Once again, let me remind you that during the 14 year window you make reference to, Purdue did not provide sufficient resources to compete, even in the BIG. We are damned lucky Painter waited out Cordova and the budget restrictions.

.i don't start any sort of clock on Painter until the end of Cordova's administration, and the restoration of a competative recruiting budget. That's only been a few years. Let's give him time to rebuild the momentum.

 

[lbodel]

This is spot on. While fans might get frustrated with Painter, you could be one hire away from the bottom of the Big Ten. I do think it’s fair to say there needs to be a tweak if you feel a ceiling is hit. Purdue has had some bad luck with injuries, but the idea is to not build a team for a run every 3/4 years where an injury derails eberything. If you put yourself in a position to be a top 4 seed 3 out of 4 years, you will eventually breakthrough.

I'm guessing you don't actually know how many programs in the country are a top 4 seed 3 out of 4 years?

Well, in the last 4 years that answer is: 5 programs across the country. 0 from the Big Ten.

Only 32 programs total have received a top 4 seed at least once in any of the last 4 tournaments.

Purdue is 1 of 16 programs that have received a top 4 seed 2 or more times in the last 4 tournaments - and one of 2 Big Ten programs that have.

People are putting forth benchmarks that I don't think they grasp exactly how difficult they are. The consistency Purdue's played at under Painter is extremely rare in college basketball today.

 

[lbodel]

It's interesting to see how people get on tangents. The responses to the original post...some on subject, some not so much. I happen to believe 13 years or 15 years to reach a final 4 is much too long w// the resources we offer. Granted it's a tough biz to get to a Final 4. I believe Matt might want to consider a book about high performance sales success. Challenger Sale is a great read and is a learned science and process. CMP IS everything one could hope at Purdue. His kind of talent is unique and much preferred by this Purdue fan, but as in life Matt can improve and I'm sure he strives to be better by his actions. Closing is science and art. Challenger Sale is a great read for anyone who sells whether ideas, products, services etc...Boiler Up, Hammer Down!!!

I think it's interesting to judge people on things you have no idea what they are doing behind the scenes. I'm guessing a "light" work week for Painter is 60-70 hours. You infer he's just sitting on his hands, happy and content where he's at.

The fact of the matter is - the "resources we offer" is really not anything special.

You linked resources ($) with an ability to get to the Final Four.

Purdue is 9th in the Big Ten in spending for men's basketball. Rutgers spends more on basketball than we do.

Why do you expect Purdue to reach a Final Four in a national tournament, if we're not even in the top 4 in resources in our own conference?

And it's not that the Big Ten just has so much money. Here's how we'd rank in other conferences:

ACC: 9th
SEC: 8th
Big 12: 7th
PAC 12: 6th
Big East: 6th (out of 10)
American: 3rd

So just from those conferences and the Big Ten, there are 41 programs putting more resources into basketball. So if you are 42nd in the country in resources, do you find that to be "too long with the resources we have" not to reach a Final Four in 13 years?

That doesn't really add up.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I think it's interesting to judge people on things you have no idea what they are doing behind the scenes. I'm guessing a "light" work week for Painter is 60-70 hours. You infer he's just sitting on his hands, happy and content where he's at.

The fact of the matter is - the "resources we offer" is really not anything special.

You linked resources ($) with an ability to get to the Final Four.

Purdue is 9th in the Big Ten in spending for men's basketball. Rutgers spends more on basketball than we do.

Why do you expect Purdue to reach a Final Four in a national tournament, if we're not even in the top 4 in resources in our own conference?

And it's not that the Big Ten just has so much money. Here's how we'd rank in other conferences:

ACC: 9th
SEC: 8th
Big 12: 7th
PAC 12: 6th
Big East: 6th (out of 10)
American: 3rd

So just from those conferences and the Big Ten, there are 41 programs putting more resources into basketball. So if you are 42nd in the country in resources, do you find that to be "too long with the resources we have" not to reach a Final Four in 13 years?

That doesn't really add up.

Wow. That is surprisingly low. Figured we’d be top 25-30 at least. Though right now Football is priority #1, for obvious reasons.

 

[DAG10]

13 years for CMP. A long time to make progress. He has successfully built us into contenders. We have won league championships, he has also had some brutal bad luck with player injuries just when we are on the verge of something greater. I feel for him. On the other hand, CMP has not been able to regularly close the door on prime recruits, which translates into the struggles we see on the court with athletic teams. I believe the question at this point is does our administration want a Top 25 team each year or do they seriously want to challenge for a national championship? If the latter, I believe CMP needs to at least make the final 4 in the next 2-3 years, and if he can't accomplish that, we need a change. Of course being long time, hungry for a Final 4 Purdue fans, CMP will then accomplish getting to the Final 4 somewhere else. He is pretty young by standards of national title coaches at 47. I'm not complaining, just an observation. If we're happy being a perennial Top 25 team, we have our coach for as long as he wants to remain here. How do you see it?

I see it as a rhetorical question, as the answer is clearly no...and, Purdue has established that they are more than content with the status quo...people often question how appealing the Purdue job is for whatever respective sport, but, it should be incredibly appealing in that the expectations are so low...which is why they have had only two coaches in the past 39 years and no FF appearance (never mind that the first coach hand-picked the second one).

Purdue has accepted their self-imposed fate, and, much of their fanbase has as well (and they are incredibly thankful for, and appreciative of, that).

 

[DAG10]

Only four teams will be FF teams this year. Pretty elite company

And, Purdue yet again will not be one of them.

Yes, Loyola is definitely one of the nation's elite programs

Eric Musselman has more tournament success...AT NEVADA...and a more talented team...AT NEVADA.

Butler played for the National Championship...TWICE.

George Washington played in a FF. VCU played in a Final Four (with help from Purdue/Painter ironically enough). Heck, Mike Davis proved that if you have enough talent that you don't even have to be a great coach (or maybe even good coach) by guiding IU to a FF (and beating the nation's best/most talented team along the way with arguably the nation's best coach on the sideline).

Those are teams that simply had a really good (maybe elite?) coach and played really good basketball...something Purdue has not been able to do even once in 38 years!?!

Purdue has only sniffed the FF twice in 38 years, and, it choked in epic fashion both times, establishing exactly what Purdue basketball truly is on a national scale.

 

[DAG10]

Purdue fans that are "disappointed" with Painter better be careful what they wish for.

Look at IU - that's a program that should be a piece of cake to be perennially ranked in the top 25 and it's been a hot mess.

They've only made the tournament 4 years out of the last 10 years. Purdue's been in the Sweet 16 four times in the last 10 years, and in the tournament 8 of the last 10 -- so twice as many times as IU.

To complain about "just" being a regular top 25 team is pretty stupid these days in college basketball. That's no easy feat.

Well, it is poised to be a week away from losing that status of a "regular" top 25 program, and, it stands to be lost for some time after due to the inability to recruit the talent necessary to keep it there...so while they Painter and his supporters have been able to hang their hat on that fairly meaningless accomplishment, it too may be lost in the very near future.

 

[ahhculdee]

I'm sure he had Loyola in his Final Four last year....

In my all upsets bracket I had them.

 

[dwhitebash11]

Only four teams will be FF teams this year. Pretty elite company

Took way too long for someone to like this post. It should've been done an hour post-post(?).

Will done, your humor fits in quite nicely with a lot of these bonehead posters.

 

[BBG]

I think it's interesting to judge people on things you have no idea what they are doing behind the scenes. I'm guessing a "light" work week for Painter is 60-70 hours. You infer he's just sitting on his hands, happy and content where he's at.

The fact of the matter is - the "resources we offer" is really not anything special.

You linked resources ($) with an ability to get to the Final Four.

Purdue is 9th in the Big Ten in spending for men's basketball. Rutgers spends more on basketball than we do.

Why do you expect Purdue to reach a Final Four in a national tournament, if we're not even in the top 4 in resources in our own conference?

And it's not that the Big Ten just has so much money. Here's how we'd rank in other conferences:

ACC: 9th
SEC: 8th
Big 12: 7th
PAC 12: 6th
Big East: 6th (out of 10)
American: 3rd

So just from those conferences and the Big Ten, there are 41 programs putting more resources into basketball. So if you are 42nd in the country in resources, do you find that to be "too long with the resources we have" not to reach a Final Four in 13 years?

That doesn't really add up.

Great post. What stands out to me is that all of the data you provided is essentially AFTER things were improved post Cordova and we still are at the bottom. That is really telling as to how bad things were.

 

[BoilerIron]

Once again, let me remind you that during the 14 year window you make reference to, Purdue did not provide sufficient resources to compete, even in the BIG. We are damned lucky Painter waited out Cordova and the budget restrictions.

.i don't start any sort of clock on Painter until the end of Cordova's administration, and the restoration of a competative recruiting budget. That's only been a few years. Let's give him time to rebuild the momentum.

You continue to harp on this. When did the budget increase happen? 2014? How many more years of recruiting flops do we have to go through for you to realize it isnt a budget thing, it's a CMP/assistants thing?

 

[lbodel]

You continue to harp on this. When did the budget increase happen? 2014? How many more years of recruiting flops do we have to go through for you to realize it isnt a budget thing, it's a CMP/assistants thing?

It had nothing to do with Cordova. Purdue was cheap pre-Cordova and it was still cheap post-Cordova. The common denominator was the AD. The resources were increased for the program with the whole Mizzou spat under Cordova, but the hand was forced. The President of the university wasn't and still isn't the catalyst for any of it. It's the AD.

Purdue's athletic budget, like almost every other university, is independent of the university. The athletic department has a budget based on revenues, just like any business - the funding of MBB has to be carved out of that. If Morgan Burke wanted to spend more money on basketball, he could have made that choice. Same thing with Bobinski. If he doesn't want Purdue to be 9th in the Big Ten in spending on basketball, he can adjust HIS budget.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

It had nothing to do with Cordova. Purdue was cheap pre-Cordova and it was still cheap post-Cordova. The common denominator was the AD. The resources were increased for the program with the whole Mizzou spat under Cordova, but the hand was forced. The President of the university wasn't and still isn't the catalyst for any of it. It's the AD.

Purdue's athletic budget, like almost every other university, is independent of the university. The athletic department has a budget based on revenues, just like any business - the funding of MBB has to be carved out of that. If Morgan Burke wanted to spend more money on basketball, he could have made that choice. Same thing with Bobinski. If he doesn't want Purdue to be 9th in the Big Ten in spending on basketball, he can adjust HIS budget.

Does anyone know specifically where we are lagging behind the top B1G teams in basketball spending? Assistant coach salaries? Support staff? Recruiting budget?

 

[purduefan101]

I'm just fine with the way CMP builds the team(s)

It seems the blueprint is to win with experience... and that's what we're building this year... We have two solid examples with the '07 class and the '14 class.

I don't think we'll ever be the best recruiting team... but we can take "tough as nails" guys and mold a team that can take the phenoms down in march.

Injuries have derailed both of those classes in crunch time... Robbie with the knee(s) and Hass with his elbow. without those injuries, I'm first in line to say that my be a final four or 2!



guys rip CMP for not recruiting more athletic players.... then we get a guy like Eastern.... and he gets ripped for something else....

I think you're delusional if you thought this years team would not have its share of struggles.... The experience we had last year equals inexperience this year... you can't have it both ways.

Settle down and enjoy watching young guys develop

 

[uelnesm]

Can Matt close the deal????

Flipping through our NCAA results ...... <thinking>

NOPE!!!!!!

 

[lbodel]

Does anyone know specifically where we are lagging behind the top B1G teams in basketball spending? Assistant coach salaries? Support staff? Recruiting budget?

Some of the numbers are going to be apples and oranges. For example, Tom Izzo has a higher salary than Painter - naturally that would make sense. But that would explaiin a $1 million difference, not a $3 million difference.

That being said, outside of the head coach - I don't see there being a reason why we shouldn't be comparable in everything else.

It also doesn't make sense that Illinois is spending $2.5 million more on basketball than we are. Granted, Illinois pays their coach who has achieved nothing more than Purdue pays Painter.

Illinois gives Underwood $850,000 for his assistant coaches.

Gary makes $244, Brantley makes $219k and Lutz $184k - just a hair under $650k (which I don't know, but maybe that's Painter's pool to work from). So $200k under what Underwood gets. $200k isn't a lot of money total - but given the salaries are in the $200k range, having $200k more to play with can certainly upgrade a position.

It just seems like giving Painter $200-300k more a year for assistant coaches isn't asking a ton - especially if he has a vacancy. It gives the impression that Lutz got hired because he's who we could afford, not because he was a top target.

 

[BoilerIron]

It had nothing to do with Cordova. Purdue was cheap pre-Cordova and it was still cheap post-Cordova. The common denominator was the AD. The resources were increased for the program with the whole Mizzou spat under Cordova, but the hand was forced. The President of the university wasn't and still isn't the catalyst for any of it. It's the AD.

Purdue's athletic budget, like almost every other university, is independent of the university. The athletic department has a budget based on revenues, just like any business - the funding of MBB has to be carved out of that. If Morgan Burke wanted to spend more money on basketball, he could have made that choice. Same thing with Bobinski. If he doesn't want Purdue to be 9th in the Big Ten in spending on basketball, he can adjust HIS budget.

I agree that it isnt a budget issue, it's a Painter issue.

It doesnt cost very much money to recruit Indiana kids. That's an area where we have been lacking in recent history.

 

[lbodel]

I agree that it isnt a budget issue, it's a Painter issue.

It doesnt cost very much money to recruit Indiana kids. That's an area where we have been lacking in recent history.

Huh? I was simply stating that it wasn't a problem under 1 university president, it's been a problem his whole career at Purdue.

Painter makes less money than Brad Underwood at Illinois, and his assistant coaches make less than Underwood's. Does that make sense to you?

We spend $2.5 million less a year on basketball than Illinois.

Shouldn't based on your logic, Illinois be cruising? There's a lot of talent in that state and it's a very short drive to Indiana. No recruiting costs, right? Illinois is 2-5 currently.

Oh wait, there's more to it than that.

 

[BoilerIron]

Huh? I was simply stating that it wasn't a problem under 1 university president, it's been a problem his whole career at Purdue.

Painter makes less money than Brad Underwood at Illinois, and his assistant coaches make less than Underwood's. Does that make sense to you?

We spend $2.5 million less a year on basketball than Illinois.

Shouldn't based on your logic, Illinois be cruising? There's a lot of talent in that state and it's a very short drive to Indiana. No recruiting costs, right?

Oh wait, there's more to it than that.

You said if we wanted a bigger budget all we would have to do is allocate the funds for basketball. We have the funds. Thanks to the BTN, every program in our conference gets 51 million/yr right out of the gate.

With that being said, my point is that budget doesnt matter in cases where the recruit is an indiana kid. It's very cheap to recruit those players. We have been terrible in that department under Painter outside of the 2007 class.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

You said if we wanted a bigger budget all we would have to do is allocate the funds for basketball. We have the funds. Thanks to the BTN, every program in our conference gets 51 million/yr right out of the gate.

With that being said, my point is that budget doesnt matter in cases where the recruit is an indiana kid. It's very cheap to recruit those players. We have been terrible in that department under Painter outside of the 2007 class.

And you don’t think assistant coaches have anything to do with that?

 

[lbodel]

You said if we wanted a bigger budget all we would have to do is allocate the funds for basketball. We have the funds. Thanks to the BTN, every program in our conference gets 51 million/yr right out of the gate.

With that being said, my point is that budget doesnt matter in cases where the recruit is an indiana kid. It's very cheap to recruit those players. We have been terrible in that department under Painter outside of the 2007 class.

You're looking at things in black and white. Take my post where I just outlined our assistant coaching salaries compared to Illinois. When we had an assistant coaching vacancy, Painter has a salary pool which appears to be $200k less than Illinois, for example. So we could only hire an assistant coach at X amount - our assistants are making $60k+ less than Illinois just based on a simple average.

So we can only hire what we can afford - so take out your top candidates, we have to lower the caliber of assistant we can hire.

Right there, that's a direct correlation between the money you spend and recruiting.

 

[BoilerIron]

And you don’t think assistant coaches have anything to do with that?

I do! I think we should try getting new assistants first and foremost. That decision is on CMP though.

 

[lbodel]

I do! I think we should try getting new assistants first and foremost. That decision is on CMP though.

And when you are given a budget less than your Big Ten peers, then what? There's not a Cyber Monday deal for assistant coaches. You either have the money to hire top assistant coaches or you don't. Painter does not.

 

[UncleRico3]

This is as good as it's going to get for Purdue, especially since we are competing with a dozen schools for recruits in our area. In our state alone you have IU, Butler, Notre dame that we have to compete with, just outside of Indiana it's UM, MSU, Ohio $tate, Kentucky and Loui$ville. We could very easily be a B10 bottom dweller, like tomorrow, if Painter left. The b10 is not even the premier basketball conference anymore. Sure we can compete but the big east/acc teams have been the bball conferences for awhile now. Izzo is the only coach that gets any sort of mainstream cred because he won the tourney once like 50 years ago. Realistically, Painter has us primed for a final four run about once every 5 years. And injuries have derailed pretty much every one of those high potential seasons. He will rip one off eventually, I have faith.

I feel confident in saying Matt Painter won’t lead Purdue to a FF as head coach

 

[BoilerIron]

You're looking at things in black and white. Take my post where I just outlined our assistant coaching salaries compared to Illinois. When we had an assistant coaching vacancy, Painter has a salary pool which appears to be $200k less than Illinois, for example. So we could only hire an assistant coach at X amount - our assistants are making $60k+ less than Illinois just based on a simple average.

So we can only hire what we can afford - so take out your top candidates, we have to lower the caliber of assistant we can hire.

Right there, that's a direct correlation between the money you spend and recruiting.

If Painter wanted a bigger assistant budget he could have it. We just paid Brohm 6 million/yr. We are not lacking money.

 

[DAG10]

Once again, let me remind you that during the 14 year window you make reference to, Purdue did not provide sufficient resources to compete, even in the BIG. We are damned lucky Painter waited out Cordova and the budget restrictions.

.i don't start any sort of clock on Painter until the end of Cordova's administration, and the restoration of a competative recruiting budget. That's only been a few years. Let's give him time to rebuild the momentum.

Just for reference, it took Archie literally no time at all to "rebuild the momentum"...never mind the same for the guy heading up the Purdue football program.

Whatever timeline you choose to use is irrelevant in the case of Painter "building/rebuilding momentum"...he has been there 13 years and had TWO highly successful recruiting classes...Archie accomplished the same in his first two years. For that matter, just name another coach in the B1G, (and there are even fewer top national coaches) that has had 13 years to build/rebuild momentum, or, is a virtual afterthought to the best players within their state (as that fact is unacceptable anywhere else).

 

[DAG10]

Some of the numbers are going to be apples and oranges. For example, Tom Izzo has a higher salary than Painter - naturally that would make sense. But that would explaiin a $1 million difference, not a $3 million difference.

That being said, outside of the head coach - I don't see there being a reason why we shouldn't be comparable in everything else.

It also doesn't make sense that Illinois is spending $2.5 million more on basketball than we are. Granted, Illinois pays their coach who has achieved nothing more than Purdue pays Painter.

Illinois gives Underwood $850,000 for his assistant coaches.

Gary makes $244, Brantley makes $219k and Lutz $184k - just a hair under $650k (which I don't know, but maybe that's Painter's pool to work from). So $200k under what Underwood gets. $200k isn't a lot of money total - but given the salaries are in the $200k range, having $200k more to play with can certainly upgrade a position.

It just seems like giving Painter $200-300k more a year for assistant coaches isn't asking a ton - especially if he has a vacancy. It gives the impression that Lutz got hired because he's who we could afford, not because he was a top target.

Lutz arguably recruited better at/for Creighton when he was making less money, so, I am not sure that is the answer either...another excuse certainly though. Even with some additional $ to work with, given the recruiting results with respect to players, what is to say (never mind support) the notion that Painter would be able to recruit an upgrade to sit on the bench and recruit?

 

[*4purdue*]

I think it's interesting to judge people on things you have no idea what they are doing behind the scenes. I'm guessing a "light" work week for Painter is 60-70 hours. You infer he's just sitting on his hands, happy and content where he's at.

The fact of the matter is - the "resources we offer" is really not anything special.

You linked resources ($) with an ability to get to the Final Four.

Purdue is 9th in the Big Ten in spending for men's basketball. Rutgers spends more on basketball than we do.

Why do you expect Purdue to reach a Final Four in a national tournament, if we're not even in the top 4 in resources in our own conference?

And it's not that the Big Ten just has so much money. Here's how we'd rank in other conferences:

ACC: 9th
SEC: 8th
Big 12: 7th
PAC 12: 6th
Big East: 6th (out of 10)
American: 3rd

So just from those conferences and the Big Ten, there are 41 programs putting more resources into basketball. So if you are 42nd in the country in resources, do you find that to be "too long with the resources we have" not to reach a Final Four in 13 years?

That doesn't really add up.

First off.... I would gladly work 80 hours a week for 3 million a year. Especially when the season is only about 6 months. Why wouldn’t you expect your team to get to a FF. I’m sure our budget is much larger than Loyola, Butler, etc... that have all made it. Wisconsin use to be the laughingstock of the B1G and then they started hiring good coaches... Bennett and Bo. Look what happened. They’ve been to 3 FF’s. To say Purdue has no chance because CMP is not supported is ridiculous. They just spent 110 million on Mackey renovations. We have everything we need except the right coach.

 

[BoilerBiker]

Purdue is 9th in the Big Ten in spending for men's basketball. Rutgers spends more on basketball than we do.

Does anyone know specifically where we are lagging behind the top B1G teams in basketball spending? Assistant coach salaries? Support staff? Recruiting budget?

this is what i was wondering regarding the term 'spending'...
is this just referring to coach/staff salaries?

i posted this link in a prior year, which looked at recruiting expenses specifically, from 2008-13. during that time, purdue was mid-pack to 8th in the big ten. and saw a 29% increase in budget. that was actually higher than what i expected considering that was burke + cordova years, and the complaints fans had of both (and i agree, we were notoriously cheap prior to cordova, so she was not the root cause. *theres also potential accounting variances for these reports as skeptics point out... but likely not too much in this case since its just recruiting/not All expenses, and since the ranges in $ were pretty similar/narrow).

but does spending more $ guarantee more success?
one example: painter spent bigger $ and time to recruit jaren jackson, even going to watch him in europe. unfortunately it didn't work. being cheap obviously creates an obstacle to success, but just spending more $ doesn't guarantee success either.

**remember when everyone joked about how bad the recruiting budget was when our coaches showed up in an ordinary family-type car for recruit visits, while other top programs arrived in a mercedes/bmw/whatever? now, that same boring ordinary car (in even older, worse shape!) has essentially become a positive symbol for our football coach and program. that seems to reinforce the importance of 'selling' that everyone talks about; rather than just relying on more $ to solve it.

 

[DAG10]

And when you are given a budget less than your Big Ten peers, then what? There's not a Cyber Monday deal for assistant coaches. You either have the money to hire top assistant coaches or you don't. Painter does not.

But, would he actually hire other coaches or just pay his more? Brohm was given more money...yet, he did not go out and hire new guys...BECAUSE HE ALREADY HAD GOOD GUYS. I can confidently say with salaries that you shared for the present staff...there are definitely some guys that are not earning their keep, as there are guys making the same or less around the country delivering far more return on their salary than a couple of the guys at Purdue are.

If you doubled Painter's salary, he is the same coach...same strengths...same shortcomings...more $ makes no difference in that regard at all. Jeff Brohm is the exact same coach with the raise that he received (and earned) as he was making what he made 2 years ago and last year.