Why? That essentially was in play. It was a problem and will be a problem with some teams in different years. I’m fine with Purdue building up teams through player continuity.
CMP getting eviscerated on the SCORE
- Thread starter KenTre1983
- Start date
It was a lot different at the game. You could see the impact UConns ability to rebound was having on the team and that was carrying over to the offensive side. It was a huge emotional drain for the team as Purdue had always dominated the boards all season.
This times 100. Illini fan here - UConn was simply the best team in college basketball this year and Purdue was the second best. But this thread is based on comments by Dan Bernstein and Holmes. I turned off the Score many years ago because Bernstein has no interest in unbiased journalism. We've had our share of bad coaches but he goes beyond fairness - as one of you posted previously he is all about clicks/ears and will put out the most outrageous content he can. His on-air perspective is as useless as tits on a bull.
You have a great coach and a better human being, IMO. Hurley comes across as an ass to me but it's been working for him. I just don't understand why he is allowed on the court during play, and why pushing Spencer on the court was not a technical. Congrats on a great season to you guys.
Clearly there wasn't much ability to get a three off considering we had 2 if not 3 attempts blocked.
Think about that. How often do you see three point attempts blocked?
Let's be honest, none of our guards would start for UCONN. That's not a knock on them, it's just recognizing that UCONN has elite talent at every position.
They both know basketball. They break down the game at an extremely high level. They’ve both been play-by-play announcers. They maybe assholes, but they’re far from dumbasses.
I am saying UConn had 4 NBA players on their team, we had 1. They would beat us in 7 game series every time, but if they played their B- or C+ game and we played our A game we could have won.
I hear a lot of announcers who know little. Can't figure out how they get their jobs. Yes we needed 3 point shots, but our players could not get open to shoot them.
But, you haven't heard these guys. I don't like them, but they're not know-nothings.
I think that was a huge difference in the game. The second chance opportunities that Purdue didn't normally give up. They'd miss a two, and get a second chance three. It was very frustrating watching, so I can only imagine how the players felt.
I have a theory on Painter’s game plan, because I heard him in interviews last week talking about how he tries to feel out each ref to understand how they call fouls and confront each ref to inquire whether they call fouls consistently on every player.
Purdue has often been a second-half team because of foul trouble. Fouls on big men pay dividends late. UConn’s second tallest player fouled out, and Clingan got his fourth late in the game. Clingan’s fourth foul would be a major inflection point, had it occurred early enough in the second half. UConn claimed they were fine with Zach getting points, but he missed 10 shots - mostly while being guarded by Clingan. I think painter saw his best shot was to get Clingan out of the game as early as possible, which is very much a function of how the refs call it.
Early in the second, even down double digits, that was still probably calculated to be the best play with Clingan having three fouls. It may have still been their best approach even with 10 minutes left, though, at that point, no approach would have been more likely than not to succeed.
I don’t think you’ll hear painter mention this as a reason, because it would be admitting that his strategy is dependent on how games are called, more so than other teams. But that’s the reality when you have a player that gets called inconsistently by different refs.
I say, bring on the AI auto refs and remove the subjective human element. I believe technology has evolved to the point where such a system could be easily created if desired, and would result in noticeably more standardized calls.
Would that have changed the outcome of the game? Likely not, But it would certainly have affected each coach’s game plan. How annoying and pointless to have to have multiple game plans depending on how a game gets called. Why should a team have to determine whether they even need to plan for multiple reffing approaches?
Purdue has often been a second-half team because of foul trouble. Fouls on big men pay dividends late. UConn’s second tallest player fouled out, and Clingan got his fourth late in the game. Clingan’s fourth foul would be a major inflection point, had it occurred early enough in the second half. UConn claimed they were fine with Zach getting points, but he missed 10 shots - mostly while being guarded by Clingan. I think painter saw his best shot was to get Clingan out of the game as early as possible, which is very much a function of how the refs call it.
Early in the second, even down double digits, that was still probably calculated to be the best play with Clingan having three fouls. It may have still been their best approach even with 10 minutes left, though, at that point, no approach would have been more likely than not to succeed.
I don’t think you’ll hear painter mention this as a reason, because it would be admitting that his strategy is dependent on how games are called, more so than other teams. But that’s the reality when you have a player that gets called inconsistently by different refs.
I say, bring on the AI auto refs and remove the subjective human element. I believe technology has evolved to the point where such a system could be easily created if desired, and would result in noticeably more standardized calls.
Would that have changed the outcome of the game? Likely not, But it would certainly have affected each coach’s game plan. How annoying and pointless to have to have multiple game plans depending on how a game gets called. Why should a team have to determine whether they even need to plan for multiple reffing approaches?
Last edited:
Seeking tall, athletic guards isnt a ground breaking revelation. But Jaden Ivey's don't exactly grow on trees.
What I find interesting, is CMP contructs a roster that makes it all the way to the TITLE GAME, and some people want to question what got them there?
UCONN was able to do what few teams could to the 23-24 Boilers.
What is Jones? I wouldn't want any of the teams we beat to call him a Mercenary. It demeans what we have done and what Uconn did this year. Spencer is the only guy on their roster that was a transfer this past year.
The portal was used by PU to get where we got this year. There is no way we have the success we had this year without Jones, period. We may or may not use the portal next year with the large freshman class we have coming. But if you think Jones is the last player CMP gets from the portal, you are mistaken.
We got beat by a much better team. 2 of their players transferred there 2 years ago and 1 transferred last year. Hardly a bunch of guys who haven't been playing together and were just "bought".
When you use the word Mercenary you sound like sour grapes instead of just acknowledging the better team won.
Correct, however, as a Coach isn’t it his job to get them open? Look, this is a title game, UCONN lost 3 games, they’ve given up 3 pointers, to only shoot 5 is crazy. I love Painter but he got outcoached that game, no doubt UCONN was better, however, there’s no way guys all game can’t at least get a few shots off. Painter decided that he was going to let Edey try to win it for Purdue, UCONN decided that as well, they were happy to comply. Also, they both said, with 5 minutes left down by 14 why are you running time off the clock looking to force into Edey? It was a weird game plan, UCONN seemed to know it verbatim.
It is well documented that Jones was not a mercenary or being paid to join the team like mercenaries in the past were paid to come and join a war effort. Matt stated he never once mentioned NIL. Therefore he came to Purdue for reasons outside of money and we know it was a chance to play in the tourney and no doubt wanting to know how he would do in a tougher league. A person that goes to a school outside of money is much closer to the student athlete that was closer to reality than the semi professional league. Just take Spencer off and that is a different team...much different. No mention of sour grapes in the definition and no application to Lance either...
mercenary /mûr′sə-nĕr″ē/
adjective
- Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
- Hired for service in a foreign army.
- Acting for reward; serving for pay; paid; hired; hireling; venal
Were there tall, athletic guards on other teams...even teams that never made the tourney? UConn had good players that were tall and outside of Spencer athletic
This CANNOT be said often enough.
ONE TEAM in the country had the requisite length, skill, athleticism, experience and execution to effectively counter what Purdue brought to the table.
We did miss several makeable shots, but as was said-- unless UConn had a major breakdown (which has happened before in games), it was going to be tough for Purdue to win.
Purdue's season was the golf equivalent of nutting a perfect tee shot, then striping a perfect fairway wood to set up an eagle putt on the toughest par-five on the course...
We came up short on the eagle putt, but I'm absolutely satisficed with a VERY impressive birdie. You all should be too!
fully aware...not as early as many games. I'm not even sure Purdue got in Bonus, but maybe for a minute or so...not only in the Uconn game , but in the NCS game as well. Just not the level of calls made after the Tenn game. Was that the result of NCS and UConn both deciding not to foul? Don't know, but the scenario was similar to the NCS game as well
How does this definition apply any more to Spencer than it does to Jones?
I'm with dryfly on this --"mercenaries" is a rather poor word choice in this context. For someone who normally expresses himself well--this is surprising.
Well, I'm making an educated guess knowing how he was in demand and could go to many teams for money and knew his money situation in going to UConn as do many players in demand. Lance although he provided some nice play for Purdue was not in demand. I thought someone said he was somewhere close to 300 as a ranking portal player. Now, I don't know those numbers and could be wrong, but when I wrote in the Let the Guesses Fly thread I mentioned Spencer as the biggest key for Purdue's defense and for Lance to have him...assuming of course that others go under the screens rather than on top. I knew his value on a team that won the whole thing.
Spencer would be desired at a LOT of schools and no doubt had the opportunity to make money that Lance didn't. By all indications known, as well as insight into his ranking, Lance did not show the signs or ability to have a bidding war for his services...and Spencer did. Lance was NOT a mercenary. Could Spencer have turned down money to go someplace? It is possible...I just don't know how likely.
Thanks-- after reading this, I'm convinced that Spencer filled a need for UConn, just as Jones filled a need for Purdue.
Labelling kids out of ignorance is not a good look for our fanbase.
Cam Spencer went to UConn to win a national championship. I don't know what he got in NIL money, but his motivation was to win the Natty.
When did this board get so sanctimonious? 24 year olds who have been at 3 schools in 5 years and end up at a place where the coach publicly thanked the university and fans for providing “the resources” doesn’t come off as a student athlete just playing for the love of the game. Get real.
FFS, just a few seasons ago this board was a hot bed of “anyone not named Purdue who wins is cheating” accusations.
FFS, just a few seasons ago this board was a hot bed of “anyone not named Purdue who wins is cheating” accusations.
Purdue didn’t get into the bonus until 2 minutes to go in final four game and not until very late in champ game. The foul counts tended to stay pretty even on both teams in each game too. Almost as if there had been a week of fans, pundits, and coaches talking about foul counts and free throws. The Chrissy Collins/Tom Izzo/Kevin Willard effect if you will.
Lotta unnecessary moralizing goes on with NIL and college sports in general.
our guy just wanted to make friends and play in a tournament game and maybe help an old lady cross the street
Their guy wanted money and whores and puppies to kick probably.
Their guy wanted money and whores and puppies to kick probably.
What your doing is making a lot of assumptions about Spencer. Spencer played for Rutgers and didn't even make the tournament his last year. Maybe he wanted to play for a chance to win a title. Maybe he liked Hurley. Maybe he wanted more money. We don't know and to assume you do is just a bad look.
We went into the portal to get where we did this year. There is no argument there. But you are trying to apply virtue to what PU did and demonize what they did.
We may get beat by teams in the future that are put together for a one year run and they load up on a bunch of guys from the portal. But this wasn't that. They signed one guy from the portal last year and so did we.
To me, the keys to the game were:
1) UConn looked like they wanted it more. They got to every loose ball & key rebound.... or at least it seamed. When we did get a stop, they would rebound & kick it out for a 3.
2) CMP really didn't make any adjustments to get us looks from 3. Braden was open many times coming off the high ball screen to take an open 3, but usually dribbled into the paint or shot from the elbow (neither of which were working for him).
3) Braden also looked weak with the ball both Saturday & Monday. The pressure really bothered him, causing us to have to screen for him much higher & even to get the ball across half court. He needs to work on that this summer.
4) If the only thing working for us was to get the ball inside to Edey, I thought CMP should have tried playing TKR, Gillis & Edey together, which would have also helped us rebounding on the defensive end.
Bottom line is UConn was the better team & won. I think this was a great learning & recruiting tool for Purdue just to get there. Remember, Coach K & Duke lost his 1st championship game by 30. Better things to come for Purdue. I see many more FF in CMP's future.
This is very true.... we did need Jones, that was a key get for us. I do remember Spencer killing us though even when he was at Rutgers.
I think both Braden and Loyer need to look at the weight room as their new best friend this summer. Maybe even Colvin although I certainly don't want to impact his quickness and burst either.
But yeah, Braden really struggled with athletic guards even to some extent against TN. More strength would also help him finish a few more drives and be fresher.
To be fair to him, we once again really rode him in minutes played. We didn't use Jones as a backup PG as much and really didn't have another one off the bench.
Agree. I was at game so i will need to rewatch on tv(needed binocs at game). I just dont think there is a game plan that works for us against them. Eveeyone talking about how we just stood around is over simplifying
I figured he got paid to go to UConn, but if he didn't then I obviously must have embarrassed the Purdue fan base. I assume you did verify that he wasn't paid, because as I said he just had a bidding hand to make that possible than Lance didn't. That was the difference. I can't read someone's mind. I'm just surprised he wasn't paid. There have been posts about Mason playing somewhere to get NIL money and to my surprise I figured Can could bid a higher dollar than Mason.
Wait a minute...I thought he wasn't paid? That was the conclusion from RossMackey's post after making up his mind after reading what I wrote, but I thought he must have inadvertently verified and now you imply he was paid. I certainly can't read a person's mind or even a group or fanbase, but if you know he never came for money as a fact rather than what might be stated publicly, then obviously the tea leaves I read were not accurate and I have forever embarrassed the fanbase with such questions in today's NIL and quantity of portal people.
I admit it is good to know he is different than many others. I can respect more purity in the game
Wow, so the data was quite different. We don't know why. We do know the incessant publicity on it and we know the abrupt change took place after Tenn. Most can reason Uconn and conclude that they wouldn't have to foul. I haven't watched the game again to see what Zach did to go flying out of bounds and landing next to the UConn's bench. I'm guessing he tripped and then lost his balance and his misses at the rim could be due to Clingan, but not sure how to explain the NCS game as easily?
Some people say good refs...letting them play, but not sure ow to reconcile those comments with a rule book. Oh well, we will never know. I just know if I were coaching against Zach I'd be complaining as well as it is the best defense that can be played upon him.
Who are these guys and why should I care what they think?
I don't know what your deal is on this TJ. Geezus they all get paid including Lance. Here's an article from Feb, he was second only to Edey in the NIL store for sales in January. Quit acting like our guys don't get paid. Of course Spencer made money through NIL, they all do, including PU players.
I don't like it any more than you do, but acting like a team that just beat us did so because they brought in the hired guns is ridiculous. That is for sure going to happen, but this Uconn team doesn't fit that narrative. Next years Uconn team may with all the guys they will be losing.
No idea what you're talking about with the embarrassed the fanbase stuff.
7 Big Ten Basketball Players Among Top-10 in NIL Store Sales For January
Seven Big Ten men's basketball players were in the top-10 in NIL sales for the month of January. Purdue led the way with four, while Illinois had two and Nebraska had one. Boilermakers stars Zach Edey and Lance Jones occupied the top two spots.
Quickly the RossMackey poster accused me of embarrassing the fan base for not liking the pay for play...which I don't. It is insane what is going on today in sports and I know for certain my thoughts don't matter. I've shifted my stance held for decades that players shouldn't be paid. I don't have as big a problem today, but I think there has to be limitations on the amount and especially when it is offered. I think the NCAA has to put in place things to eliminate it being a recruiting tool else we fall farther away from the student athlete. I really despise it being used as a recruiting tool and yet that is where it is. We saw that with Pack. I get fans buy shirts and such and players getting a cut...no problem...no issues what so ever with that. I'm sure you recall Alford getting in trouble with a calendar years ago.I don't know what your deal is on this TJ. Geezus they all get paid including Lance. Here's an article from Feb, he was second only to Edey in the NIL store for sales in January. Quit acting like our guys don't get paid. Of course Spencer made money through NIL, they all do, including PU players.
I don't like it any more than you do, but acting like a team that just beat us did so because they brought in the hired guns is ridiculous. That is for sure going to happen, but this Uconn team doesn't fit that narrative. Next years Uconn team may with all the guys they will be losing.
No idea what you're talking about with the embarrassed the fanbase stuff.
7 Big Ten Basketball Players Among Top-10 in NIL Store Sales For January
Seven Big Ten men's basketball players were in the top-10 in NIL sales for the month of January. Purdue led the way with four, while Illinois had two and Nebraska had one. Boilermakers stars Zach Edey and Lance Jones occupied the top two spots.www.si.com
I'm a Purdue fan and might not have been had I not chose Purdue for college. I'm not for pay to play, but once in school and they make money off of commercials and what have you...not a big deal for me. I'm also aware this has went on for years at some places. For the record and better understanding...there is a player today going to a team as a result of money offered. It doesn't matter to me whether that player beats Purdue, doesn't beat Purdue or never plays Purdue...I'm not a fan. That is my stance and others can disagree. I have just tossed in my mind that when the growth of offering money to players in recruiting to get them is even more prevalent if I'll even like college ball...and again those players getting a cut from commercials and merchandise I have no issue. I always thought Purdue was a cut above in not charging fees that went to the athletic department like many schools. Anyway, that is my take...
