CMP poll question
- Thread starter *4purdue*
- Start date
If Painter gets offered another job now and takes it, Purdue isn't going to announce it, the new school will. Once we the fans hear about it, the deal will already be done.
Purdue would announce if he has been given permission to interview. I said "might"
There is a lot of unspecified context in the question that could sway my answer either way.
-Why is he leaving
-What is it that he is demanding
-How long of an extension would be required to retain him
-Who is on my short list of possible/realistic replacements
-Where are we in the AD transition
If something were to go down similar to the 2011 Missouri thing, Purdue isn't going to be moving heaven and earth to keep him from leaving this time nor should they.
-Why is he leaving
-What is it that he is demanding
-How long of an extension would be required to retain him
-Who is on my short list of possible/realistic replacements
-Where are we in the AD transition
If something were to go down similar to the 2011 Missouri thing, Purdue isn't going to be moving heaven and earth to keep him from leaving this time nor should they.
Open the door as wide as you can, and give him a nice, gentle shove!
That scenario would be the answer to my prayers. Have never been a Painter fan after the Missouri mess. It's long past time for a change!
Not enough info in that hypothetical for me to answer. In general I am in favor of keeping Painter but obviously there is a price at which it wouldn't make sense to keep him, or really any paid position. Suppose an SEC football power with an average-at-best basketball program decided they wanted him and offered 3.5 million a year. Don't think I'd be inclined to match anything like that right now.
I always feel like Painter catches way too much crap for the Missouri thing. In reality, what he was fighting for was bigger than just himself and is exactly the same things many people have complained about on this board for at least the last 15+ years I've been around. He was fighting for the basketball program to be able to compete on a level playing field with other programs. Assistant coaching salaries, recruiting budget, etc. Yes he also got a raise out of the situation but he had Burke in a tough spot with the introduction of the legacy fee at the time and the Mackey re-seating. Had the athletic department lost Painter in the midst of that and with a middling football program at the time (oh to be back to middling in football) they could not afford to lose a very popular and successful coach at that time. It was one of the few times a coach has had the cards to make a power play on Burke at Purdue and that's what he did. He doesn't have the same leverage now. Purdue might be inclined to give him an extension and/or a small raise but I'm not sure they need to give him a huge bump at this time. His opportunity to earn more money at Purdue right now should be through in incentives for winning conference titles and advancing each weekend in the NCAA tourney.
This is all true - he did fight for the program to be more competitive from an overall financial funding standpoint. But the majority of the funds he fought for were his own. He went from $1.3M annual salary to $2.3M. Even if he got an extra $100k/year for each of his assistants, the car allowance, a recruiting budget increase, and a couple other things, his $1M/year increase was more than the rest of "the program" elements combined. To be fair, I'm not faulting him - he had a couple big years behind him and he and his agent made a play when they thought the timing was right. There's no shame in that. But I just don't think he deserves nearly as much nobility as some people imply when they talk about him fighting for the program.
Good point. I'm in the middle, not believing he did something awful or noble. He made a good play and got a nice raise. Many of us have done similar things (on much smaller scales) at work when we've had a few good reviews or knew we were very valuable to our department and used it as leverage. Regardless, he got paid well, budgets went up, assistant pay went up, and I don't believe we've won a NCAA game or done anything of note since. Regardless of anything else, that is what frustrates me.
Well I wanted Purdue to let him go to Missouri and hire Zo but that didn't happen. My only real concern would be who at this point.
I also want to point out that the expanded recruiting budget was critical. We haven't seen the fruits yet but those things take time. He has made in roads in Texas and the Northeast largely due being able to recruit beyond driving distance. People talk about Crean and all the offers he throws out but his recruiting budget is huge compared to Matt.
Still he hasn't earned a big raise or a lot of years on his contract.
I also want to point out that the expanded recruiting budget was critical. We haven't seen the fruits yet but those things take time. He has made in roads in Texas and the Northeast largely due being able to recruit beyond driving distance. People talk about Crean and all the offers he throws out but his recruiting budget is huge compared to Matt.
Still he hasn't earned a big raise or a lot of years on his contract.
If certain coaches out there had the talent of this Purdue team the final four would have been the bare minimum expectation and they would probably of gotten there with ease. Losing to LR in round one was the worst loss in Purdue basketball history in my mind. The reason I say that is that rarely do you see a team with so so much advantage in talent and size going up against a team that has just got nothing to contend. LR basically surrendered anything inside. It is absolutely mind boggling how with a two point game they don't even attempt the ball to Hammons with over 2 minutes left. It is mind boggling and outright negligent. Personally, I have never seen anything like that in my basketball watching life. It is as if Shaquille O'Neal is out there going against 6ft 1 defenders and nobody thinks to pass him the ball. It is unimaginable. Why not put Hammons, Haas, and Swaningan in there at the same time that last minute and crash the boards. It would be impossible for them to defend. Kick it out to our best other two shooters and there is no way in the world they could compete with that. Never once did that happen all year. You wouldn't ask for it during the game, but a team like LR it wouldn't have hurt to try it at the end there.
I tend to agree, which is why I didn't vote. I am a Painter supporter, but I think that he is paid fairly by Big Ten coaches standards. I also think that it makes sense for Burke's successor to have to make a decision on and negotiate an extension.
You clearly don't watch much college basketball outside of Purdue.
You way over estimate the "talent" on this Purdue team. Please watch a few other teams before making these kinds of statements. I suggest watching some of the Sweet Sixteen teams - check out the speed and versatility of their guards, and the athleticism of their post players. Remember, 7 foot is only an inch from 6'11", so don't think a 7 footer is that big an advantage based on just height.
By making statements like you did, you imply a level of incompetence of our coach that simply is not the case. I ask you to directly compare the MSU situation this year with Purdue's. Don't give me a bunch of crap about how good Izzo was in the past. Let's just talk about this year, since you use this same measuring stick for Painter. Izzo had much more talent, any way you can measure it, and did even worse than Painter in the NCAA's.
I see some folks have posted that they would not go through the same negotiation again with Painter. Often the Missouri threat is put forth as an example of something "bad" that Painter did. I think this opinion is incorrect in many ways.
Painter took the previous BOD and administration to the floor in a wrestling match that helped determine whether Purdue would be competitive in the future years, or fall to the bottom of the BIG. In my eyes he rescued the basketball program before it got too far down. Yes, we bounced off the bottom, but the rebound has been pretty heady. To understand this, you need to account for the impact of long lead times in recruiting.
He got a FAIR and COMPETATIVE salary for himself, and for his assistant coaches. He did not "hold up the university for millions". He got a mid-range salary for building and ruining what has now become a top-20 team. As one who has done the same to his employer for a fair salary, I support Painter's actions completely.
At this point, many of the BIG coaches Painter regularly beats on the court are making more money than he is. Purdue University needs to fix this, and they need to provide for top notch salaries for assistants as well. If Painter has to look outside Purdue once again, we have no one to blame but the University. The fault is their and not Painter's.
Painter took the previous BOD and administration to the floor in a wrestling match that helped determine whether Purdue would be competitive in the future years, or fall to the bottom of the BIG. In my eyes he rescued the basketball program before it got too far down. Yes, we bounced off the bottom, but the rebound has been pretty heady. To understand this, you need to account for the impact of long lead times in recruiting.
He got a FAIR and COMPETATIVE salary for himself, and for his assistant coaches. He did not "hold up the university for millions". He got a mid-range salary for building and ruining what has now become a top-20 team. As one who has done the same to his employer for a fair salary, I support Painter's actions completely.
At this point, many of the BIG coaches Painter regularly beats on the court are making more money than he is. Purdue University needs to fix this, and they need to provide for top notch salaries for assistants as well. If Painter has to look outside Purdue once again, we have no one to blame but the University. The fault is their and not Painter's.
Agree with your sentiment Re: 2011 and Missouri in the first 3 paragraphs. But with regards to the last one, in 2016 the scales are much more balanced. If Painter were to become dissatisfied with his current deal (which is the basis of this thread), it would tend to raise a lot more eyebrows.
Below is a link to the highest paid coaches in college bball. It's a year old, so Painter has probably dropped a few notches, but by my estimation if he is compensated in the top 25 of coaches then that is quite fair based on his resume. Again, to me it depends on what he is demanding and some other factors, but if he wants top 10 money then no thanks. He's already paid more than guys like Roy Williams, Dana Altman, Tony Bennett, and Mike Brey.
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/
I was one of the more vocal fans that was very displeased with Painter following the loss but have taken a few more days to let it play out in my mind, but wanted to respond to your comments.
Playing all three at the same time is simply asking a smaller lineup to run circles around Purdue and have nobody of threat on the wing. Who would play with that grouping? Also, Purdue did attempt to get the ball inside but went away from it due to LR sending 3 and 4 players at the post once the ball got inside. LR did not just waive their hands in surrender anytime the ball got inside. The issue is that nobody was hitting their shots from outside and no adjustments were made because of it. Nobody was hitting and a Stephens never left the bench and the adjustments Painter did make were simply awful (not playing PJ or Hill at a time when ball handling was of a premium and not having Haas in for the last twenty minutes).
Sorry but you couldn't be more wrong. First lets start with the utterly ridiculous no adjustments were made. How do you know? Were you there? Or are you simply basing this off of your limited perception that you had from seeing it on TV? Second, get off the Stephens is a savior train. Before he left to deal with the issues, that kid was skewered on here religiously and suddenly he would of won the game single-handidly for us. And not playing PJ or Hill was probably the best adjustment he made because neither of them were doing squat for us. Or did you forget Hill tripping over his own two feet at the end? And I find it also funny you whine about Haas not playing but if AJH was on the bench you would be whining about that.
Basically, you are all being fickle whiners. You throw out all of these expert opinions yet haven't the first clue of how to coach or even play that level of organized ball. And yes, I do as I played years ago before coming to Purdue to get my masters. But these threads are just getting ridiculous and I guarantee you, potential recruits read them and think the same way I do.
Last edited:
Ah the ol' "you are not a coach" argument against having an opinion. Well...
I'm not a chef, but I know they over cooked my steak last night before I sent it back.
I'm not in the military, but I'm sure you should never start a land war in Asia.
I'm not a doctor, but in my opinion, that snotty nose brat over there needs a kleenex.
I'm not a mechanic, but in my opinion, my car won't start because it is out of gas.
I'm not a coach or player, but my opinion, we should have won against UALR, Cincy, Kansas, VCU, Wofford, North Florida, Richmond, Gardner Webb....
So wait, you're really going to compare coaching to a chef? Thanks, you essentially just proved my point that you and others like you shouldn't be trying to pass off your opinions as expert fact. And the other points further support my claim. So again, thanks for that.
Glad to see 77% would not re-sign CMP to an extension and raise. I get his buyout is too high for Purdue, even in his final year, but hopefully we can just not retain him and move on in a couple of years.
Well to be fair, this poll is hardly a true representation imo. Simply because I could create 80 accounts on here and each one could vote the same way.
Just my 2 cents being the IT guy that I am.
And I'm sure there are people like me who refused to vote. Why feed the whiners? If posting a meaningless poll gives them meaning in life, fine. The web is full of delusional people who just want someone to pay attention to them.Well to be fair, this poll is hardly a true representation imo. Simply because I could create 80 accounts on here and each one could vote the same way.
Just my 2 cents being the IT guy that I am.
Wasn't the Kansas team #1 seed when we lost to them? Or did you mean the Kansas State team?
He's probably referring to the #2 seed Kansas team that Purdue had a halftime lead against (sound familiar?) in the 2012 NCAA Tournament and then folded in the final 5 minutes or so (after CMP instructed the players to go into "stall mode" in the half-court offense; we've seen that all too often) and subsequently lost the game. That same season they had a very similar set of circumstances unfold against Butler (in the Crossroads Class) and at Xavier. We saw that same set of circumstances unfold in about half of their losses this past season as well.
Last edited:
Let him walk. But not for the reasons you'd think. I'd like to have him as coach for a long time. I think he's a good X's and O's coach and identifier and developer of talent, and has gotten better as a recruiter. But I'd let him walk out of principle - one I'd hold for any coach who has already had to be bought back once. You would lose a lot of leverage in future negotiations with this or any other coach, if you showed that it always pays to look around.
Kansas was the #2-seed that year (2012)....even though Purdue maybe let that game get away, I wouldn't put it in the same category of losses.
I'll take the time to respond to this.
Stephens as a savior: where did I say Stephens was a savior or you could go back to my posts over the last 4 months where I ever called for him to play more? In fact, I called for Dakota to take more minutes from the start. I simply states that a shooter who has played significant minutes over the previous two seasons sat on the bench while all other players struggled to get anything going. In previous games, CMP would insert different players looking for the hot shooter. The fact Stephens didn't get off the bench speaks more to Painter's distrust in him as a player or lack of adjustment.
Stephens winning the game single handily: once again, I didn't say that. Had Stephens come in an hit some outside shots, that immediately opens the lane for AJ and Haas to work against more one on one situations in the block instead of having 3 players draped on them.
Whining about Haas not playing but probably whining had AJ not played: Again, completely off base and false. You could see Hammons was clearly tired at the end of the game and obviously you don't take him out in OT. Did you forget that the game was in Denver? The statement I made was one that Haas needed to be given some time on the floor to allow AJ time to recover, especially given Hammons almost never touched the ball in the last 10 minutes of regulation.
Not playing PJ or Hill: you are correct that this was an adjustment but it screams of desperation given Painter played a lineup that didn't have either player in the floor for probably less than 20 total minutes all season. That isn't an adjustment but a shot in the dark. The reason the two were pulled was because the opposing team simply weren't guarding them on the offensive end and Painter went directly to playing a type of small/slow ball that played directly in to the hands of LR. As the LR coach said...never did he think Painter would try to play the same type of ball that LR was doing. A poor, poor coaching decision.
Your master opinion: so playing a game allows you to suddenly become an expert at a sport? Can I ask where you played and when? A lot of my opinions actually come after speaking to multiple coaches about their opinions. All the coaches I spoke to, who also watched the game, stated the coaching Painter did I'm that game was horrid and his inability to adjust properly was what lost the game.
if msu's current roster has much more talent than purdue, how did we arrive at that dilemma?You way over estimate the "talent" on this Purdue team. Please watch a few other teams before making these kinds of statements. I suggest watching some of the Sweet Sixteen teams - check out the speed and versatility of their guards, and the athleticism of their post players. Remember, 7 foot is only an inch from 6'11", so don't think a 7 footer is that big an advantage based on just height.
By making statements like you did, you imply a level of incompetence of our coach that simply is not the case. I ask you to directly compare the MSU situation this year with Purdue's. Don't give me a bunch of crap about how good Izzo was in the past. Let's just talk about this year, since you use this same measuring stick for Painter. Izzo had much more talent, any way you can measure it, and did even worse than Painter in the NCAA's.
painter's recent recruiting has been far from sub par compared to other top teams.
in fact, based on average team recruiting rankings i linked in previous threads, painter actually out recruited izzo over the past four years.
so what could cause our purdue squad to be so inferior today when they were more highly considered as new, incoming players?
what reason, or combo of reasons, below do you see contributing to our problems?
- recruit rankings:
are they that inaccurate year after year? are the incoming purdue recruits that overrated? i usually read the opposite sentiment here during off seasons.
- player retention:
i've argued this is a concern before. but we are very similar to msu during this roster's time frame. purdue has lost 3 recruits, msu has lost 2. (and one of msu's was their highest rated recruit, who only contributed 2 seasons before going pro).
- izzo:
was it his player development, coaching style, game plans, motivation, etc? is that how he got his roster to end up so much more talented than the purdue roster?
- painter:
or maybe you're suggesting painter contributed to the regression of some purdue players, to be considered less talented later on? maybe he cannot get guys to play team ball?
-player awards:
past recruit rankings aside, are current voters inaccurate in their assessment of our players?
did davis and hammons lack talent despite being named DPOYs? did post players lack talent vs. msu even though hammons is 1st team all big ten and one of the best centers in the country? or swanigan on the all-freshman team?
Last edited:
Agree. If I was a Maryland fan I would be pissed. Might be 5 NBA players on that team. Aren't that deep but there's NO comparison in talent on the starting five with our team and theirs.You way over estimate the "talent" on this Purdue team. Please watch a few other teams before making these kinds of statements. I suggest watching some of the Sweet Sixteen teams - check out the speed and versatility of their guards, and the athleticism of their post players. Remember, 7 foot is only an inch from 6'11", so don't think a 7 footer is that big an advantage based on just height.
By making statements like you did, you imply a level of incompetence of our coach that simply is not the case. I ask you to directly compare the MSU situation this year with Purdue's. Don't give me a bunch of crap about how good Izzo was in the past. Let's just talk about this year, since you use this same measuring stick for Painter. Izzo had much more talent, any way you can measure it, and did even worse than Painter in the NCAA's.
I like your comparison to MSU. We were pretty close in talent to them. Just how far did MSU go in the tournament?
I think you went down the wrong trail. When I asked for folks to watch more basketball and look at the talent on the court, I did not mean pacifically MSU, which was no longer playing by the time of the post I made.
One more point. I would have to say that Shaq was probably the most impressive college center I have ever watched. His teams never made it to the S16 IIRC. Centers do not a champion make.
Similar threads
