Fire Painter

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Reading through this litter of stupid postings from the first half reminds me why I try not to post during games. For one thing, I just like watching the game, and don't want to take time to read or type posts. Why do people post this kind of stuff? How does "atmafola" know that Painter doesn't have a FF in him? I read this kind of weird extrapolation and think this is some child posting. WTF?

Okay atmafola, is the opposite true? If this game is the hinge-point of the season, the litmus test of FF possession, then it begs the question. I suppose since the team pulled out a win, we can now extrapolate (base on this one game???) that Painter DOES have a Final Four in him? Well? Looking for a response here....

My last concern has to do with the posting population. Why is it always the same 4 posters that appear when we lose, but only then? They never seem to post on positive points for the team. Guys like atmafola (and he is not the only one) never are seen on here until we drop a game of struggle with an opponent. In my eyes, this really deflates their credibility, and makes me hostile toward their posts.

Mathboy,

I certainly can understand why you wouldn't want to post during games.

I also understand how posters might appear "emotional" during the game, which sometimes gets reflected in a post.....this is seen both with positive and negative thoughts. Might there be other agendas? Sure.....

Just to give you my perspective....I enjoy the back-and-forth posting during the games, probably some of it due to not being able to attend games now that I've moved from the Midwest. The only chance I have had for a while is a bowl game (long drought there) or the NCAA tournament. So, there is definitely some Boilermaker fellowship in my case. Also, the posting keeps me occupied and diverted from the possible breakables (like the remote and other artifacts/items), so much so that with certified proof of my posting I've been able to get a discounted insurance rate.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Mathboy,

I certainly can understand why you wouldn't want to post during games.

I also understand how posters might appear "emotional" during the game, which sometimes gets reflected in a post.....this is seen both with positive and negative thoughts. Might there be other agendas? Sure.....

Just to give you my perspective....I enjoy the back-and-forth posting during the games, probably some of it due to not being able to attend games now that I've moved from the Midwest. The only chance I have had for a while is a bowl game (long drought there) or the NCAA tournament. So, there is definitely some Boilermaker fellowship in my case. Also, the posting keeps me occupied and diverted from the possible breakables (like the remote and other artifacts/items), so much so that with certified proof of my posting I've been able to get a discounted insurance rate.

agree. but the "game thread" is the proper place for them. I'm up and down and all over the place during games, particularly when we play like dookie for half the game. Starting a "fire painter" thread is going to get some ribbing and deservedly so. Most of us just want CMP to take the next steps in growing as a coach. He's been a decent coach and hasn't tarnished the university, but I want to see him improve in all areas and I think he can and is in many ways...This is a mostly unmoderated board so it's best to just ignore the trolls...or post recipes. lol.

 

[BBG]

I'm up and down and all over the place during games, particularly when we play like dookie for half the game.

Can confirm. You even made me go outside and freeze my nads off!

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Can confirm. You even made me go outside and freeze my nads off!

the ends justify the means my friend. you were the mvp.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

agree. but the "game thread" is the proper place for them. I'm up and down and all over the place during games, particularly when we play like dookie for half the game. Starting a "fire painter" thread is going to get some ribbing and deservedly so. Most of us just want CMP to take the next steps in growing as a coach. He's been a decent coach and hasn't tarnished the university, but I want to see him improve in all areas and I think he can and is in many ways...This is a mostly unmoderated board so it's best to just ignore the trolls...or post recipes. lol.

yeah.....BBG also back in the day posted other "distractions".....the good old days...

 

[IndySouthsider]

As far as I am concern Painter is paid handsomely for extreme criticism. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

It's when it gets personal about a player I think lines get crossed. I don't want to see the Bade/Carroll treatment for future players. All signs point to Travis being one heck of a teammate.

 

[tjreese]

As far as I am concern Painter is paid handsomely for extreme criticism. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

It's when it gets personal about a player I think lines get crossed. I don't want to see the Bade/Carroll treatment for future players. All signs point to Travis being one heck of a teammate.

I too don't like it to get personal about a player or am bothered by criticism of Matt. Whether Matt or another, I think criticism should be fair, at least some debate on accuracy and not out and out crazy notions without an inkling of support. Players are younger and should me more immune from most things...and certainly immune to criticism relative to physical abilities

 

[atmafola]

Reading through this litter of stupid postings from the first half reminds me why I try not to post during games. For one thing, I just like watching the game, and don't want to take time to read or type posts. Why do people post this kind of stuff? How does "atmafola" know that Painter doesn't have a FF in him? I read this kind of weird extrapolation and think this is some child posting. WTF?

Okay atmafola, is the opposite true? If this game is the hinge-point of the season, the litmus test of FF possession, then it begs the question. I suppose since the team pulled out a win, we can now extrapolate (base on this one game???) that Painter DOES have a Final Four in him? Well? Looking for a response here....

My last concern has to do with the posting population. Why is it always the same 4 posters that appear when we lose, but only then? They never seem to post on positive points for the team. Guys like atmafola (and he is not the only one) never are seen on here until we drop a game of struggle with an opponent. In my eyes, this really deflates their credibility, and makes me hostile toward their posts.

My proof is simple. He hasn't or shown he can. Please provide proof that I'm wrong about that. Otherwise quit insulting me. When he does, I will gladly cheer him on. Until then, please keep your insults to yourself. I also post win or lose. I'm pro painter, just not a fan of people who defend him while slating players. I really really loathe that. I'm also in the camp of I will consider him about elite coach when he shows it. He hasn't till date. You are free to annoint him a legend now if you wish, but dont expect me to agree with you and dont insult me if I don't.

 

[TC4THREE]

My proof is simple. He hasn't or shown he can. Please provide proof that I'm wrong about that. Otherwise quit insulting me. When he does, I will gladly cheer him on. Until then, please keep your insults to yourself.

Everyone that has ever gone to the Final Four had never there before they went their first time. That didn't mean they weren't capable of getting there.

 

[atmafola]

Everyone that has ever gone to the Final Four had never there before they went their first time. That didn't mean they weren't capable of getting there.

Well until he does, he hasn't.

 

[mathboy]

My proof is simple. He hasn't or shown he can. Please provide proof that I'm wrong about that. Otherwise quit insulting me. When he does, I will gladly cheer him on. Until then, please keep your insults to yourself. I also post win or lose. I'm pro painter, just not a fan of people who defend him while slating players. I really really loathe that. I'm also in the camp of I will consider him about elite coach when he shows it. He hasn't till date. You are free to annoint him a legend now if you wish, but dont expect me to agree with you and dont insult me if I don't.

I think you misunderstand what I asked you. You clearly stated that Painter doesn't have the capability to reach the final four. Then you state that your proof is that he has not made the FF yet. Okay, to follow that logic, the only coaches that have the capability to reach the FF are those that already have? Any body, that has not reached the FF yet can ever reach it now? WTF?

Sorry, but that sort of logic makes you the target of some derisive responses.

 

[mathboy]

Well until he does, he hasn't.

Thanks, captain obvious. LOL

 

[atmafola]

I think you misunderstand what I asked you. You clearly stated that Painter doesn't have the capability to reach the final four. Then you state that your proof is that he has not made the FF yet. Okay, to follow that logic, the only coaches that have the capability to reach the FF are those that already have? Any body, that has not reached the FF yet can ever reach it now? WTF?

Sorry, but that sort of logic makes you the target of some derisive responses.

I think I understand the source of confusion now. The "he doesn't have it in him" is me predicting the future based on my reasoned opinion. It was never meant to be a normative position. It can not be. That much is obvious and implied. Stating it explicitly is trivial and unnecessary. Short of coming back from the future, nobody can prove a future event occurs or not. The proof you demand DNE by definition. But it doesn't mean we can't reasonably attempt to predict the future and perhaps even reach contrasting opinions. Mine leans towards he never gets there. I already gave you some of my reason. You are free to disagree, but please cut the insults out.

 

[mathboy]

I think I understand the source of confusion now. The "he doesn't have it in him" is me predicting the future based on my reasoned opinion. It was never meant to be a normative position. It can not be. That much is obvious and implied. Stating it explicitly is trivial and unnecessary. Short of coming back from the future, nobody can prove a future event occurs or not. The proof you demand DNE by definition. But it doesn't mean we can't reasonably attempt to predict the future and perhaps even reach contrasting opinions. Mine leans towards he never gets there. I already gave you some of my reason. You are free to disagree, but please cut the insults out.

You made the assertion, so the burden of proof is on you.

Your "proof" was that Painter would not make the FF, ever, because he had not made it yet. I just pointed out the flawed circular logic. So you add that some how, we should know what you mean because it is "obvious and implied"? Sorry, I am still at WTF with this whole dialog with you.

 

[BoiledSteel]

I think I understand the source of confusion now. The "he doesn't have it in him" is me predicting the future based on my unfounded opinion.

Fixed that part for you. The rest of your post is just nonsense. And not in disagreement way, but a putting-a-string-of-thoughts-together way.

 

[cprh9u]

And you have no way of knowing that. There is far more evidence that he would of gotten a FF than not.

This makes no sense. There is evidence that he would of (nice) gotten a FF? The evidence is that he didn't. There is speculation that he could have, but to say there is "evidence that he would of" is just ridiculous.

 

[BoiledSteel]

This makes no sense. There is evidence that he would of (nice) gotten a FF? The evidence is that he didn't. There is speculation that he could have, but to say there is "evidence that he would of" is just ridiculous.

I am using the same rhetoric you use to assure us that Painter will never get to the Final Four. So it either applies to all situations or makes your previous assertions null and void and equally ridiculous. Sorry, you don't get it both ways.

 

[Kesselschmiede]

I am using the same rhetoric you use to assure us that Painter will never get to the Final Four. So it either applies to all situations or makes your previous assertions null and void and equally ridiculous. Sorry, you don't get it both ways.

Hahaha, nicely done. Now, watch him backtrack.

 

[mathboy]

This makes no sense. There is evidence that he would of (nice) gotten a FF? The evidence is that he didn't. There is speculation that he could have, but to say there is "evidence that he would of" is just ridiculous.

It makes perfect sense. Using the only evidence possible, the rankings, we were a top 4-5 team at the time. It was the end of the season, and so the rankings were as accurate as possible. That team was likely a FF team until Hummel went down.

To say it makes no sense is disingenuous. Of course, the luck of the draw and the bounce of the ball all make the best rankings subject to random luck. We all understand that, but your position is not substantiated by the facts.

 

[TC4THREE]

Well until he does, he hasn't.

And that doesn't make someone not capable of doing so.

 

[atmafola]

It makes perfect sense. Using the only evidence possible, the rankings, we were a top 4-5 team at the time. It was the end of the season, and so the rankings were as accurate as possible. That team was likely a FF team until Hummel went down.

To say it makes no sense is disingenuous. Of course, the luck of the draw and the bounce of the ball all make the best rankings subject to random luck. We all understand that, but your position is not substantiated by the facts.

Neither is your position supported by facts. You are also being disingenuous. You can't on one hand attack someone for making declarative statements about the unknown future, while on the hand, you do the exact same thing and make a declarative statement about an unknown. At best, all we can do is speculate based on how we individually choose to interpret known information available to us. You really were wrong for throwing out insults.

 

[atmafola]

And that doesn't make someone not capable of doing so.

That he isn't capable is purely my own opinion of Painter. It's a prediction based on my interpretation of I have seen from him so far. It's by definition not a falsifiable statement. You are perfectly allowed to have a contrary opinion even based on the same set of reasons. And that will be just as valid.

 

[TC4THREE]

That he isn't capable is purely my own opinion of Painter.

There it is.

 

[atmafola]

There it is.

That much was implied from my very first statement on this topic. Any statement on this topic is necessarily just an opinion.

 

[TC4THREE]

I've been told that realists only deal with facts though. Maybe they only deal with certain facts that support the opinion they favor?

 

[atmafola]

I've been told that realists only deal with facts though. Maybe they only deal with certain facts that support the opinion they favor?

then go argue with those realists, I never claimed to be one. I made a statement that by definition can only be an opinion. Anyone is free to disagree with their own opinion and reasons why. The future will tell us which of us was closer to being right. But the insult was unnecessary.

 

[TC4THREE]

Anyone is free to disagree with

I disagree with your opinion.

 

[TC4THREE]

then go argue with those realists, I never claimed to be one. I made a statement that by definition can only be an opinion. Anyone is free to disagree with their own opinion and reasons why. The future will tell us which of us was closer to being right. But the insult was unnecessary.

And where did I insult you?

 

[cprh9u]

It makes perfect sense. Using the only evidence possible, the rankings, we were a top 4-5 team at the time. It was the end of the season, and so the rankings were as accurate as possible. That team was likely a FF team until Hummel went down.

To say it makes no sense is disingenuous. Of course, the luck of the draw and the bounce of the ball all make the best rankings subject to random luck. We all understand that, but your position is not substantiated by the facts.

I can't even respond to the stupidity here. I love the fact that Kessel and TC are the one's that like your comment. That's all the verification that I need

 

[cprh9u]

It makes perfect sense. Using the only evidence possible, the rankings, we were a top 4-5 team at the time. It was the end of the season, and so the rankings were as accurate as possible. That team was likely a FF team until Hummel went down.

To say it makes no sense is disingenuous. Of course, the luck of the draw and the bounce of the ball all make the best rankings subject to random luck. We all understand that, but your position is not substantiated by the facts.

Yes, good hard evidence. Nice job mathboy. And again, the PU cheerleaders Tom Coverdale and Kessledouche support this. Tells me what I need to know...

 

[TC4THREE]

Yes, good hard evidence. Nice job mathboy. And again, the PU cheerleaders Tom Coverdale and Kessledouche support this. Tells me what I need to know...

Loser's argument. Using non-specific phrases that don't address anything like "I can't even respond to the stupidity here" or "Tells me what I need to know".

1. You are used to providing the stupidity so you probably wouldn't know how to respond to it if you encountered it from someone else.

2. You need to know so much more than you think. It's always scary when people don't know how much they don't know.

 

[tjreese]

That he isn't capable is purely my own opinion of Painter. It's a prediction based on my interpretation of I have seen from him so far. It's by definition not a falsifiable statement. You are perfectly allowed to have a contrary opinion even based on the same set of reasons. And that will be just as valid.

Wouldn't it be better to change valid to reasonable? Only one view is correct and that may for ever be unknown or may be known...but only one answer would be valid. Two views might be reasonable due to unknowns, but only one of the unknowns...and maybe never known is valid...or at least it appears that way to me...

 

[boilernuke]

It makes perfect sense. Using the only evidence possible, the rankings, we were a top 4-5 team at the time. It was the end of the season, and so the rankings were as accurate as possible. That team was likely a FF team until Hummel went down.

Purdue was actually ranked #3 when that happened at the end of February 2010.

 

[Boilerkid18]

This is entertaining

 

[atmafola]

Wouldn't it be better to change valid to reasonable? Only one view is correct and that may for ever be unknown or may be known...but only one answer would be valid. Two views might be reasonable due to unknowns, but only one of the unknowns...and maybe never known is valid...or at least it appears that way to me...

i used valid to mean reasonable in that sense not correct. English is not my first or second language, but I am pretty sure valid does not mean as accurate/correct/right. And pretty much every dictionary agrees with me. A valid opinion is one that's "okay to have and/or reasonably defensible". By that definition, yes I correctly used valid. Valid doesn't mean right. Two diametrically opposite views can both be valid, but only one may be objectively accurate. And in this case, right won't be known until the future.

 

[atmafola]

And where did I insult you?

not you boss, Mathboy did. I would have gladly welcomed any post that disagreed. I would have even enthusiastically read why the person did. I might disagree and state my reasons why. End of the day maybe one of us sways the other, or perhaps nothing changes, but at least hopefully I learned something.

 

[mathboy]

not you boss, Mathboy did. I would have gladly welcomed any post that disagreed. I would have even enthusiastically read why the person did. I might disagree and state my reasons why. End of the day maybe one of us sways the other, or perhaps nothing changes, but at least hopefully I learned something.

Was it my statement about your circular logic: "Sorry, but that sort of logic makes you the target of some derisive responses." ...or was it my reply to CPR where I said, "To say it makes no sense is disingenuous. " Did you get mixed up and think my reply to CPR was to you? I think the problem here is that you are not following the conversation accurately enough. Neither of these statements should be taken as an insult to you. I recognize we are all Purdue fans here, but I am sorry if my direct statements came across as somehow insulting to you.

As the good doctor said, "I know, maybe we can have a spelling bee?"

 

[mathboy]

Purdue was actually ranked #3 when that happened at the end of February 2010.

Thanks Nuke. The only proof that a FF was possible that year was this ranking. Of course, it is no guarantee we would actually get to the FF, but carrying that ranking at that point in the season meant we were likely a Number 1 seed and would have the advantageous matchups. Every basketball ranking service could see we were playing at that level. To state otherwise is simply not understanding the facts.

 

[Goboilerzzz]

Yeah, he is a great Coach. Only taken him a year and half to figure out they are too slow playing both bigs at the same time. And he cost them the season last year by playing Davis 35 minutes a game and getting nothing out of him. He has wasted more talent than any Coach in the BIG. He is a MAC level Coach at best

 

[BoiledSteel]

Yeah, he is a great Coach. Only taken him a year and half to figure out they are too slow playing both bigs at the same time. And he cost them the season last year by playing Davis 35 minutes a game and getting nothing out of him. He has wasted more talent than any Coach in the BIG. He is a MAC level Coach at best

But wait, last year you wanted him to play Haas and AJH at the same time. So which is it? Nevermind, there is nothing you can say that will even come close as to shoring up any credibility you might of had. It is all gone and your critique of CMP has been voided and found invalid.