Luckily Berghof and Bobinski work off of facts and data, instead of their feelings.
For all of the FIRE PAINTER! Morons
- Thread starter New Pal Boiler
- Start date
Still doesn’t make what you said any less wrong. And no one cares what impresses you.
Nope, no facts - Little Rock, North Texas, Saint Peters, FDU
Exactly my point. That is the ceiling with Painter.
So instead, you will just whine on a message board. That's a healthy solution to your problem.
Barely .500 in the NCAA.
Beaten by double digit seeds 3 years straight
Only team ever to lose to a play in team. Historic.
Running a clean program is a given, no trophy for that.
Historic loss in a tourney with the red sea parting for him and a deep run in the NCAA.
Regular season wins and post season wins are how you separate class of coaching.
At 17-15 for his career, he’s much more likely to lose in the Rd of 32 than he is to get to the Sweet 16.
Again, I was still supporting CMP until it was reported that his big solution is a turnover-prone G5 kid who can’t shoot. If that’s who we get, I have zero confidence that CMP has any idea of how to actually get us to where we all want Purdue basketball to go…
Both sides of this talk are behaving in the same way. If one side is whining, then the other is as well. You don't have default virtue because of your position. Everyone is stressing their position and defending it strongly. That's how this works.
What percentage of B1G coaches average 1 NCAA per season coached? Must be at least 50% if Matt is “mediocre” or a “really bad tournament coach”.
What percentage of B1G coaches average 1 NCAA per season coached? Must be at least 50% if Matt is “mediocre” or a “really bad tournament coach”.
What other programs do is not my concern. I believe Purdue should expect more from an 18 yr coach than 1 elite 8 and 3 consecutive losses to a 13, 15 and 16 seed. You clearly think that is good, I do not.
I support Matt Painter, but I'm not defending him here. I simply pointed out that it's ridiculous to say he's mediocre.
In fact, in my first post in this thread I acknowledged the frustration many Purdue fans (myself included) feel over the recent NCAA Tournament flameouts.
Wrong. To YOU, it "truly matters." I don't give a damn about a one and done, crap shoot, made for TV / gamblers tournament.
You don't speak for everyone. I would rather have the intimacy of celebrating Big Ten hardware in Mackey around friends and family.
March or nothing mentality is just nonsense.
Sounds pretty mediocre to me, Considering that most of those sweet sixteens came when:
1) IU had that Sampson cheating scandal going on and were recovering from it (hence why we ended up with the big three (four initially)). Which reminds me, how come Painter still had a hard time recruiting top kids from instate even then?
2) We had three-four NBA worthy kids in four of those years.
Most fan bases would disagree with you. For example, I don’t think many people talk about how many pac 10 championships UCLA has.
None of that proves that Painter is “mediocre” or a “really bad tournament coach”.
What percentage of B1G coaches average 1 NCAA per season coached? Must be at least 50% if Matt is “mediocre” or a “really bad tournament coach”.
No. People whining that "Purdue" and "Matt Painter" are at fault for not paying players to come to Purdue do not have a legitimate position. It is a whining complaint made out of ignorance and entitlement. The people whining about it are the people who should be working to fix it.
Who is whining about Purdue and Painter not paying players? Show your receipts. Painter has the talent.
The perpetually overrated B1G should not be our standard. I know that's hard to understand.
You may be right on this, but it’s what the big money guys think that matters, ultimately.
No, it doesn’t prove it to you. Because you think making the tournament is a success. And that is fine.
You haven't been reading these threads if you have to ask that.
And I agree that Painter has the talent to win.
OK, what percentage of Power 6 coaches average 1 NCAA win per season coached? Must be at least 50% if Matt is “mediocre” or a “really bad tournament coach”.
You apparently don’t know the definitions of the words “mediocrity” or “really bad”.
Again, I think 1 elite 8 in 18 yrs and losing the last 3 tournaments to 13, 15 and 16 when you have an All-American is not a success. You clearly do. That’s ok, we just look at things differently.
Must have missed them. I don’t subscribe to that. I do subscribe that Painter has the talent and has not produced in March with that talent.
How is averaging 1 NCAA tournament win per season “mediocre” ?
How does that make Painter a “really bad tournament coach” ??
The last 3 tournaments, Painter has had really good teams and lost to teams seeded worse than Purdue. Not only worse, but 13, 15 and 16 seed. You clearly believe that shows he is a good tournament coach. I do not.
Similar threads
