Harrison Ingram to Stanford.....Who up next?
- Thread starter Monk1014
- Start date
So not only out of touch, you're a liar as well. Got it.
Alright name names and we'll verify. Being out of touch as you are, you likely don't understand how google works and the wealth of information out there. So give us names, schools and the dates to back your claims up. Or, which is more likely, you are just blowing smoke our of your ass.
Hopefully you're not that dumb.....or gullible.
I'm still trying to understand though, why you would say I'm out of touch with today's 16-18 yr olds? What am I missing? What's this piece of the recruiting puzzle that has to do with weather, beaches, girls, and nightlife that I'm unaware of that sways a 5 star recruits decision away from Purdue?
But, I'll ask again, if those things were important, why don't Miami, USC, Rutgers, Ole Miss, AZ St and others have dominant recruiting?
You're the one that said it. Only one being dumb here is you.
This has been explained to you, with proof, time and time again. You're just ignoring it all to try and save face on the internet.
Well, just for clarification then: Your basic premise is that there's a lot of factors that go into the final decision of where a 5 star recruit chooses to go but the head coach is not the most important one.
My contention is that the head coach is a very, very significant part of that decision, more so than any other factor. I also contend that location, weather, girls, nightlife, beaches, etc are very low on the priority list of a player who may only be around for 1-2 years and then going to the NBA.
Therefore, the question is, why has Painter only been able to land a single 5 star recruit in his 16 years at Purdue?
Is there something in the way Painter is recruiting these kids because I don't believe it's something unique to Purdue.
Is your proof the article from the division 3 pitcher? That's hardly 'proof'. His recruiting experience is not even in the same ball park as a 5 star basketball recruit with NBA potential.
No the proof has been in the countless times you have brought it up and so many people have given more than enough evidence to show how wrong you are. You just choose to ignore it.
You know though you say that recruiting a 5 star with NBA hopes is different than recruiting a 5 star with MLB hopes, but how can that be? According to you everything is the same so all the same rules apply.
Not correct. My contention is that what is important to one recruit is not necessarily important to another. You assume that everyone is the same and wants the same things and that couldn't be further from the truth.
Players with MLB hopes rarely go to D3 schools where as 95% of 5 star basketball recruits probably go to a Power 5/high major program.
So, why do you think that only a single 5 star recruit out of several hundred has said yes to Painter in 16 years?
Is it Painter or Purdue?
I have a hard time believing it's Purdue.
Same question can be asked of all the other schools that don't land 5 stars on the regular. Which only a handful of schools "qualify" for that 5 star lottery usually and there are only so many 5 stars to go around.
I know you're trying to pin this on Painter somehow lenny, but you're argument just doesn't hold nay water. Basically you're creating a problem that doesn't exist.
Last edited:
Perfect way to end this discussion. He is never going to understand what goes in to recruiting, so it's rather just best to let him throw his tantrum when a player picks someone else and just move on as he can no longer be taken seriously nor actually debate anything factual. I've learned that the hard way through this whole thing lately.
Yet, you refuse to address the question? All you reply with is "there's lots of reasons". Well, "lots of reasons" as the reason for consistently losing out on the best talent turns into a trend. Trends happen because of a repeated event or behavior. What I'd like to know is, what do you think that event or behavior is? And can it be changed?
You seem to be resigned to the fact that it's just random chance to land a 5 star. I disagree.
No, it's been addressed many times to you, you just choose to ignore it. Kind of like how I have now told you the same thing several times in the thread.
I'm actually really starting to question whether you are even a Purdue grad to begin with. Either way, your questions have been answered both in this thread and others and by links/facts/etc sent to you every time you bring this up and I am done wasting time on it. Your questions have been answered, you're either just really dense or purposely ignoring it. Maybe a bit of both.
You sound like Joe Biden dodging questions from the media....
Why don't you just answer the question? "What is it about Purdue or Painter or other reason that you think is the main reason Painter isn't able to land 5 star recruits?"
It's a simple questions. You're a big boy, express your opinion.
How is that in any way relevant given your premise that recruiting five stars is all about the coach? Two coaches , including Painter, have been at their school that long. Three of 14 coaches have been at their school for 10+ seasons. Half have coached five season or fewer. I posted last week the number of Big10 schools that have signed one or more five stars in the last six years. Short list.
Last edited:
Here's the all-time list. However, are they counting Big Dog or Biggie as our 1 5 star?
All-Time Five-Star Recruits by Big Ten University
- Michigan State: 10
- Indiana: 9
- Ohio State: 9
- Maryland: 3
- Michigan: 2
- Wisconsin: 2
- Minnesota: 1
- Purdue: 1
- Illinois: 0
- Iowa: 0
- Nebraska: 0
- Northwestern: 0
- Penn State: 0
- Rutgers: 0
Not sure the source but that doesn't look right. A quick Google search shows that in Michigan's Fab Five class Chris Webber was #1 nationally, Juwan Howard #3, Jalen Rose #6 and Jimmy King #9. Maybe this doesn't go back that far, which would explain why Big Dog doesn't show up for Purdue?
Regardless of the time frame it is interesting that by far the highest counts are with MSU, IU and OSU. With MSU you can't separate the coach from the school, but for IU and OSU they've both had a bunch of coaches come through in the last 20 to 30 years, so it would seem to indicate that the school, not just the coach, is important in attracting five stars.
The line I bolded nukes his entire premise from orbit. It's ironic IU gets used to add to the mountain of information proving him wrong, but still, well done.
I've given up the argument as it's gotten to the point where it is like trying to explain physics to a pile of mulch.
The list goes back to 1980, so it does include the Fab 5 and Big Dog.
You bring up an interesting point though. It would be interesting to see the recruiting budgets of these programs as well where they rank with their recruiting rankings.
"The list goes back to 1980, so it does include the Fab 5 and Big Dog.
You bring up an interesting point though. It would be interesting to see the recruiting budgets of these programs as well where they rank with their recruiting rankings. "
I believe his point was that, if it really goes back to 1980, it should have 2 for us, and at least 5 for Michigan, as all 5 of the Fab Five were 5-stars. If it doesn't reflect that, then either it doesn't go all the way back to 1980, or, it's a very flawed list.
You bring up an interesting point though. It would be interesting to see the recruiting budgets of these programs as well where they rank with their recruiting rankings. "
I believe his point was that, if it really goes back to 1980, it should have 2 for us, and at least 5 for Michigan, as all 5 of the Fab Five were 5-stars. If it doesn't reflect that, then either it doesn't go all the way back to 1980, or, it's a very flawed list.
Illinois has had multiple 5 star recruits since 1980. Marcus Liberty was the number one player in the country. Nick A
Illinois has had multiple five star recruits since 1980. Marcus Liberty was the number one high school player in the country. Nick Anderson. Dee Brown. Efrem Winters. Bruce Douglas.
According to Rivals, here is the list for all 5 star recruits between 2002 and 2019. I don't know what source folks use to go back to 1980 - seems those lists are flawed... I just saw an error in the below in that Michigan should have 3 - i then found all of 2019 was missing. See update below:
| Row Labels | Count of SCHOOL |
| Kentucky | 49 |
| Duke | 38 |
| Arizona | 26 |
| Kansas | 25 |
| North Carolina | 22 |
| Texas | 17 |
| No School | 17 |
| UCLA | 17 |
| Connecticut | 13 |
| Florida | 12 |
| Louisiana State | 12 |
| Memphis | 12 |
| Ohio State | 10 |
| Villanova | 10 |
| Louisville | 10 |
| Michigan State | 10 |
| Florida State | 9 |
| Indiana | 9 |
| Syracuse | 8 |
| Oregon | 8 |
| NC State | 8 |
| Mississippi St | 7 |
| UNLV | 7 |
| Tennessee | 7 |
| Washington | 7 |
| USC | 7 |
| Alabama | 7 |
| Oklahoma State | 6 |
| Wake Forest | 5 |
| Kansas State | 4 |
| Georgetown | 4 |
| Georgia Tech | 4 |
| Oklahoma | 4 |
| Georgia | 4 |
| Arkansas | 4 |
| Missouri | 4 |
| Maryland | 3 |
| Pittsburgh | 3 |
| Vanderbilt | 3 |
| Baylor | 3 |
| Gonzaga | 3 |
| Stanford | 3 |
| Wisconsin | 3 |
| Iowa State | 3 |
| California | 3 |
| Auburn | 3 |
| Cincinnati | 3 |
| SMU | 3 |
| Michigan | 3 |
| W Kentucky | 2 |
| Arizona State | 2 |
| Marquette | 2 |
| Texas A&M | 2 |
| Miami (FL) | 2 |
| Providence | 2 |
| DePaul | 2 |
| San Diego State | 2 |
| West Virginia | 2 |
| Illinois | 2 |
| St. John's | 2 |
| Minnesota | 2 |
| Texas Tech | 1 |
| Iona | 1 |
| Houston | 1 |
| Purdue | 1 |
| Notre Dame | 1 |
| Nevada | 1 |
| Clemson | 1 |
| Seton Hall | 1 |
| Grand Total | 494 |
Last edited:
Similar threads
