So you're ok with Zach getting 12 FT's after being fouled 40 times? Zach is a huge part of the offense, he is involved in almost every possession and we rely on him to shoot a high %. While he gets more foul calls than anyone else in the country, he still gets many fewer foul calls than he should. I will repeat it....Zach is fouled every single play. Sometimes this causes him to miss the shot, sometimes he turns it over and sometimes it's a bad pass out of the lane. Particularly in late game situations, when refs swallow their whistles, our offense struggles. That's my point.
How many feel
- Thread starter Gman544
- Start date
I agree with all of this, but you're still relying on the refs, some who have never reffed an Edey game, to make judgement calls on how much physicality they're going to allow in the paint.
If an opposing coaches defensive strategy is to play hack-a-Shaq and force the refs to call it that way, it can be an effective way to take Purdue out of what it wants to do on offense.
I understand your point. But, a ref blowing his whistle is still a judgement call, regardless of how obvious it is on TV, to the staff, coaches or fans. It's only a foul if the ref calls it a foul.
It's like calling holding on an offensive line: you can probably call holding on every play, but they don't.
Through the years Purdue fans have not relied on the refs to do their job, because many times they don't. I'm just pointing out why Purdue puts more fouls (even if less than desired or less that what should happen) towards the foul differential. That is an expected positive for getting the ball and player closer to the basket. Naturally if they don't call enough as you imply and we know to be true, then you better have other ways of scoring
i guess it is a give and take. I hated watching and listening to all the broadcasters talking about the fits Montana or Grambling will give us. If we walk into the S16 with back to back double digits wins they will still question us. We could have a cake walk of blowouts to the title game and they would still question us. We are the media punching bag and rightfully deserved.
I'm not sure that Indinia fans would describe "onto another new coach" as "interesting".
I love it.
Couldn't ask for a more perfect scenerio as a Boiler.
I would truly hate to be #1 with a large target on our back.
If you can slip under the radar as a top 5 team, we are doing it.
Despite the turmoil and coaching carousel in Blooomington, they still have a FF banner more recently than we do. Sad but true.
I think it’s three, plus two national championship banners. But if Purdue gets one now, the immediacy helps wipe all those IU banners out as ancient history.
Last edited:
already gone. The tourney now has computer input. Completely different arrangement than years ago in selecting the teams with less bias when the decisions are being made...and more teams. The tourney they reference is outdated
I'm just saying their dusty shit doesn't make me feel any worse about ours.
IMO, only the 2000 championship can be considered modern era. But I get that this is a subjective call.
I think most consider 1985 the start of the modern era when field went to 64 and shot clock and 3 point line were in play. That's why I used that date. No doubt the game has changed since then, but the basic rules of today were introduced then.
3 in 38 years is amazing.
That's little brother talk. I disagree that Indinia is better than Purdue because of that criteria.
Haven't looked it up, but I would bet that since 2000, the Big 10 has had more teams in the tourney than any other conference.
The B1G has had at least one team in the final four in 13 of the years going back to 2000 and several times they’ve had 2 of the 4. Just can’t seem to get over that championship hump.
I believe have also had 6 different programs in the title game, MSU, Mich, Wisconsin, IU, OSU, Illinois. I believe MSU, Michigan, and OSU have made it more than once but am going only off memory here.
People attribute the refs we use aren’t always the elite ones which they have been trying to change. I’ll find the tweet but the elite refs are calling Maryland Rutgers and they put Green on Purdue v Illinois. Not saying that is the only reason but when the best refs aren’t used for our best teams and we have refs who easily crater when coaches beg for fouls not to be called, you get let down come March.
Other side is focusing on dominate centers v uptempo slashing and shooting. When watching the Illinois game, I give Underwood tons of credit for switching his approach and bringing in Dainja. That totally turned the game and momentum around. Wonder if Painter would ever consider putting Edey on the bench and riding with TKR and Gillis at the 4/5. Basically could play 5 out and let Jones, Smith et al shoot and drive instead.
I know TKR will launch an occasional 3, but I thought he was supposed to have more a well rounded game. Seems like he's really become a low post, bully ball player than someone who can create mismatches away from the basket.
I don’t know that there ever was a supposed to be for Trey. I think the desire was for him to be able to play defense on the perimeter and be able to score for Purdue. Hope that he would have a decent shot behind the arc but also could see value if he didn’t.
depending on the situation, I think Matt is open to lots of things. not playing Zach outside of foul trouble or not being able to defend the three-point line would require a lot just because of what he contributes so much. Should some oddities surface, I think that is a possibility.
He certainly seemed to have had a more rounded game back in high school than just low post bully ball. He has shown the ability to hit open 3s but doesn’t take many.
I specifically remember NCAA adopting 3 pt line in '86-87 season. Always felt (perhaps stupidly) that they favored Golden Boy Alford more than Bad Boy Skiles, who missed the 3 pt line ruling by a year. (Although the NCAA did experiment with it during '82-83, iirc)
You are correct. It was used in conference play for a few years before that, but was adopted for NCAA tournament in 87. Just in time for Stevie!
The different lines was crazy for a while. ACC had a line that was inside the top of the key and Big Sky had one that was like 2 feet beyond the top of the key.
The ACC line was a travesty.....ok give three for a make, but you should have lost a point (or two) if you missed.
What folks fail to remember is in HS he was much taller than other kids he was playing against. His size allowed him to score and rebound more.
The ACC line was a travesty.....ok give three for a make, but you should have lost a point (or two) if you missed.
That's a fun idea. Make a 4pt line, but if you miss you lose a point.
Similar threads
