I don't really follow women's basketball but....
- Thread starter boilerzz
- Start date
Sadly now, it seems it is a sport at Purdue just to fullfill Title IX. Our leaders act like they don't care what it has become. Now the fanbase is at an alltime low and that doesn't even sway them. They'll let her run her contract out for another year of our misery. I'm surprised they haven't ruined volleyball also.
Shocking to no one really, she’ll get 1 last season to right the ship, Purdue wasn’t going to cut another check on a head Coach leaving. Another poor year and she’ll be gone.
But I'll be a year older and closer to the nursing home. I hope they let me watch sports there.
Disappointing, I was really hoping she would be successful.
If she wasn't a beloved former player - she would've been gone. But they're going to give her 1 more shot because - well Bobinski really doesn't care because it's all about the bottom line - that of which WBB doesn't affect. I really have no clue how they are going to recruit any talent that's going to help move the needle forward.
In fairness, the 3 recruits on paper look to be pretty solid, she said she’s going to hit the portal hard, better get legit players, MAC ones or girls that average 8-10 pts a game from smaller schools won’t cut the mustard.
Yes - but she has to win NOW. Are they talented players with loads of potential? Sure. But they are still freshmen post players who will take time to develop. All-American, top 20 elite post players - which they are not - still take time to develop. The one thing that may work more in our favor is the majority of these Covid kids will have exhausted their eligibility after this year so much less 5th, 6th year seniors to compete against - meaning less experienced players - and we can finally get back to somewhat normality - a whopping 5 years after covid started.
Honestly, I could still get behind Gearlds if she can show tangible, steady progress. The downward progression of the program the last 3 years is very concerning---especially considering how the B1G has grown.
It'll be a monumental challenge. I'm not encouraged by the "hit the portal hard" rhetoric. This looks like a longer term ground-up rebuild. Purdue needs leadership committed to reestablishing a winning mentality in all phases of the program.
If Gearlds can do that, great. But if not I think it's time to move on.
I think we all see who she is a a coach by now. The only remaining question is when will the results embarrass Bobo the clown enough to remove her?
Could be. Maybe giving Gearlds another year is just a hope and a prayer. Maybe it's Bobinski's fig leaf of loyalty toward one of Purdue's all-time greats until her buy-out becomes more manageable.
But, Katie has the opportunity, and we'll see what she does with it.
Painter had his back against the wall after Purdue dropped from B1G champion to last place in just 3 years. He reevaluated, made productive adjustments, and rebuilt. We'll see what Gearlds does facing what looks like a tougher climb.
Absolutely. Gearlds will have to do something unprecedented in her career to survive and thrive at Purdue. But that's how coaches grow. She'll either rise to meet this challenge or go back to a level where she's had more proven success.
We'll see.
Looking at the latest Bracketology and if it stands - 18 of our 29 games this season were against NCAA tournament teams. That's a whopping 62% of our games. Will have played 3 of 4 - 1 seeds, a 2 seed and 6 total games against top 5 seeds.
Not an excuse - but that's a TOUGH schedule for a team not even close to having the talent to compete against that. 10-19 should not shock anyone.
Not an excuse - but that's a TOUGH schedule for a team not even close to having the talent to compete against that. 10-19 should not shock anyone.
Last edited:
Wow.
That is a tough schedule.
The BIG is a gauntlet. Especially since adding the West Coast teams.
I guess we'll see if KG can get it done.
I can agree on the schedule and record. But, Purdue was annihilated by 30, 40, even 50 points way too many times.
I work at UT-Martin. Our women's basketball team finished exactly in the middle of the Ohio Valley Conference (13-19/10-10/#212 NET). UTM faced three elite opponents this year:
Tennessee (road) 50-90
Louisville (home) 64-86
UCLA (neutral) 37-97
So, against elite competition, Purdue did about the same (or maybe marginally better) than a mid-level OVC team. That can't be acceptable for a program of Purdue's stature.
Full disclosure: that's not to suggest an overall equivalence. Purdue went 8-0 against Quad 4 whereas UTM was 11-15.
It's hard to really tell - a lot of top ranked teams play schools differently because they know how they will be perceived when it comes to NCAA seeding and how that is determined. For example - the difference between a 1 seed or a 2 seed - based on how many "impressive" wins they get. The process really is splitting hairs by the end of it and the coaches know this. I say this because a 40 pt win against UTM and a 40 pt win against a Big Ten team like Purdue will hold much different weight come selection Sunday. The coaches know this. So that will inevitably leave them to play teams like Purdue and UTM very differently. They will go much easier on a UTM - a team they could probably beat them by 70-80 pts if they want to - but obviously they don't want to play their starters anymore than they have to thus only beating them by 40.
Against Purdue - completely different game plan as they want to beat a P4 school by as much as possible and they will do all they can to do that.
So I say all this - its kind of impossible to compare losses when you comparing two very different stature programs. I think it's a mistake to say UTM and Purdue are on the same level because they are losing to elite teams by the same margins because this Purdue team - as talently challenged as they are - would beat a 13-19 UTM by 25-30 pts rather easily.
Last edited:
Oh, don't misunderstand me---I'm not saying the two programs are anywhere close to the same level. They're not. That's why I added the caveat at the end about Quad 4 games.
But, I will say this: I watched both teams quite a bit this year (have UTM season tickets). And in those games against elite opponents, I often had a hard time seeing much difference.
That's because the coaches took two very different approaches to the game. For instance - UL was able to beat UTM by 22 pts and they only played their starters an average of 20 minutes. They played their bench a ton. Ok. So Purdue, hypothetically loses to UL by 20ish points. But UL plays their starters 30+ min against Purdue. Would you say those two games would be very comparable? I know it looks the same - but the games are being played much differently. If UL played their starters only 20 min and they are beating Purdue handedly then sure - make the comparison.
Okay, so now explain why we lost to Big Ten teams by much greater margins than PSU and Northwestern....
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Purdue football Burhenn looks to become leader of Purdue tight end room
- Latest: DubJellison
-
-
Purdue men's basketball Matt Painter and Trey Kaufman-Renn talk Purdue at Illinois- Latest: Casey Bartley
