I'm a Painter supporter....but what if

[Boiler Buck]

All these offers are on the table for solid players, and no one signs.

I would have thought by now Painter would have had one or two commits, so what if....

Once I have seen multiple offers go out to others, based on past history, I have already resigned myself that a lot, if not maybe all of the top Indiana kids offers are not coming Painter's way.....sad deal.

To not care about recruiting these local IN top 40 guys --- is to not care about winning big. Sure Painter can compete for the upper middle pack and some are happy with that....but clearly there was an opportunity here for Purdue in 2017 to have the B1G's top recruiting class ....just like he could have done in 2012 based on available recruits in IN.....that is appearing perhaps again to be missed by Painter in 17....not that he did not try to set this up, he surely did, and tried very hard.........we will see the results of his work soon? But what about his past history makes one think it will be any different than other years?

As it looks to me he will get a decent class for sure.....based on recent history....prob.a top 25 class again, based on available spots open.....but still again probably the B1G's 2nd, third or maybe even fourth best class in 17.....which some will applaud as a great success.

 

[TC4THREE]

Once I have seen multiple offers go out to others, based on past history, I have already resigned myself that a lot, if not maybe all of the top Indiana kids offers are not coming Painter's way.....sad deal.

To not care about recruiting these local IN top 40 guys --- is to not care about winning big. Sure Painter can compete for the upper middle pack and some are happy with that....but clearly there was an opportunity here for Purdue in 2017 to have the B1G's top recruiting class ....just like he could have done in 2012 based on available recruits in IN.....that is appearing perhaps again to be missed by Painter in 17....not that he did not try to set this up, he surely did, and tried very hard.........we will see the results of his work soon? But what about his past history makes one think it will be any different than other years?

As it looks to me he will get a decent class for sure.....based on recent history....prob.a top 25 class again, based on available spots open.....but still again probably the B1G's 2nd, third or maybe even fourth best class in 17.....which some will applaud as a great success.

And others will wring their hands over it repeatedly as if it dooms us to failure.

 

[Dryfly88]

Once I have seen multiple offers go out to others, based on past history, I have already resigned myself that a lot, if not maybe all of the top Indiana kids offers are not coming Painter's way.....sad deal.

To not care about recruiting these local IN top 40 guys --- is to not care about winning big. Sure Painter can compete for the upper middle pack and some are happy with that....but clearly there was an opportunity here for Purdue in 2017 to have the B1G's top recruiting class ....just like he could have done in 2012 based on available recruits in IN.....that is appearing perhaps again to be missed by Painter in 17....not that he did not try to set this up, he surely did, and tried very hard.........we will see the results of his work soon? But what about his past history makes one think it will be any different than other years?

As it looks to me he will get a decent class for sure.....based on recent history....prob.a top 25 class again, based on available spots open.....but still again probably the B1G's 2nd, third or maybe even fourth best class in 17.....which some will applaud as a great success.

Just to clarify your position: Are you saying you will/would be disappointed if PU ends up with the 2nd or 3rd best recruiting class in the B1G this year? Nothing short of the #1 recruiting class (however that is measured) will do?

 

[cprh9u]

If he doesn't do well in 2017 and it shows up in a couple of years, then I think things could get hot
.

People have been saying that since 2012. Yet somehow, CMP still gets an extension and everyone says "Well, if he doesn't perform well the next 3 years.." I predict making the NCAA tourney 2 of the next 3 years, 0-1 NCAA tourney wins in that time and finishing 8th - 10th in the B1G the year we don't make it and still people will say "lets see what happens the next 3 years. I think he will rebound. His recruiting is on it's way up. He is still fairly young. He is a Purdue guy through and through . Who can we get that's better? Painter has learned from his mistakes and now is his time. The 2020 class is loaded, he will almost certainly get 2-3 studs" And on and on and on it goes.

 

[IamBob]

After reading all of these posts, i just have one thing to say .......................

IU SUCKS!!!!!​

 

[TheRealDeal73]

That's about the only thing everybody agrees with on this board

 

[TheRealDeal73]

You're looking ahead to the 2020 class that's a joke right

 

[TheRealDeal73]

When we consistently make deep runs in the tournament that's when you know recruiting has gotten a lot better

 

[tjreese]

People have been saying that since 2012. Yet somehow, CMP still gets an extension and everyone says "Well, if he doesn't perform well the next 3 years.." I predict making the NCAA tourney 2 of the next 3 years, 0-1 NCAA tourney wins in that time and finishing 8th - 10th in the B1G the year we don't make it and still people will say "lets see what happens the next 3 years. I think he will rebound. His recruiting is on it's way up. He is still fairly young. He is a Purdue guy through and through . Who can we get that's better? Painter has learned from his mistakes and now is his time. The 2020 class is loaded, he will almost certainly get 2-3 studs" And on and on and on it goes.

If I interpret your comments correctly, you don't think he will be on a hot seat in a couple of years if he doesn't do well?

 

[IamBob]

You're looking ahead to the 2020 class that's a joke right

 

[bonefish1]

Just to clarify your position: Are you saying you will/would be disappointed if PU ends up with the 2nd or 3rd best recruiting class in the B1G this year? Nothing short of the #1 recruiting class (however that is measured) will do?

Let's say the state of MI was loaded with high school talent for 2018, like 5-7 guys in the Top 50, more good players than any other state in Big10 country. Let's say that Izzo had been recruiting several of that group for years and had put in considerable time, effort and resources to get them to MSU. If none of them commit to MSU and MSU ends up with the 3rd or 4rd rated class that year, would you consider that a bad recruiting year or a failure? I would.

 

[TC4THREE]

Let's say the state of MI was loaded with high school talent for 2018, like 5-7 guys in the Top 50, more good players than any other state in Big10 country. Let's say that Izzo had been recruiting several of that group for years and had put in considerable time, effort and resources to get them to MSU. If none of them commit to MSU and MSU ends up with the 3rd or 4rd rated class that year, would you consider that a bad recruiting year or a failure? I would.

Let's say that happened. How many MSU fans would be calling for a new coach?

 

[Dryfly88]

Let's say the state of MI was loaded with high school talent for 2018, like 5-7 guys in the Top 50, more good players than any other state in Big10 country. Let's say that Izzo had been recruiting several of that group for years and had put in considerable time, effort and resources to get them to MSU. If none of them commit to MSU and MSU ends up with the 3rd or 4rd rated class that year, would you consider that a bad recruiting year or a failure? I would.

That's fine and you have a right to that opinion. I was trying to get a clarification from Boiler Buck on his comments about #1 recruiting class in the B1G being a requirement.

I did notice that you changed it to 3rd or 4th best class. Does that mean #2 would be ok? Or is it #1 or bust??

 

[mryankee2397]

what if eleanor roosevelt could fly? why worry about something you have to control over? remember all the angst last year over biggie?

 

[TheRealDeal73]

Well Bonefish that will never happen so we don't have to worry about that at all is Tom Izzo will get anybody he wants from the state of Michigan hell he comes here and gets anybody he wants

 

[TheRealDeal73]

And please can we stop comparing Matt Painter two people that's been to the Final Four. Not even on the same coaching level.

 

[TheRealDeal73]

You want to compare Matt Painter to anybody compare him 2 ball State's coach are Indiana State are Valparaiso but please stop comparing him to coaches that win

 

[TheRealDeal73]

And when I say win I mean in the tournament because I can care less what happens before then. I've seen Purdue with 20-plus wins I've seen Purdue with 30 wins I've seen Purdue win a Big Ten Tournament I've seen Purdue win the Big Ten outright in regular season but what I haven't seen is a final four and a championship. Until that is done we ain't accomplish shit.

 

[77 grad]

What year did we win 30?

I saw us play in the Final 4 in 1980 and NCAA championship game in 1969.

"We" have accomplished plenty more than "$#*t" in those and surrounding years. Routine "good," with a few yearly bumps, beats "average"

But I would like seeing more "greats" than we have seen for a very long time.

 

[TC4THREE]

And please can we stop comparing Matt Painter two people that's been to the Final Four. Not even on the same coaching level.

You are clearly very intelligent.

Perhaps we should stop talking to you like you are a functional, educated adult.

 

[bonefish1]

Let's say that happened. How many MSU fans would be calling for a new coach?

When you compare Izzo and Painters record and success in the NCAA, I think Izzo has earned the right not be questioned. Painter on the other hand hasn't.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

When you compare Izzo and Painters record and success in the NCAA, I think Izzo has earned the right not be questioned. Painter on the other hand hasn't.

That's a fair point; Bonefish Lenny wins round 7 on points.....

 

[FirstDownB]

Starting to feel like an outsider as a Purdue fan on the Purdue board. I just don't agree with TCs comment that he wants less Purdue fans. he stated he didn't agree with me being a Purdue fan or at least that's the way I read it. His second paragraph i understand and thanks for the explanation. anyways boiler up.

Just ignore them. If you root for a team, support them in some way, and want what's best for them to succeed then you are a fan, degree or no degree. We need Mackey and Ross-Ade packed with fans regardless of background. When you buy Purdue swag it helps the department. When you wear your colors around the state and talk about Purdue at the office water cooler its all good. The whole alumni superiority thing is mostly a defense mechanism against over-exuberant IU and ND trolls. It should not carry over to shaming fellow Purdue fans. We are all family at the end of the day. There are plenty of other ways to feel special about your degree. Just my 2 cents.

 

[TC4THREE]

When you compare Izzo and Painters record and success in the NCAA, I think Izzo has earned the right not be questioned. Painter on the other hand hasn't.

BS. I know MSU fans who are upset that in spite of all the Final Fours Izzo hasn't been able to follow up with a 2nd national championship. He gets questioned too. If we went to the Final Four next year some of you bozos would be all up in arms if we didn't win it all. People will always want more and stupid fans will always be unappreciative of what they have and demand more because they undoubtedly live a life of pure perfection that can't ever be questioned.

 

[tjreese]

BS. I know MSU fans who are upset that in spite of all the Final Fours Izzo hasn't been able to follow up with a 2nd national championship. He gets questioned too. If we went to the Final Four next year some of you bozos would be all up in arms if we didn't win it all. People will always want more and stupid fans will always be unappreciative of what they have and demand more because they undoubtedly live a life or pure perfection that can't every be questioned.

There is no question that recruiting is much more than just a coach. It is also true that players (recruiting) play a bigger role in tourney play where the coaches don't have the same level of knowledge of the other team as in conference. Consequently "tourney play" is weighted more to the players than season play and the coaches have less effect in the tourney as they do when they know the other teams tendencies and personnel better. None of this is to diminish the importance of a coach, but for those myopic on tourney success...players are very important and recruiting has many things outside the coach.

The budget for recruiting and losing coaches when Matt had the baby boilers put a huge dent into the next few years by Purdue. Had Matt continued the recruiting even with Hummel's knee, his record would have been outstanding and his draw much greater. Consequently, he needs that type of team to take him to where he was and then continue with the improved recruiting budget.

 

[IamBob]

BS. I know MSU fans who are upset that in spite of all the Final Fours Izzo hasn't been able to follow up with a 2nd national championship. He gets questioned too. If we went to the Final Four next year some of you bozos would be all up in arms if we didn't win it all. People will always want more and stupid fans will always be unappreciative of what they have and demand more because they undoubtedly live a life of pure perfection that can't ever be questioned.

I'd love to find out if you would be correct

 

[mathboy]

People have been saying that since 2012. Yet somehow, CMP still gets an extension and everyone says "Well, if he doesn't perform well the next 3 years.." I predict making the NCAA tourney 2 of the next 3 years, 0-1 NCAA tourney wins in that time and finishing 8th - 10th in the B1G the year we don't make it and still people will say "lets see what happens the next 3 years. I think he will rebound. His recruiting is on it's way up. He is still fairly young. He is a Purdue guy through and through . Who can we get that's better? Painter has learned from his mistakes and now is his time. The 2020 class is loaded, he will almost certainly get 2-3 studs" And on and on and on it goes.

Your whole premise is based on a lot of events that haven't happened yet, and given improvements in the staff and in the funding of our recruiting, are unlikely to happen. You have simply projected some previous events into the future, with no understanding of why they took place, and why they are unlikely to be repeated,

We are currently ranked between 16 and 10 in ranking services, so it is more likely we will get to the sweet 16 this year. That means one of the best 16 teams in the country, and 2-1 in the NCAA. This seems more likely than a 0-1 record in the NCAA, don't you think? Of course, the NCAA is difficult to predict. Last year a coach with multiple FF's and an NC, with the National Player of the Year, couldn't get out of the first round. A coach whose team had hardly ever played past the first weekend, wins the NC. Hard to predict.

 

[dwhitebash11]

What do you put the chances at of Painter reaching the FF or winning a NC in the next 3 years?
Don't you think his 'scheme' might need to change? Maybe defense shouldn't be the priority? Maybe is should be to get more possessions and outscore people?
While having a winning program is obviously the goal, Keady had a winning program but didn't reach a FF in 25 years. Painters going on 13 without FF. That's way too long for a program most would consider to be pretty good.

I think Painter needs to slightly adjust on the fly, as the game is changing in front of our eyes. That said, he has slightly adjusted his game, and hopefully this CE kid is just that, as the game has become more of a PGs game, or better yet, fast-paced game. CE seems explosive around the rim, good 3pt shooter, and someone who can create for himself and others. That's what every team needs, especially us with a great overall team around him.

I do think that this roster is our best chance at making a FF or NC in the next 3 years. We don't really have any weaknesses at all in our starting 5 (if CE plays up to potential), and our bench is pretty deep.

I'm okay with defense being a priority. But you need talented offensively players who prioritize defense, which we seem to have ATM.


What I do know is what do you measure success on for a top 25 program like ours? Is it success against ranked teams? Conference season success? Completely season success? Or the one that nearly everyone says, Final Fours/NC?

If it's the FF/NC success, then riddle me this. Do you really think George Mason University is a better program than us, just because they made one hell of a run in 2006? I would be willing to bet that GMU would rather have Purdues basketball tradition than their own, and that goes for many teams who have gone further in the NCAAT than we have in the past 20 years. We consistently make an appearance in the NCAAT in one of the best conferences in the league.

That said, damn we do need a FF appearance

 

[bonefish1]

I think Painter needs to slightly adjust on the fly, as the game is changing in front of our eyes. That said, he has slightly adjusted his game, and hopefully this CE kid is just that, as the game has become more of a PGs game, or better yet, fast-paced game. CE seems explosive around the rim, good 3pt shooter, and someone who can create for himself and others. That's what every team needs, especially us with a great overall team around him.

I do think that this roster is our best chance at making a FF or NC in the next 3 years. We don't really have any weaknesses at all in our starting 5 (if CE plays up to potential), and our bench is pretty deep.

I'm okay with defense being a priority. But you need talented offensively players who prioritize defense, which we seem to have ATM.


What I do know is what do you measure success on for a top 25 program like ours? Is it success against ranked teams? Conference season success? Completely season success? Or the one that nearly everyone says, Final Fours/NC?

If it's the FF/NC success, then riddle me this. Do you really think George Mason University is a better program than us, just because they made one hell of a run in 2006? I would be willing to bet that GMU would rather have Purdues basketball tradition than their own, and that goes for many teams who have gone further in the NCAAT than we have in the past 20 years. We consistently make an appearance in the NCAAT in one of the best conferences in the league.

That said, damn we do need a FF appearance

Ok, I'll solve your riddle: No, GMU is clearly not a better program, nor is VCU, nor are any other mid-major programs that got hot in the tourney and made a FF run. Which is even more reason to question why Purdue, in 35 years, hasn't been able to get hot, considering the number of times they've been in the NCAA in those 35 years.
My contention is that you've had 2 coaches, with very similar philosophies, styles, etc in those 35 years and there seems to be some common threads those two share in terms of how they use their players, etc.

 

[BoiledSteel]

Ok, I'll solve your riddle: No, GMU is clearly not a better program, nor is VCU, nor are any other mid-major programs that got hot in the tourney and made a FF run. Which is even more reason to question why Purdue, in 35 years, hasn't been able to get hot, considering the number of times they've been in the NCAA in those 35 years.
My contention is that you've had 2 coaches, with very similar philosophies, styles, etc in those 35 years and there seems to be some common threads those two share in terms of how they use their players, etc.

The problem with your argument is you are looking at this in an emotional vacuum. Many I imagine would contend that Purdue has gotten hot and made tourney runs but you make it sound like Purdue has only gone one maybe two rounds in the tourney, ever.

Also lets take a look at your grossly inaccurate statement that we've had the same coaching style for those 35 years. You can clearly see just looking at last year that while defense was important, we put up very good offensive stats as well. Which is a direct veer from the previous years where defense was mainly the focus.

You can also see that with the type of players Painter is recruiting, he is changing his coaching philosophy even further with players like CE, Cline, Dakota, etc.

And finally lets take a look at a coaching change. First the assumption is being made that we can get any coach we want here. That simply isn't the case and any rational person should be able to see that. While there is a list of coaches, there is nothing saying that those coaches would even want to come here in the first place. So aside from that risk, you also have the risk that they come in and flop. There is zero guarantee that any new coach would do as good or better than Painter is. So you have much more risk of setting the program back like the football program has been as opposed to sticking with what you have as overall Painter has turned in above average results.

And before those jump in and say that I am scared to make a change, that couldn't be furthest from the truth. It just simply isn't warranted right now outside of an emotional few and I dare say that those people are scared to stick with what we have because if/when Painter turns out to prove the doubters wrong, there is an awful lot of crow that will be dished out.

 

[BoilerBiker]

The problem with your argument is you are looking at this in an emotional vacuum. Many I imagine would contend that Purdue has gotten hot and made tourney runs but you make it sound like Purdue has only gone one maybe two rounds in the tourney, ever.
.

I think he has referred to more than two weekends of play - final four.

 

[bonefish1]

The problem with your argument is you are looking at this in an emotional vacuum. Many I imagine would contend that Purdue has gotten hot and made tourney runs but you make it sound like Purdue has only gone one maybe two rounds in the tourney, ever.

Also lets take a look at your grossly inaccurate statement that we've had the same coaching style for those 35 years. You can clearly see just looking at last year that while defense was important, we put up very good offensive stats as well. Which is a direct veer from the previous years where defense was mainly the focus.

You can also see that with the type of players Painter is recruiting, he is changing his coaching philosophy even further with players like CE, Cline, Dakota, etc.

And finally lets take a look at a coaching change. First the assumption is being made that we can get any coach we want here. That simply isn't the case and any rational person should be able to see that. While there is a list of coaches, there is nothing saying that those coaches would even want to come here in the first place. So aside from that risk, you also have the risk that they come in and flop. There is zero guarantee that any new coach would do as good or better than Painter is. So you have much more risk of setting the program back like the football program has been as opposed to sticking with what you have as overall Painter has turned in above average results.

And before those jump in and say that I am scared to make a change, that couldn't be furthest from the truth. It just simply isn't warranted right now outside of an emotional few and I dare say that those people are scared to stick with what we have because if/when Painter turns out to prove the doubters wrong, there is an awful lot of crow that will be dished out.

Maybe our definition of 'hot' and 'tourney run' are different.
The '94 team with Big Dog was a No.1 seed. There were supposed to make a big tourney run. It wasn't a matter of getting hot, they were already hot. They just ran into the wrong team.
The other Elite 8 team under Keady did get hot and made a great run. However, that's 2 Elite 8 appearances in the last 35 years.
To your other points: You have absolutely no, none, zero, zilch idea which coaches would be willing to come here and which wouldn't. Sure, you can speculate and spout off about "Oh, no way so-n-so would come to Purdue" but you have no idea. We have a new AD and that changes everything.
You're right about one thing though: there is the possibility the next coach could flop. There's also the possibility that the next coach could make Purdue a perennial Final Four contender like MSU.
One thing is guaranteed though, and that is that it's the coach that's the ultimate factor in whether a program is successful. It's not location. It's not academics. It's not weather or any of the other list of excuses people come up with. It's the head coach. Period.

 

[TC4THREE]

You have absolutely no, none, zero, zilch idea which coaches would be willing to come here and which wouldn't. Sure, you can speculate and spout off about "Oh, no way so-n-so would come to Purdue" but you have no idea.

You are wrong. It is easy for anyone with an ounce of common sense to eliminate a bunch of coaches. It's a lottery ticket scenario.

 

[B-Westy]

And when I say win I mean in the tournament because I can care less what happens before then. I've seen Purdue with 20-plus wins I've seen Purdue with 30 wins I've seen Purdue win a Big Ten Tournament I've seen Purdue win the Big Ten outright in regular season but what I haven't seen is a final four and a championship. Until that is done we ain't accomplish shit.

I'd like to meet you in real life & personally witness the type of wank you are.

 

[SIBoiler2]

I'd like to go back the original post and thread title and ask just what kind of supporter you are to say "I'm a .............. supporter, but what if???" Seems kind of like limp support to me.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

I'd like to go back the original post and thread title and ask just what kind of supporter you are to say "I'm a .............. supporter, but what if???" Seems kind of like limp support to me.

would that make you an "athletic" supporter?

 

[SIBoiler2]

would that make you an "athletic" supporter?

No just implied that you could say that with anyone in the blank but the statement brings into question the depth of your commitment.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

No just implied that you could say that with anyone in the blank but the statement brings into question the depth of your commitment.

I hear you....just some sarcasm (failed humor) to deal with the Monday blues. My "commitment" is ever closer if I keep watching Boiler football.

 

[cprh9u]

If I interpret your comments correctly, you don't think he will be on a hot seat in a couple of years if he doesn't do well?

Everyone was all over 2017 as being HUGE... now that he is 0 for ? on that class so far (can still change, but nothing good so far) people are changing their story. It's been happening since 2012, as in the last time we won a NCAA tourney game.

I'm saying he still won't be on the hot seat with the mediocre loving fans here as long as he makes the tourney 2 out of the next 3 years with 1 combined tournament win over those 3 years. I would say that is NOT doing well, others would probably disagree. At that point, people will still be making the same excuses I laid out previously.

 

[cprh9u]

Your whole premise is based on a lot of events that haven't happened yet, and given improvements in the staff and in the funding of our recruiting, are unlikely to happen. You have simply projected some previous events into the future, with no understanding of why they took place, and why they are unlikely to be repeated,

We are currently ranked between 16 and 10 in ranking services, so it is more likely we will get to the sweet 16 this year. That means one of the best 16 teams in the country, and 2-1 in the NCAA. This seems more likely than a 0-1 record in the NCAA, don't you think? Of course, the NCAA is difficult to predict. Last year a coach with multiple FF's and an NC, with the National Player of the Year, couldn't get out of the first round. A coach whose team had hardly ever played past the first weekend, wins the NC. Hard to predict.

It's not terribly hard to predict when you have 11 years of facts and observation. Improvements in staff and recruiting? Painter had something like 7 NCAA tourney wins his first 6 years at Purdue (thank you baby boilers!) and 1 in his past 5. But just hang on everyone, the wins in March along with the better recruits are coming because of improvements made 2 contracts ago! Give me a break.

And ranked between 16 and 10 so it is more likely.... come on, seriously? Preseason rankings mean nothing in relation to March. What were we 10th last year before Arkansas Little Rock whipped us in round 1? And that was based on a whole season of play and observation. The fact that we are in that vicinity again in the preseason means very little when you have a history of mediocrity in March.

Anyway, one of the biggest issues in the Painter era besides mediocre in game coaching is his inability to land playmaking guards since E'Twuan. Maybe that changes this year with C Edwards. I sure hope so, or it's one and done again with the excuses flying.