You will need to explain to me how criticism on this board of the program, players, or coach is "constructive"? I agree that criticisms, or better yet, improvement suggestions, offered directly to the acting parties can be useful. Offered here, it is just noise. Furthermore, it is often inaccurate. I find that Critics of good posters who offering correct data when one of you goes stupid and rants using words like "never" or "always" are almost as obnoxious as the ranter. Nothing wrong with a debate, saying someone who is positive about the program is as bad as a troll is just dumb.
Thank you for your constructive criticism. Which to some extent proves my point. You are right, I could make it clearer.
First, why are we on this board? I suggest that we share an interest in Purdue basketball.
After that: To celebrate? Commiserate? Troll? Varies from post to post, poster to poster. How about "communicate"?
If our goal is to directly improve the "affected parties," meaning players and/or coaches, I think and hope we're deluding ourselves. You with your 5,875 posts, me with 209 ... they are all "noise." We are here to communicate with each other.
Here's an example: "I love Carsen, but wish he would not play out of control sometimes." I'm saying to fellow fans, "I celebrate this exciting player and our team, but also see how they can get better." Neither "Sis boom bah, Boilers!" nor "Boilers suck!"
I don't pretend that my fan-based constructive criticism is specific or applied enough to be useful to Carsen, CMP or our team. They're the ones there. And we're the ones here, on a chat board.