It don't even got to be a five star player just top 40 players I think Purdue is good enough to land those types of players every year but we don't that's a problem
Malik Williams commits to Louisville
- Thread starter TC4THREE
- Start date
IU Michigan State and Iowa were also considered having a good chance at the young man. Purdue wasn't the only loser.
And anyone who thinks Pitino doesn't cheat is an idiot.
According to some people, Purdue has too many challenges that prevent us from consistently getting top recruits.
The list includes:
Not close enough to a beach
Not enough night clubs
Academics too hard
Not enough black students
Too close to corn fields
Not in a major city
Coaches won't cheat
Weather too cold
Facilities not good enough
Not on TV enough
No general studies major
No athletic dorm
No cool game intros like in the NBA
Competing with the rest of the B10 for recruits
The list includes:
Not close enough to a beach
Not enough night clubs
Academics too hard
Not enough black students
Too close to corn fields
Not in a major city
Coaches won't cheat
Weather too cold
Facilities not good enough
Not on TV enough
No general studies major
No athletic dorm
No cool game intros like in the NBA
Competing with the rest of the B10 for recruits
Kessel-dbag is easily the worst poster on this board. Has no opinion of his own, simply talks smack and nothing else.
Fair point, but Purdue was in longer and deemed a front runner...never mind IU and MSU are able to recruit players nationally of the same caliber whereas Painter has not been able to. Ultimately, it boils down to this...if Painter/Purdue is going to compete on the floor with the likes of the schools that are consistently and annually recruiting guys of this caliber, it has to be able to compete off of the floor and win some of those recruiting battles as well...and. to me at least, when there are guys as talented as there are in this class in your own backyard, then he has to be able to land someone...a program cannot be built, much less sustained, when you cannot keep those guys home and get them to play for you.
Your latter point is spot on...unfortunately, it is irrelevant though.
Oh please, that is really ironic coming from you.
I used to try and engage you whiney negatwats in civil conversation but that is about as fruitful as trying teach a rock physics. I hands down have forgotten more about basketball than all of you whiners combined.
Now run back to your game console and porn mags and leave the discussions to the people that know what they are talking about mmkay? And take the rest of the whining tweeners with you.
So you don't think those things have an impact on a recruit? Pull your head out of the sand. Just once.
Izzo has had problems of late. Lost Biggie to Painter and now Williams to Louisville. I'm not saying that I'm not disappointed in how often Painter loses these battles but when a kid suddenly changes everything in his recruiting there is more to it in many cases.
While I don't disagree entirely on your first point, I wish Painter had the same "problems" that Izzo has had or is allegedly having when it comes to recruiting.
As to your latter point...on that I totally agree...as I had mentioned in another post somewhere in this thread though, it is irrelevant...as literally nobody at all cares that it happens or is happening.
When the fellow fan acts like a moron, they will be treated as such.
Also I'm in my 30's. If that's old to you, then that explains why there's so much you don't understand.
It's only Real's second day of being a Purdue fan. He'll get better.
You act like those are somehow unique to Purdue.
Let me clue you in a on a little secret....they're not.
Give me a school and I'll come up with a list of excuses on why it's a tough place to recruit.
I didn't say it was unique, I said those things had an impact on a recruit. Stop trying to twist the context in to something it isn't.
You guys are comparing apples to oranges when it comes to recruiting Indiana and Michigan State are light years ahead of us in recruiting not even in the same chapter same book so far apart so so far apart so when they missed out on a big recruit it don't hurt them because they just replace that recruit with somebody just as good or better
I'm going to say it again you guys can call me crazy all you want you get the same type of coach in Cuonzo Martin as you do Matt Painter differences is if Cuonzo Martin was setting where Matt Painter is he would be able to get top 40 recruits every year I know what has Cuonzo Martin done lately my answer to that he hasn't been anywhere long enough to establish itself. But one thing he has proven in the short time he's been a head coach and I'm only counting Tennessee and California is that he can consistently pull down 5 Star recruits he got them at Tennessee and now he's getting them at California. I like Matt Painter he did what he could do here at Purdue 12 seasons is long enough time to give somebody else a try and I would like that to be Cuonzo Martin.
Makes Painter's record against IU all the more impressive considering we can't recruit on their level.
Do you think Martin would even take the job in such circumstances? I don't.
wow, what's dropped to lower depths? The football program or this thread?
I don't have any inside info to dispute your statement, but out of curiosity, why do you think he wouldn't be interested? And what do you mean by "such circumstances", that he might not want to to take another job so soon after leaving Tennessee for Cal?
No. I was thinking that Cuonzo worked for Painter and there is some respect there. If Cuonzo disagrees with how Purdue treats Painter, which I think most coaches would in this hypothetical, then he isn't likely to want to step in at that time under those circumstances.
Also, if you are firing a coach that is winning 20+ games and going to the NCAA tournament as per this hypothetical, then I don't think many coaches are going to abandon more secure positions (which I'm assuming most of the coaches people would want are in pretty secure spots) to take a job where you have 4 years to make a Final Four before people start clamoring for someone else.
It would be hard to leave Berkley for anyone. Plus he most likely wouldn't follow Matt who is one of his best friends. The mistake was not hiring Zo in the first place but constantly bitching about what might have been just isn't productive. Matt has about three years left to prove himself or he's likely gone.
All that said there is a reason that Matt is one of the young coaches of the national program.
Yes, there are two actually...because he played at Purdue for Keady, and because he was willing to accept less money and be part of a succession plan.
Paul Lutz Hummel and Martin
Zo for Moore and Johnson
Woops someone already got this....
Boiler Up!
Last edited:
A good point...that said, Keady was very involved which is in part why Painter is as well.
If it didn't work out for Matt Painter here I don't think Matt would tell Cuonzo Martin not to take the job if it was offered to him. Nor do I think he would be mad at him for taking the job. Business is business
Similar threads
