No. 1 seed in the Midwest

[Dryfly88]

There is absolutely no question that bias exist. The debate is how much is intentional and why? The bias could have a lot of desired games at desired locations for money, but the human aspect will always have a bias for some reason and it does not have to be with the intention of making it harder for this team than another, but make no mistake bias exists since humans are "pairing" and not drawing.

It is better today, because the human bias has a counter weight due to computer numbers. There exists bias in the computer numbers, but it is in the algorithm used and not altered through the season. Together they do a better job than years in the past, but make no mistake there is bias

Humans = Bias no argument there.

That said, it is ridiculous to suggest that the committee purposely put teams in PU's path that would be "tough" Matchups because of their style of play. FDU wasn't even supposed to be in the tournament but the winner of their conference tournament was ineligible. FAU in the next round was an 8/9 seed that had a coin flip chance of even winning their first game.

I know humans have bias, but does anyone really think 10-12 people sat in a room and said let's see how we can screw Purdue? That might have happened many years ago, but there are too may eyes and talking heads on this today to get away with something like that.

Not directed at you TJ, but at anyone that thinks bias = conspiracy in this case.

 

[tjreese]

Humans = Bias no argument there.

That said, it is ridiculous to suggest that the committee purposely put teams in PU's path that would be "tough" Matchups because of their style of play. FDU wasn't even supposed to be in the tournament but the winner of their conference tournament was ineligible. FAU in the next round was an 8/9 seed that had a coin flip chance of even winning their first game.

I know humans have bias, but does anyone really think 10-12 people sat in a room and said let's see how we can screw Purdue? That might have happened many years ago, but there are too may eyes and talking heads on this today to get away with something like that.

Not directed at you TJ, but at anyone that thinks bias = conspiracy in this case.

I wrote this-"The bias could have a lot of desired games at desired locations for money, but the human aspect will always have a bias for some reason and it does not have to be with the intention of making it harder for this team than another, but make no mistake bias exists since humans are "pairing" and not drawing."

 

[Old Gold n Black]

you can't be serious.

Humans = Bias no argument there.

That said, it is ridiculous to suggest that the committee purposely put teams in PU's path that would be "tough" Matchups because of their style of play. FDU wasn't even supposed to be in the tournament but the winner of their conference tournament was ineligible. FAU in the next round was an 8/9 seed that had a coin flip chance of even winning their first game.

I know humans have bias, but does anyone really think 10-12 people sat in a room and said let's see how we can screw Purdue? That might have happened many years ago, but there are too may eyes and talking heads on this today to get away with something like that.

Not directed at you TJ, but at anyone that thinks bias = conspiracy in this case.

Conspiracy? No need to even go there. My presumption is that there may be good reason for the committee to force uncomfortable matchups so that upsets are more likely to occur. This is the stuff that exciting tourney games are made of, and it garners more viewers. If the top seeded team always won, how boring would that be? It's fair to assume that the matchups are crafted for maximum volatility, and not just for Purdue. Upsets abound in the tourney, and have for years.

 

[qazplm]

Humans = Bias no argument there.

That said, it is ridiculous to suggest that the committee purposely put teams in PU's path that would be "tough" Matchups because of their style of play. FDU wasn't even supposed to be in the tournament but the winner of their conference tournament was ineligible. FAU in the next round was an 8/9 seed that had a coin flip chance of even winning their first game.

I know humans have bias, but does anyone really think 10-12 people sat in a room and said let's see how we can screw Purdue? That might have happened many years ago, but there are too may eyes and talking heads on this today to get away with something like that.

Not directed at you TJ, but at anyone that thinks bias = conspiracy in this case.

Particularly since Montana State and Grambling have completely opposite styles as do TCU and Utah State to a lesser extent.

 

[Dryfly88]

Conspiracy? No need to even go there. My presumption is that there may be good reason for the committee to force uncomfortable matchups so that upsets are more likely to occur. This is the stuff that exciting tourney games are made of, and it garners more viewers. If the top seeded team always won, how boring would that be? It's fair to assume that the matchups are crafted for maximum volatility, and not just for Purdue. Upsets abound in the tourney, and have for years.

Nowhere in the bracket/seeding rules is the words "style of play" used. So when I say conspiracy, I'm using it in the context of 10 people getting together and purposely saying "let's seed and place teams so that PU faces teams that could make for a better game and better chance of upset". I don't think that happens, if you do, that is certainly your right.

 

[Old Gold n Black]

Nowhere in the bracket/seeding rules is the words "style of play" used. So when I say conspiracy, I'm using it in the context of 10 people getting together and purposely saying "let's seed and place teams so that PU faces teams that could make for a better game and better chance of upset". I don't think that happens, if you do, that is certainly your right.

Would you agree that it is plausible that the committee might pair teams to maximize volatility so that upsets are more probable? That's all I am stating, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Gemini95]

Conspiracy? No need to even go there. My presumption is that there may be good reason for the committee to force uncomfortable matchups so that upsets are more likely to occur. This is the stuff that exciting tourney games are made of, and it garners more viewers. If the top seeded team always won, how boring would that be? It's fair to assume that the matchups are crafted for maximum volatility, and not just for Purdue. Upsets abound in the tourney, and have for years.

By the time the committee decides on which teams are in, seeds them, arranges them to avoid conference and rematch rules, tc.. there's probably not much time left to try and arrange exciting games or potential upsets.
Also I would posit that the committee members wouldn't even understand what would make interesting stylistic matchups team by team. And if they tried would probably fail.
Also if the style of a 16 seed is the much of an issue, you probably shouldn't be a 1 seed.

 

[Old Gold n Black]

By the time the committee decides on which teams are in, seeds them, arranges them to avoid conference and rematch rules, tc.. there's probably not much time left to try and arrange exciting games or potential upsets.
Also I would posit that the committee members wouldn't even understand what would make interesting stylistic matchups team by team. And if they tried would probably fail.
Also if the style of a 16 seed is the much of an issue, you probably shouldn't be a 1 seed.

Maybe. Maybe not. Wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall during these committee meetings? They've gotten better about transparency of the whole process in recent years, but there certainly could be improvements. The reality is that neither you nor I truly know what takes place behind closed doors.

 

[Gemini95]

Maybe. Maybe not. Wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall during these committee meetings? They've gotten better about transparency of the whole process in recent years, but there certainly could be improvements. The reality is that neither you nor I truly know what takes place behind closed doors.

I'll say this, I would believe that they intentionally underseed a few teams that should be in the 7-9 range as 10-12s (New Mexico for example) to goose some 5-12 and 6-11 upsets. That I would buy.

Edit: I would also buy that they are just bad at seeding.

 

[mryankee2397]

Folks gotta stop using the word mediocrity to mean anything but the apex of success. That's not what it means.

Mediocrity is dully average. Making the tourney every season and winning or near the top of a string conference almost every season isn't mediocrity.

Now it's fine to believe "should do better." But calling it mediocrity is just making a new word definition.

Purdue football is mediocre. Half the time they make a bowl game, half the time they don't. Sprinkle in a couple of above average or even good seasons here and there and below average or bad seasons mixed in with a lot of 6 win seasons.

Purdue basketball hasn't been mediocre for a long, long time. Is it where it can or even should be? No, but it's not mediocre.

2020 was pretty average team. would not have made the dance

 

[tjreese]

By the time the committee decides on which teams are in, seeds them, arranges them to avoid conference and rematch rules, tc.. there's probably not much time left to try and arrange exciting games or potential upsets.
Also I would posit that the committee members wouldn't even understand what would make interesting stylistic matchups team by team. And if they tried would probably fail.
Also if the style of a 16 seed is the much of an issue, you probably shouldn't be a 1 seed.

Bias happens and none of this should imply that people are out to get Purdue or better yet that a group is out to cheat Purdue. Bias is the result of something that isn't random. Bias happens in determining who gets in the tourney. Bias happens in determining seeds. Bias happens in placing those seeds. The computer helps cancel any human bias, but I don't know how much of the seeds is weighed by the computer and how much is by human, but whatever that number is...it too is biased. Biased is much broader than thinking it has to do with cheating. It is a deliberate, non random action. The only debate among anyone is what were the reasons for "any" bias and that will never be fully understand and it will always exist in some form...computer...people...

The Indiana high school tourney is advertised not as a draw, but pairings! When you have 6 team sectional and two teams in a bye and the statistical probabilities of the occurrences that take place over many years are quite different, then you start to wonder why wasn't the tourney called draw instead of pairings outside of random talk? I don't think anyone is out to get Purdue, but bias always is in play outside of a random draw and random placement and all teams in the tourney and nobody is wanting all of that.

 

[tjreese]

I'll say this, I would believe that they intentionally underseed a few teams that should be in the 7-9 range as 10-12s (New Mexico for example) to goose some 5-12 and 6-11 upsets. That I would buy.

Edit: I would also buy that they are just bad at seeding.

We as fans have bias. If in fact they under seed or are just bad at seeding and the numbers observed do not fall inside expected observations for a reasonable sample then maybe it isn't a random occurrence and if not random, then it is biased. In any repeated measures on any variable or interaction for study, there will be an error term. That error term is generally considered random differences, but I believe there are assignable causes for that term and that we just don't know them. I don't believe in $hit happens or random events, but an assignable cause in every case even if it cannot be identified. That is the way I think about cause and effect...

 

[tjreese]

Maybe. Maybe not. Wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall during these committee meetings? They've gotten better about transparency of the whole process in recent years, but there certainly could be improvements. The reality is that neither you nor I truly know what takes place behind closed doors.

Oh things go on behind closed doors. I knew that all 5 starters from Marion that were placed on the Indiana All Star Team in the mid 80s over a week before they were announced and shared it with a newspaper writer (who kept quiet about it). First time that ever happened. That info came from that meeting. That was also the year that Rick Fox who never played a minute of varsity due to school issues as a foreign exchange student, but was definitely worthy of such was added.

 

[Dryfly88]

YES, there is bias whenever humans are involved in picking anything. There is ZERO evidence that any bias negatively impacted PU's seeding, region placement or potential opponents. We have as good of a path as any #1 seed could hope for.

Yes, I would love to be a fly on the wall, but not because of any nefarious things, simply because I love college basketball and think it would be awesome to see how it all comes together and the discussions that take place.

 

[Old Gold n Black]

YES, there is bias whenever humans are involved in picking anything. There is ZERO evidence that any bias negatively impacted PU's seeding, region placement or potential opponents.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The absence of evidence for a particular hypothesis does not necessarily invalidate it. It simply indicates the need for further analysis, or at least conversation. But hey, isn't that why message boards exist in the first place?

 

[BoilerAndy]

YES, there is bias whenever humans are involved in picking anything. There is ZERO evidence that any bias negatively impacted PU's seeding, region placement or potential opponents. We have as good of a path as any #1 seed could hope for.

Yes, I would love to be a fly on the wall, but not because of any nefarious things, simply because I love college basketball and think it would be awesome to see how it all comes together and the discussions that take place.

Somewhat off topic, I am thinking back to the years when the NCAA put Purdue on the opponent's home floor in the NCAA tournament 2 (3?) years in a row. I believe it was unintentional and probably not bias, but still egregious.

 

[Dryfly88]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The absence of evidence for a particular hypothesis does not necessarily invalidate it. It simply indicates the need for further analysis.

Good Lord, ok you win. I think we got screwed, the committee is out to get us and nobody likes us. Did I cover them all?

 

[qazplm]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The absence of evidence for a particular hypothesis does not necessarily invalidate it. It simply indicates the need for further analysis.

Thus my continued search for unicorns.

 

[Dryfly88]

Somewhat off topic, I am thinking back to the years when the NCAA put Purdue on the opponent's home floor in the NCAA tournament 2 (3?) years in a row. I believe it was unintentional and probably not bias, but still egregious.

Yeah, as I said somewhere up above, it is different now than it used to be. Too many eyes and talking heads now to have something like that happen now. Plus there are so many more "rules" for the committee to follow to keep really bad things from happening.

 

[Old Gold n Black]

Good Lord, ok you win. I think we got screwed, the committee is out to get us and nobody likes us. Did I cover them all?

Nah, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. But I prefer to not slide into dichotomous "either this or that" thinking. My mind isn't made up either way. I do however leave a little room for bias, fraud, and other forms of bullshit, because that's what people do sometimes.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Somewhat off topic, I am thinking back to the years when the NCAA put Purdue on the opponent's home floor in the NCAA tournament 2 (3?) years in a row. I believe it was unintentional and probably not bias, but still egregious.

'84 @ Memphis as the co-Big Ten Champ and the #3-seed in the Midwest Region.

'86 @ LSU in a #6/#11 match-up. #11-seed LSU ended up in the National Semi-Finals.

Also in '84, Illinois was the co-Big Ten Champ and the #2-seed in the Mideast Region and was "rewarded" with playing #1-seed Kentucky in the Regional Final in Rupp Arena. The Illini outplayed the Wildcats in the views of many but got seriously home-cooked in that one.

The bracket rules have changed, preventing those. Purdue played on its home floor the first two rounds in 1980, by the way, and if Duke had not beaten Kentucky, JBC and company would have faced Kentucky in Rupp Arena that year. Indiana also played on its home floor for the Regional rounds in 1981.

Now, with all of that, I think Purdue has generally gotten decent/fair draws for a while now.....and they've also had some brackets break their way but unfortunately couldn't seize on the opportunities.....yet.

 

[Old Gold n Black]

Thus my continued search for unicorns.

And this is why you are a lawyer and not a scientist or an engineer.

 

[Dryfly88]

Nah, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. But I prefer to not slide into dichotomous "either this or that" thinking. My mind isn't made up either way. I do however leave a little room for bias, fraud, and other forms of bullshit, because that's what people do sometimes.

I'm ok with that as long as you can at the very least point to something that is negative for PU in this scenario. As I've said several times, I acknowledge bias exists in anything humans do, but I just can't find anyway that bias has negatively impacted PU this year.

 

[qazplm]

And this is why you are a lawyer and not a scientist or an engineer.

Yes because trying to determine human bias in the NCAA tournament is totally about science and engineering, and I started in engineering bud.

 

[qazplm]

I'm ok with that as long as you can at the very least point to something that is negative for PU in this scenario. As I've said several times, I acknowledge bias exists in anything humans do, but I just can't find anyway that bias has negatively impacted PU this year.

Of course there isn't anything negative for Purdue or anyone else that's intentional. The NCAA tourney is the second most watched sporting event in the US after the Super Bowl I believe.

Why would they purposely risk that with attempts at juicing the ratings that may or may not even work.

 

[Old Gold n Black]

Yes because trying to determine human bias in the NCAA tournament is totally about science and engineering, and I started in engineering bud.

Alright, so the lawyer comment was a low blow. Apologies. I do have several lawyer friends, including some JAG.

Just pointing out that hypotheses in science are formed, tested, and tried against both historical and recent data. If disproven, new hypotheses are formed and the process repeats itself and theories sometimes emerge. From my (admittedly) outside perspective, law just seems so cut and dry. Unyielding, even. Maybe I'm wrong. But I reserve the right to change my take based on new data.

 

[BoilerAndy]

'84 @ Memphis as the co-Big Ten Champ and the #3-seed in the Midwest Region.

'86 @ LSU in a #6/#11 match-up. #11-seed LSU ended up in the National Semi-Finals.

Also in '84, Illinois was the co-Big Ten Champ and the #2-seed in the Mideast Region and was "rewarded" with playing #1-seed Kentucky in the Regional Final in Rupp Arena. The Illini outplayed the Wildcats in the views of many but got seriously home-cooked in that one.

The bracket rules have changed, preventing those. Purdue played on its home floor the first two rounds in 1980, by the way, and if Duke had not beaten Kentucky, JBC and company would have faced Kentucky in Rupp Arena that year. Indiana also played on its home floor for the Regional rounds in 1981.

Now, with all of that, I think Purdue has generally gotten decent/fair draws for a while now.....and they've also had some brackets break their way but unfortunately couldn't seize on the opportunities.....yet.

I still remember that Illinois-Kentucky game. The refereeing was maybe the worst I have ever seen.

 

[Old Gold n Black]

I'm ok with that as long as you can at the very least point to something that is negative for PU in this scenario. As I've said several times, I acknowledge bias exists in anything humans do, but I just can't find anyway that bias has negatively impacted PU this year.

I agree that we have a favorable draw this year. My gripe was with years past. Here's hoping that we make the best of the opportunity. 🤞

 

[qazplm]

Alright, so the lawyer comment was a low blow. Apologies. I do have several lawyer friends, including some JAG.

Just pointing out that hypotheses in science are formed, tested, and tried against both historical and recent data. If disproven, new hypotheses are formed and the process repeats itself and theories sometimes emerge. From my (admittedly) outside perspective, law just seems so cut and dry. Unyielding, even. Maybe I'm wrong. But I reserve the right to change my take based on new data.

Logic, which is what you are really citing, is as much the field of lawyers and philosophers as it is scientists and engineers.

And if law were so cut and dry and unyielding we'd have about one percent of the lawyers we have now.

 

[bonefish1]

Somewhat off topic, I am thinking back to the years when the NCAA put Purdue on the opponent's home floor in the NCAA tournament 2 (3?) years in a row. I believe it was unintentional and probably not bias, but still egregious.

I think the fact that Purdue has lost to a 16, 14 and 13 in the last 4 years should take the slightly bit of consideration that the committee pays attention to match-ups out of the discussion. If anything, it could be argued that the committee is giving PU too much respect and overseeding them.

 

[Dryfly88]

Of course there isn't anything negative for Purdue or anyone else that's intentional. The NCAA tourney is the second most watched sporting event in the US after the Super Bowl I believe.

Why would they purposely risk that with attempts at juicing the ratings that may or may not even work.

I don't think they do.

 

[tjreese]

'84 @ Memphis as the co-Big Ten Champ and the #3-seed in the Midwest Region.

'86 @ LSU in a #6/#11 match-up. #11-seed LSU ended up in the National Semi-Finals.

Also in '84, Illinois was the co-Big Ten Champ and the #2-seed in the Mideast Region and was "rewarded" with playing #1-seed Kentucky in the Regional Final in Rupp Arena. The Illini outplayed the Wildcats in the views of many but got seriously home-cooked in that one.

The bracket rules have changed, preventing those. Purdue played on its home floor the first two rounds in 1980, by the way, and if Duke had not beaten Kentucky, JBC and company would have faced Kentucky in Rupp Arena that year. Indiana also played on its home floor for the Regional rounds in 1981.

Now, with all of that, I think Purdue has generally gotten decent/fair draws for a while now.....and they've also had some brackets break their way but unfortunately couldn't seize on the opportunities.....yet.

Yes, human bias is much less in play today...very much so. Here is what we do know as far as group dynamics. Not all will control the direction. Like a courtroom there will be a leader emerge and that leader will have influence. I do NOT think Purdue got a bad seed. I don't believe the committee has the bias of the NCAA that was trailing Frank years ago when I believe an IU person was leading the charge and casting Frank as lying rather than perhaps deceitful in the dates that were asked.

I do NOT believe this Purdue pairing had any intentional bias resulting from a desire to make the bracket easier or harder. I do not believe it was the thoughts of the 12 or so, but that a leader or two led the seeding bracket. I believe that Prices Law was in effect in this as in other things. People can dispute the math behind it (Prices law of the square root of the group number contributing over 50%), but I think all of us know it to be true that all people do not share equally in their contributions in groups. All that said there is absolute reason that leaders emerge and that Prices law is in effect meaning few people contribute more than their share in a group setting.

Aware of such and understanding humanity on the whole throughout history, is to realize the many vices man has, and had, to negotiate conditions more favorable to one than another. The computer is that counterweight and I too think the last few losses by Purdue were on Purdue and that overall seeding is in fact very much better than it was.

 

[mryankee2397]

how did virginia make the dance? they were not a good team at any point in the season. that was bias on the part of the selection committee

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Purdue now having the best 4 year stretch in program history. Can they finally make it to the Final Four? Anything less is really failure. They won't lose 1st round and have a somewhat easier road than the other #1s. Really only thing missing on this 4 year span is an Elite 8 or further. But even an Elite 8 would feel short of expectations. Is this the year Purdue wins it all finally? Maybe. Is this Painters vest shot at it? Without any doubt.

YES, YES ITS THE YEAR THEY GO FAR

 

[Wolegib]

Why don’t you like rematches? There is no evidence we played teams worse the second time this season. I thought we played wisconsin and Illinois better the second time. Same with indiana, Iowa, and Rutgers. Wisconsin the third time we played like we didn’t give a crap because we probably didn’t care that much. 1 seeds only win the BTT less than 40% of the time, don’t read into it.

I guess you forgot when we played UW this year in the big 10 tournament and also when we played them in the NCAA tournament. It’s hard to beat a good team 3 times in the same year. It’s also hard to beat a good team twice in the same year. If you have any further doubts, just look at Duke verses nc state this year!

There are many other examples I could provide

 

[BoilerAndy]

I guess you forgot when we played UW this year in the big 10 tournament and also when we played them in the NCAA tournament. It’s hard to beat a good team 3 times in the same year. It’s also hard to beat a good team twice in the same year. If you have any further doubts, just look at Duke verses nc state this year!

There are many other examples I could provide

NC State beat Duke twice this year.

Can you provide any examples where Purdue won the rematch?

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

I guess you forgot when we played UW this year in the big 10 tournament and also when we played them in the NCAA tournament. It’s hard to beat a good team 3 times in the same year. It’s also hard to beat a good team twice in the same year. If you have any further doubts, just look at Duke verses nc state this year!

There are many other examples I could provide

We just beat Gonzaga and UT twice this year when we were told our guards weren’t good enough or athletic enough and we wouldn’t get the same whistle. We beat Illinois twice (5 in a row vs them), Wisconsin twice (yeah they got us in the BTT but who cares?), beat sparty twice (hell we have beat them 9 out of the last 10)…

 

[BoilerAndy]

We just beat Gonzaga and UT twice this year when we were told our guards weren’t good enough or athletic enough and we wouldn’t get the same whistle. We beat Illinois twice (5 in a row vs them), Wisconsin twice (yeah they got us in the BTT but who cares?), beat sparty twice (hell we have beat them 9 out of the last 10)…

IU, Iowa, UM, Rutgers, ...

 

[Wolegib]

Well now you're sounding like Wolebig.

I knew you would go there ! Or perhaps it would be doo dah day!

There is always somebody here who just loves to send personal attacks at me whether I posted anything in a thread or not!

Yup. Just open a thread and there is a personal attack.

The problem is this board is not anonymous! I’ve had personal attacks against me on this board that revealed my real name, shared my Facebook information and even my personal pictures. They made it personal. And for their efforts, they were applauded and encouraged by others to keep it coming.

There are more harassing insults about my son from people on this board than posts from me praising him. I would post more about his accomplishments but I fear people like you would go to his real job and harass him much like he was harassed in high school when he couldn’t bring our school the state championship they wanted! Do you realize how emotionally hard it is to give 100% And having your own fans boo you because you fell short and didn’t win? Do you realize how much pressure and pain a player goes through when they miss a critical free throw? Or how much despair they go through when they lose a game. When someone heaves up a game winning 60 foot shot.

Many of you are quick to criticize others and bad mouth other fans! But you hate it when other fans bad mouth you or call you out for doing so!

There is a reason my son did not play basketball or football for Purdue. That reason is personal. He’s now a coach where everyday he has some fan berating him and wants him fired because his athletes didn’t bring home a championship! Being a coach Is a very tough job. It’s not steady employment. My son has had three jobs at different schools. in 3 years! Why? Not because he was fired. But rather because he was successful.

However, no matter how successful a person is, there is always someone on the internet who knows who you are and loves to hide behind the anonymous mask the internet provides you.

I once lived in a small town of Carterville, Illinois. That’s the same town Coach Herrin lived in and also Coach Painter lived in when they coached at SIU. That’s also the same town SIBoiler lives in. I attended all of my son’s high school basketball games. I sat in the front row! I heard the boos when he missed and the team lost. It’s funny as a parent you rarely hear the cheers. So, SIBoiler, did you ever cheer my son? Or were you one of the many who was never satisfied with his efforts? I’m sorry my son didn’t deliver that state championship. But as a parent, I know him many physical injuries he suffered . I don’t know how many emotional ones he suffered. He kept those injuries inside!

It’s amazing after being put down so many times for so many reasons by so many anonymous people. That my son still chose the coaching profession. He doesn’t talk very much about his athletes success or failures! One of his athletes is currently having academic issues which is affecting their performance! Who gets the blame? The professor? The athlete? Or the coach?

We celebrate Painter’s success today. But what about the Tennessee coach? He also gave it his 100%. What if he were your son?

 

[BoilerAndy]

I knew you would go there ! Or perhaps it would be doo dah day!

There is always somebody here who just loves to send personal attacks at me whether I posted anything in a thread or not!

Yup. Just open a thread and there is a personal attack.

The problem is this board is not anonymous! I’ve had personal attacks against me on this board that revealed my real name, shared my Facebook information and even my personal pictures. They made it personal. And for their efforts, they were applauded and encouraged by others to keep it coming.

There are more harassing insults about my son from people on this board than posts from me praising him. I would post more about his accomplishments but I fear people like you would go to his real job and harass him much like he was harassed in high school when he couldn’t bring our school the state championship they wanted! Do you realize how emotionally hard it is to give 100% And having your own fans boo you because you fell short and didn’t win? Do you realize how much pressure and pain a player goes through when they miss a critical free throw? Or how much despair they go through when they lose a game. When someone heaves up a game winning 60 foot shot.

Many of you are quick to criticize others and bad mouth other fans! But you hate it when other fans bad mouth you or call you out for doing so!

There is a reason my son did not play basketball or football for Purdue. That reason is personal. He’s now a coach where everyday he has some fan berating him and wants him fired because his athletes didn’t bring home a championship! Being a coach Is a very tough job. It’s not steady employment. My son has had three jobs at different schools. in 3 years! Why? Not because he was fired. But rather because he was successful.

However, no matter how successful a person is, there is always someone on the internet who knows who you are and loves to hide behind the anonymous mask the internet provides you.

I once lived in a small town of Carterville, Illinois. That’s the same town Coach Herrin lived in and also Coach Painter lived in when they coached at SIU. That’s also the same town SIBoiler lives in. I attended all of my son’s high school basketball games. I sat in the front row! I heard the boos when he missed and the team lost. It’s funny as a parent you rarely hear the cheers. So, SIBoiler, did you ever cheer my son? Or were you one of the many who was never satisfied with his efforts? I’m sorry my son didn’t deliver that state championship. But as a parent, I know him many physical injuries he suffered . I don’t know how many emotional ones he suffered. He kept those injuries inside!

It’s amazing after being put down so many times for so many reasons by so many anonymous people. That my son still chose the coaching profession. He doesn’t talk very much about his athletes success or failures! One of his athletes is currently having academic issues which is affecting their performance! Who gets the blame? The professor? The athlete? Or the coach?

We celebrate Painter’s success today. But what about the Tennessee coach? He also gave it his 100%. What if he were your son?

Wolegib, I truly have sympathy for you. Truly. Unfortunately, it isn't for the reason you want.