Win at any cost, reputation be damned.
Most iu fans would.
That's part of what makes rooting against iu so satisfying.
Purdue picked to win Big Ten
- Thread starter Bank Shot Podcast
- Start date
Most iu fans would.
That's part of what makes rooting against iu so satisfying.
A reputation of winning? What's bad about that?Win at any cost, reputation be damned.
Most iu fans would.
That's part of what makes rooting against iu so satisfying.
Not sure why you are lumping in the current Mark Pope incarnation of UK with the Calipari version. For 2025 UK has two commits and both are in-state players. Those two are very highly rated, but they were UK's priority over highly rated out of state kids.Win at any cost, reputation be damned.
Most iu fans would.
That's part of what makes rooting against iu so satisfying.
If IU gets Mullins and Sisley (and Mullins clearly will be paid well by NIL) why does that make IU more of a 'win at any cost' team than Purdue's current 2025 class of Antoine West Jr. from Ohio, who will also be getting as much NIL as he can (though certainly much less than Mullins or those two UK kids)? Four of Purdue's five 2024 recruits are out-of-state (though one has strong Purdue family ties). I would assume that after the senior year he had, Jacobsen is a fairly expensive NIL get for Purdue, Harris somewhat expensive for a freshman, and the others much less so. Btw, I'm not begrudging Purdue for this at all; they're like most schools -- doing the best they can with the budget available.
So given that it is part of the system and literally every team is paying NIL, what is wrong with a big-budget team prioritizing in-state five stars, and then back-filling with local developmental players and portal additions?
There are different paths to every goal. Which path one chooses says a lot about who they are. That is all.
So do you believe Purdue has been a better program than Kentucky since 2009?
Why 2009? Why not be more current, like 2020? This is the kind of thinking that makes IU fans cherry-pick years to convince themselves that their program has dominated Purdue.
Why 2009? Because 2009 is when Calipari came to Kentucky and essentially made the one and done era what it was. I know exactly what you were trying to get at. That somehow Purdue has some moral high ground because Kentucky went out and recruited at the highest level possible under Calipari. That's why 2009. Can you honestly say Purdue was better than Kentucky under Cals tenure there where he installed the freshman 5* machine? Just because you think they "cheated" means Purdue was better?
Similar threads
