Quintessential question

[Boilermaker]

Here is my best attempt at channeling my inner Wolegib regarding post length (apoligies for the novel, but please read then judge me after).

It keeps coming up on threads and not a lot of direct replies to the ever asked question. Buried in another thread purduepat asked the following and I felt a response, and the replies/input of my fellow Boilers, warranted (yet) another thread.

“My question is how much patience do we give Painter before we can clearly say he isn't going to get this program over the hump (FF, NC contender), or he shows the results? Or are most fans content with the results they've seen the past 14 years?”

Just one man’s humble opinion, but it seems to me that many (most?) PU fans have managed expectations and the fear of sliding backwards outweighs the desire to try a new coach that MIGHT get over the FF hump. There is also the longer leash you’d naturally give one of our own as head coach and the rationale that things COULD get better with said head coach. For me, I am more on the side of the fence that keeps Painter, but I’m willing to listen to the other side of the argument (there are valid points there). As far as how long to keep Painter? That is a very good question and one that I do not have an easy answer for.

Let’s say Painter duplicates his 14 year track record two more times until he retires (minus his 9-19 intital transition year) but he didn’t have untimely injuries (e.g. Baby Boiker redux with no ACL issues). Would most fans take that? Not saying PU gets to a FF but that he has similar recruiting ups/downs and has a few legit chances at a FF. Would that be enough, or too little and worth firing over? I intentionally leave making a FF nebulous as if we KNEW he’d make one or more FFs that would make this an easy question to answer for many.

My answer to that scenario is I’d probably take it, and a large reason is the respect I have for Painter who does it the right way (and because he is an alum). If Painter were a hard to like guy and a non-alum I’d have a shorter leash. I know that is a double standard, and as others have pointed out a reason to avoid hiring alums, but that is me being brutally honest. That said, though this scenario may not include any FF’s, it would put Painter in elite company as one of the all time best B1G coaches. Nothing to sneeze at.

All that said, things never remain static as the landscape is always shifting, especially over so many years as in my scenario above. Over such time would Painter learn and grow? Would he hire new (better?) assistant coaches? Would the current (and future new) AD and school admin support him in new and better ways than in the past? If the team makes a FF appearance does it create sea change that builds great momentum? I believe the answer to all these is yes, though there is the big “if” in that last question. It is this “if” that gets so many passionate Boilermaker fans so animated (and unfortunately a lot of trolls too).

I’ll inquire a little differently than purduepat. Does making (or not) a FF deserve to be the quintessential question?

 

[BoilerIron]

Here is my best attempt at channeling my inner Wolegib regarding post length (apoligies for the novel, but please read then judge me after).

It keeps coming up on threads and not a lot of direct replies to the ever asked question. Buried in another thread purduepat asked the following and I felt a response, and the replies/input of my fellow Boilers, warranted (yet) another thread.

“My question is how much patience do we give Painter before we can clearly say he isn't going to get this program over the hump (FF, NC contender), or he shows the results? Or are most fans content with the results they've seen the past 14 years?”

Just one man’s humble opinion, but it seems to me that many (most?) PU fans have managed expectations and the fear of sliding backwards outweighs the desire to try a new coach that MIGHT get over the FF hump. There is also the longer leash you’d naturally give one of our own as head coach and the rationale that things COULD get better with said head coach. For me, I am more on the side of the fence that keeps Painter, but I’m willing to listen to the other side of the argument (there are valid points there). As far as how long to keep Painter? That is a very good question and one that I do not have an easy answer for.

Let’s say Painter duplicates his 14 year track record two more times until he retires (minus his 9-19 intital transition year) but he didn’t have untimely injuries (e.g. Baby Boiker redux with no ACL issues). Would most fans take that? Not saying PU gets to a FF but that he has similar recruiting ups/downs and has a few legit chances at a FF. Would that be enough, or too little and worth firing over? I intentionally leave making a FF nebulous as if we KNEW he’d make one or more FFs that would make this an easy question to answer for many.

My answer to that scenario is I’d probably take it, and a large reason is the respect I have for Painter who does it the right way (and because he is an alum). If Painter were a hard to like guy and a non-alum I’d have a shorter leash. I know that is a double standard, and as others have pointed out a reason to avoid hiring alums, but that is me being brutally honest. That said, though this scenario may not include any FF’s, it would put Painter in elite company as one of the all time best B1G coaches. Nothing to sneeze at.

All that said, things never remain static as the landscape is always shifting, especially over so many years as in my scenario above. Over such time would Painter learn and grow? Would he hire new (better?) assistant coaches? Would the current (and future new) AD and school admin support him in new and better ways than in the past? If the team makes a FF appearance does it create sea change that builds great momentum? I believe the answer to all these is yes, though there is the big “if” in that last question. It is this “if” that gets so many passionate Boilermaker fans so animated (and unfortunately a lot of trolls too).

I’ll inquire a little differently than purduepat. Does making (or not) a FF deserve to be the quintessential question?

At this point, I just want to see that we haven't hit our proverbial ceiling under Painter. I want to see improvement. We have been to the S16 4 out 14 years. In those games we have gotten blown out. Our recruiting classes continue to be mediocre (ranked around 35th on average nationally) for our "success".

Get to the Elite 8/FF. Sign a top 15 recruiting class.

As you alluded to, we go through phases of being good and bad. The good times usually revolve around a good recruiting class that is pieced together with one or two good players from another class. When our good class graduates, we struggle until our next good recruiting class shows itself.

Maybe the 2017 class is that class. If it is, it has a loooooooooooong way to go to get there.

 

[mathboy]

At this point, I just want to see that we haven't hit our proverbial ceiling under Painter. I want to see improvement. We have been to the S16 4 out 14 years. In those games we have gotten blown out. Our recruiting classes continue to be mediocre (ranked around 35th on average nationally) for our "success".

Get to the Elite 8/FF. Sign a top 15 recruiting class.

As you alluded to, we go through phases of being good and bad. The good times usually revolve around a good recruiting class that is pieced together with one or two good players from another class. When our good class graduates, we struggle until our next good recruiting class shows itself.

Maybe the 2017 class is that class. If it is, it has a loooooooooooong way to go to get there.

I agree with your perspective here. I'd also like to see more continuity between the good classes. All in all, a very reasonable approach to our favorite sport.

 

[walstib816]

I agree with your perspective here. I'd also like to see more continuity between the good classes. All in all, a very reasonable approach to our favorite sport.

I for one have seen enough and do not need to see any more from Matt. College Head Coaches success depends almost entirely on recruiting. Over 40 years ago when I was playing basketball in 8th grade (my peak) our coach was a tremendous x's and o's guy. We knew in 8th grade not speed up the out of bounds line when being pressed. We knew how to in bound the ball. We knew how to run a pick and roll. We knew what do do against specific zone coverage and what to do in man to man situations. All things our teams seem to struggle with. All the pro Painter folks keep saying how Matt is such a good coach, I for one do not see it.

I'd wager there are at least 50 high school basketball coaches in Indiana with at least as strong an x's and o's background as any coach in the B1G. Coaching is about fielding a team that will best emulate the style of basketball the coach feels is best. While we could argue about Matt's style of coaching, I do not think we could argue the point that Matt does not recruit players that fit that mode very well. If you want to run a switching man to man defense you need a team of pretty quick players to stay in front of their man. When was the last time we had that type of team?

Matt's offense also needs speed and quickness and we seem (like all teams) to operate best when we have a strong point guard, a position Matt has been woefully poor at recruiting.

How long did Matt know in advance that VE was going to graduate? How long will it be before we have a few strong and capable forwards on the team?

If you want to run particular schemes of offense and defense could we at least recruit players that fit into that mode. It seems as if we continually try to fit round pegs in square holes.

BTW if Matt is such a great coach why in the Michigan game did we successfully run a pick and roll to begin the game and begin the second half and seemed to abandon that idea for the rest of the game. Throw the big guy the ball where he can be productive, is that too much to ask? I think the answer is yes.

yes Matt is a good quality guy
Yes Matt can coach a bit
NO Matt cannot compete and recruit against other B1G coaches, how much longer do we have to watch this unfold ?

 

[proudopete]

If he is winning conference titles and making the tourney on a regular basis, then he will retire here. It is what it is and if someone feels we are settling, fine. But it appears wins in the tourney and getting past the sweet 16 is what many here use else measure his ability. I feel the more he gets us in, the better chance we have of attaining that goal. If we miss the tourney this year and next, I’ll jump ship with y’all, but I really don’t see that happening.

 

[BoilerIron]

If he is winning conference titles and making the tourney on a regular basis, then he will retire here. It is what it is and if someone feels we are settling, fine. But it appears wins in the tourney and getting past the sweet 16 is what many here use else measure his ability. I feel the more he gets us in, the better chance we have of attaining that goal. If we miss the tourney this year and next, I’ll jump ship with y’all, but I really don’t see that happening.

Do you consider winning 2 conference titles in 14 years to be winning them on a "regular basis"?

As far as missing the tournament goes, tomorrow nights game will be a key game for that. Next year's team depends on Carsen's off season decision. If he leaves, I think we have virtually no shot at making the tournament. If he stays, we will have an outside chance.

 

[Casey and his Brother]

Here is my best attempt at channeling my inner Wolegib regarding post length (apoligies for the novel, but please read then judge me after).

It keeps coming up on threads and not a lot of direct replies to the ever asked question. Buried in another thread purduepat asked the following and I felt a response, and the replies/input of my fellow Boilers, warranted (yet) another thread.

“My question is how much patience do we give Painter before we can clearly say he isn't going to get this program over the hump (FF, NC contender), or he shows the results? Or are most fans content with the results they've seen the past 14 years?”

Just one man’s humble opinion, but it seems to me that many (most?) PU fans have managed expectations and the fear of sliding backwards outweighs the desire to try a new coach that MIGHT get over the FF hump. There is also the longer leash you’d naturally give one of our own as head coach and the rationale that things COULD get better with said head coach. For me, I am more on the side of the fence that keeps Painter, but I’m willing to listen to the other side of the argument (there are valid points there). As far as how long to keep Painter? That is a very good question and one that I do not have an easy answer for.

Let’s say Painter duplicates his 14 year track record two more times until he retires (minus his 9-19 intital transition year) but he didn’t have untimely injuries (e.g. Baby Boiker redux with no ACL issues). Would most fans take that? Not saying PU gets to a FF but that he has similar recruiting ups/downs and has a few legit chances at a FF. Would that be enough, or too little and worth firing over? I intentionally leave making a FF nebulous as if we KNEW he’d make one or more FFs that would make this an easy question to answer for many.

My answer to that scenario is I’d probably take it, and a large reason is the respect I have for Painter who does it the right way (and because he is an alum). If Painter were a hard to like guy and a non-alum I’d have a shorter leash. I know that is a double standard, and as others have pointed out a reason to avoid hiring alums, but that is me being brutally honest. That said, though this scenario may not include any FF’s, it would put Painter in elite company as one of the all time best B1G coaches. Nothing to sneeze at.

All that said, things never remain static as the landscape is always shifting, especially over so many years as in my scenario above. Over such time would Painter learn and grow? Would he hire new (better?) assistant coaches? Would the current (and future new) AD and school admin support him in new and better ways than in the past? If the team makes a FF appearance does it create sea change that builds great momentum? I believe the answer to all these is yes, though there is the big “if” in that last question. It is this “if” that gets so many passionate Boilermaker fans so animated (and unfortunately a lot of trolls too).

I’ll inquire a little differently than purduepat. Does making (or not) a FF deserve to be the quintessential question?

The sweet 16 is the Purdue goal. I see Painter racking up 500 wins at Purdue and maybe one day getting an Elite 8 under his belt. We all need to manage our expectations and not ask these kinds of questions.

 

[Boilermaker]

Curious to what Boiler nation to say on this. If Painter coaches at Purdue 25+ more years and totals 900+ Div I wins, wins the B1G 6-8 more times, wins conf and national coach of the year a few times but does NOT make a FF, would you take that? There are many teams the past 14 years that Painter has been at Purdue that have not made a FF, some are good programs so Purdue is not alone.

Is it the thought (for those who believe this) that Painter’s ceiling regarding the Tourny is beneath the FF and though he may achieve other non-FF accolades, without the hope of FFs you’d rather at least try a new coach to see if we can get there even though there is the real risk of hiring someone not as good as Painter? You can always keep hiring until you find the right someone right? Basically, is the HOPE of possibly making a FF better than what Painter offers (to those who believe he’ll never get there)?

 

[Do Dah Day]

I only suggest that one look at Shaka Smart's journey. There is greatness, and definitely far less, His recruiting backyard is huge - and included Carsen. What could he have done at Purdue? Who knows? Could the Nevada guy do better? or worse? what are the odds either way? When you have a top twenty coach and wish you had the incredible new up&comer ... you're a gambler. Some are... not bad, but reality. Could we get Zo to come as an asst? no. If playing time is that important, at some point IU/MSU won't have much . . . we'll know more tomorrow

 

[Ignacious McNutt]

All of this speculation about who would do better here is rather moot. Painter isn't getting fired any time soon so a change isn't coming so the haters need to learn to just deal with it.

Also the whole "settling" thing is ridiculous to me as well. No one is "settling" for anything because none of us on here has any impact on Painter's tenure here. We can talk about it all day long but in the end it's meaningless because the AD isn't going to make a change based on fan rants.

 

[Fansince72]

I think what is in some peoples minds is that one day CMP will screw things up so bad, that a groundswell will rise up and he will be fired. That is why after every loss the Debbies get on here and try to stir everyone up. I guess no one told them that it's just a game.

 

[ChoiceBeef]

Could we get Zo to come as an asst? no.

I was wondering how many more chances Zo will get as a HC before he would consider an assistant position especially at Purdue.

There is no question he can close recruits and sell them a vision. I just don’t know if he has shown an ability to develop players and a team.

Sorry know it is off topic but than again this whole board has been off topic for the past week.

 

[Wolegib]

I wasn't a huge Keady fan and Painter is from the same mold. I liked Lee Rose. However, I admit I don't know enough about other college coaches to digest a college coach to replace Painter or one who would generate better results. And so I say stay the course. As coaches go, I wouldn't mind having either Alford or Weber.

When people look back in time they all say what a great coach keady was. However, while he was coaching, many fans were unsatisfied with his results .

This brings up the question of the baseball marlins. They went all in on two different years and won a world series. For the rest of their history they were one of the worst baseball franchises ever. Last year they once again broke up what could have been a great team for prospects. What would you prefer? A team that has won two world championships and was crap for the remainder of the century? Or one that is always competitive but finds a way to miss that elusive championship?

I'm a Brewers fan. At this point in my life I want 1 championship and would be willing to accept anything that follows. As a Purdue fan I'd take 29 bad years if I had 1 championship.

However in firing Painter, I would want somebody with a proven track record that could take Purdue to that championship. Rather than hiring some young unproven guy like Zo, I'd want a guy who's been there like Larry Brown. And I could tolerate Larry knowing he'd only stay for 2-4 years get his championship and leave.

 

[Ignacious McNutt]

I was wondering how many more chances Zo will get as a HC before he would consider an assistant position especially at Purdue.

There is no question he can close recruits and sell them a vision. I just don’t know if he has shown an ability to develop players and a team.

Sorry know it is off topic but than again this whole board has been off topic for the past week.

Personally I think Zo would make a fantastic addition as an assistant/recruiter. Like you said he hasn't shown the ability to develop players and hasn't had a whole lot of success being a head coach either.

 

[proudopete]

Do you consider winning 2 conference titles in 14 years to be winning them on a "regular basis"?

As far as missing the tournament goes, tomorrow nights game will be a key game for that. Next year's team depends on Carsen's off season decision. If he leaves, I think we have virtually no shot at making the tournament. If he stays, we will have an outside chance.

To be honest, I take into account the two down years and I understand why it happened and have seen a change since then. Two B1G championships and B1G tourney championship along with what can only be described as regular visits to the tourney at this junction is fine with me. I look at all of the data such as no breaks in draws and of course his personal issues and for me, the risk wouldn’t be worth it. I don’t think he has reached his ceiling, but I agree recruiting and some in game decision making could be better. Yet, I have seen him change so I think he will continue to do so. I spoke to Keady a few times and I completely understand the philosophy the two coaches follow and it’s a sound one.

 

[PU52Chevy]

I look at this from a different angle...…

Painter is one of the most accomplished young coaches in America and if he keeps building on his success, meaning gets past the sweet sixteen, he will be looked at by higher profile institutions as a hot commodity and Purdue will let him go and no challenge the money that will be offered.

I feel right now Purdue and Painter are perfect for each other but if Painter does get us to a Final Four or NCAA Championship, he will move on to a school that will pay him and he will have a better chance to recruit and challenge for NCAA Championships like a Texas or USC or Florida State or other big name school in a warm climate.

That all being said above...I like Coach Painter, glad he is our coach and wish him nothing but positive success and another 15+ years at Purdue.

IMHO, I think he is here at a least 4 to 5 more years but then moves on under his own terms and I think it will be on to another big name program to test his system there.....I hope I am wrong.

Boiler Up!

 

[Bay Area Boiler]

I look at this from a different angle...…

Painter is one of the most accomplished young coaches in America and if he keeps building on his success, meaning gets past the sweet sixteen, he will be looked at by higher profile institutions as a hot commodity and Purdue will let him go and no challenge the money that will be offered.

I feel right now Purdue and Painter are perfect for each other but if Painter does get us to a Final Four or NCAA Championship, he will move on to a school that will pay him and he will have a better chance to recruit and challenge for NCAA Championships like a Texas or USC or Florida State or other big name school in a warm climate.

That all being said above...I like Coach Painter, glad he is our coach and wish him nothing but positive success and another 15+ years at Purdue.

IMHO, I think he is here at a least 4 to 5 more years but then moves on under his own terms and I think it will be on to another big name program to test his system there.....I hope I am wrong.

Boiler Up!

With all due respect, Matt Painter is not a hot commodity. He may be young in terms of age, but he's had 15 years of P5 coaching experience and has yet to eclipse the Sweet 16. On top of that he can't recruit top 50 talent. A bigger named program isn't going to come poach a coach who a) hasn't had a great deal of tournament success and/or b) isn't a nationally known recruiter.

Think it speaks volumes that programs like Louisville and Ohio State just had openings and never thought to contact Painter. Instead they hired guys like Holtmann and Mack who are similar in age.

 

[Fan4Life]

Over the past 13 completed seasons (the same time with Painter as HC,) there have been 52 FF participants spread across 27 teams. 10 of those teams (26 appearances; 50% of the FF appearances) have been linked to at least speculation regarding illegal recruiting.

While I would LOVE Purdue to go the FF and win a NC, I am proud to be a graduate of a university that does it the "right way." While following the rules, Purdue has been able to be on the cusp of great success several times.

Note that of the other 17 schools, 2/3 only appeared in one FF - due to a combination of a hot streak, under-rated talent, and more than a little luck.

 

[njm8845]

Think it speaks volumes that programs like Louisville and Ohio State just had openings and never thought to contact Painter. Instead they hired guys like Holtmann and Mack who are similar in age.

How do you know that they never "thought" to contact Painter?

The fact that Painter's name doesn't come up for other openings doesn't signal that he's a bad coach. Rather, it signals that other schools realize he's at his alma mater in a stable situation with a secure contract.

 

[njm8845]

if Painter does get us to a Final Four or NCAA Championship, he will move on to a school that will pay him and he will have a better chance to recruit and challenge for NCAA Championships like a Texas or USC or Florida State or other big name school in a warm climate.

Why do you think Texas or USC (Southern Cal or South Carolina??) or FSU is a "big name" school in basketball?

Purdue has more success than all of those schools, both historically and during Painter's tenure.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Why do you think Texas or USC (Southern Cal or South Carolina??) or FSU is a "big name" school in basketball?

Purdue has more success than all of those schools, both historically and during Painter's tenure.

Perhaps Texas of that list because they have had some talented teams the last 10-15 years, made the Final Four once in '03 and a Regional Final in '06 during that span.

Take a look at some of the list of NBA players - just since 2003....more than I thought (remembered), and I've seen a bunch of these guys play over the years. Most of these are Rick Barnes recruits.

However, football is (and for the remainder of my lifetime will be) King in Texas and especially @ the University of Texas.

TJ Ford
Royal Ivey
Lamarcus Aldridge
Daniel Gibson
PJ Tucker
Kevin Durant
DJ Augustine
Avery Bradley
Damion James
Corey Joseph
Sheldon Mac (transferred)
Dexter Pittman
James Thomas
Tristan Thompson
Jordan Hamilton
Myles Turner
Jarrett Allen
Isaiah Taylor
Mohamed Bamba

 

[bleedgoldandblack]

Does anyone know how many coaches have been to their first FF after 14 years at that given school. I’m guessing not many, if any.

I think our university could do much better at finding a coach but he probably wouldn’t be the caliber of man we think Painter is.

We go through this discussion every year but it feels a little different this year. Is it just me?

 

[Wolegib]

It's a slow week with nothing else to complain and argue about unless you want to talk about where to eat in Louisville!

 

[PU pit bull]

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/coaches/john-wooden-1.html

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Does anyone know how many coaches have been to their first FF after 14 years at that given school. I’m guessing not many, if any.

I think our university could do much better at finding a coach but he probably wouldn’t be the caliber of man we think Painter is.

We go through this discussion every year but it feels a little different this year. Is it just me?

In the "modern" era:

Mark Few (18th @ Gonzaga)

John Wooden (14th @ UCLA)
Jim Calhoun (13th @ Connecticut) were close.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

In the "modern" era:

Mark Few (18th @ Gonzaga)

John Wooden (14th @ UCLA)
Jim Calhoun (13th @ Connecticut) were close.

How many seasons in was Dracula?

 

[Bay Area Boiler]

How many seasons in was Dracula?

Was in the title game in year 11 (6th at Duke), and after year 15 had been to 3 other Final 4’s. Won his first and then second title in years 16 and 17.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Was in the title game in year 11 (6th at Duke), and after year 15 had been to 3 other Final 4’s. Won his first and then second title in years 16 and 17.

No, Dracula is Bo LOL.

 

[PU pit bull]

No, Dracula is Bo LOL.

LOOK INTO MY EYES...…………...

 

[Do Dah Day]

Personally I think Zo would make a fantastic addition as an assistant/recruiter. Like you said he hasn't shown the ability to develop players and hasn't had a whole lot of success being a head coach either.

YEP !!!!

 

[lbodel]

Here is my best attempt at channeling my inner Wolegib regarding post length (apoligies for the novel, but please read then judge me after).

It keeps coming up on threads and not a lot of direct replies to the ever asked question. Buried in another thread purduepat asked the following and I felt a response, and the replies/input of my fellow Boilers, warranted (yet) another thread.

“My question is how much patience do we give Painter before we can clearly say he isn't going to get this program over the hump (FF, NC contender), or he shows the results? Or are most fans content with the results they've seen the past 14 years?”

Just one man’s humble opinion, but it seems to me that many (most?) PU fans have managed expectations and the fear of sliding backwards outweighs the desire to try a new coach that MIGHT get over the FF hump. There is also the longer leash you’d naturally give one of our own as head coach and the rationale that things COULD get better with said head coach. For me, I am more on the side of the fence that keeps Painter, but I’m willing to listen to the other side of the argument (there are valid points there). As far as how long to keep Painter? That is a very good question and one that I do not have an easy answer for.

Let’s say Painter duplicates his 14 year track record two more times until he retires (minus his 9-19 intital transition year) but he didn’t have untimely injuries (e.g. Baby Boiker redux with no ACL issues). Would most fans take that? Not saying PU gets to a FF but that he has similar recruiting ups/downs and has a few legit chances at a FF. Would that be enough, or too little and worth firing over? I intentionally leave making a FF nebulous as if we KNEW he’d make one or more FFs that would make this an easy question to answer for many.

My answer to that scenario is I’d probably take it, and a large reason is the respect I have for Painter who does it the right way (and because he is an alum). If Painter were a hard to like guy and a non-alum I’d have a shorter leash. I know that is a double standard, and as others have pointed out a reason to avoid hiring alums, but that is me being brutally honest. That said, though this scenario may not include any FF’s, it would put Painter in elite company as one of the all time best B1G coaches. Nothing to sneeze at.

All that said, things never remain static as the landscape is always shifting, especially over so many years as in my scenario above. Over such time would Painter learn and grow? Would he hire new (better?) assistant coaches? Would the current (and future new) AD and school admin support him in new and better ways than in the past? If the team makes a FF appearance does it create sea change that builds great momentum? I believe the answer to all these is yes, though there is the big “if” in that last question. It is this “if” that gets so many passionate Boilermaker fans so animated (and unfortunately a lot of trolls too).

I’ll inquire a little differently than purduepat. Does making (or not) a FF deserve to be the quintessential question?

I don't think it's that complicated. Outside of maybe 8 programs, there's not really any other perennial Final Four/NC contenders.

Purdue has had Final Four "caliber" teams under Painter. Everyone knows that the Baby Boilers senior year and this past year - those were very solid teams that could have easily made a Final Four. You can say it's an "excuse", but injuries do F things up - it's happened to other teams other than Purdue. The best 4 teams simply don't make the Final Four.

Is Loyola Chicago a better basketball program because they made a Final Four last year? No, in 2 years nobody will think anything of them. Ball State certainly didn't tonight.

I couldn't tell you who was in the Final Four 2 years ago. Why people get so flipping hung up on it is beyond me. We're a winning program that competes with any team any night. We gave some of the eventual national champions their toughest runs - even with some of our "lesser" tournament teams (remember playing Florida? They didn't face a tougher game that whole tournament). I also certainly don't think anyone - including Painter - is settling. He's one of the younger coaches still out there and he's only going to grow. John Beilein is almost 20 years older than Painter - that's nearly 20 years of more experience. It's actually kinda sad how people $hit on him.

 

[Ignacious McNutt]

I don't think it's that complicated. Outside of maybe 8 programs, there's not really any other perennial Final Four/NC contenders.

Purdue has had Final Four "caliber" teams under Painter. Everyone knows that the Baby Boilers senior year and this past year - those were very solid teams that could have easily made a Final Four. You can say it's an "excuse", but injuries do F things up - it's happened to other teams other than Purdue. The best 4 teams simply don't make the Final Four.

Is Loyola Chicago a better basketball program because they made a Final Four last year? No, in 2 years nobody will think anything of them. Ball State certainly didn't tonight.

I couldn't tell you who was in the Final Four 2 years ago. Why people get so flipping hung up on it is beyond me. We're a winning program that competes with any team any night. We gave some of the eventual national champions their toughest runs - even with some of our "lesser" tournament teams (remember playing Florida? They didn't face a tougher game that whole tournament). I also certainly don't think anyone - including Painter - is settling. He's one of the younger coaches still out there and he's only going to grow. John Beilein is almost 20 years older than Painter - that's nearly 20 years of more experience. It's actually kinda sad how people $hit on him.

Great post.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

No, Dracula is Bo LOL.

Bo Ryan (13th year @ Wisconsin)....thought it was a few less than that.....I was mesmerized.

 

[Bay Area Boiler]

LOOK INTO MY EYES...…………...

I guess K does look more like a rat. Jet black hair though...

 

[PU52Chevy]

Why do you think Texas or USC (Southern Cal or South Carolina??) or FSU is a "big name" school in basketball?

Purdue has more success than all of those schools, both historically and during Painter's tenure.

I never said in basketball....I said big name school (meaning they have bigtime sports programs) in a big market (USC-Southern Cal.....please re-read my post so you can comprehend it correctly without assuming or plugging in your own text to start your argument. Thank you.

 

[Bay Area Boiler]

How do you know that they never "thought" to contact Painter?

The fact that Painter's name doesn't come up for other openings doesn't signal that he's a bad coach. Rather, it signals that other schools realize he's at his alma mater in a stable situation with a secure contract.

Didn't Chris Mack just leave his Alma Mater......to go to a big name program?

 

[lbodel]

Didn't Chris Mack just leave his Alma Mater......to go to a big name program?

So you have one example? Almost every head coach out there went to school somewhere. Roy Williams left friggin Kansas to coach his alma mater. He had it set at Kansas.

There's also other factors. Xavier is in a conference that's basically a step-brother to the Power 5 conferences.

And by the way, a Power 5 school went full court press at Painter before, we know this.

 

[Bay Area Boiler]

So you have one example? Almost every head coach out there went to school somewhere. Roy Williams left friggin Kansas to coach his alma mater. He had it set at Kansas.

There's also other factors. Xavier is in a conference that's basically a step-brother to the Power 5 conferences.

And by the way, a Power 5 school went full court press at Painter before, we know this.

I'm countering the point that other teams aren't deterred from approaching a coach who is currently at their alma mater.

From a basketball perspective Xavier is in the Big East which is a top dog conference. Painter was only making about $500k more than Mack. Xavier was a perennial top 15 team these last 3 years. Won the Big East last year and was a #1 seed, was a top 15 team two years ago until Sumner blew out his knee yet still reached the E8, and was a 2 seed three years ago. He was in a more than stable environment, at his alma mater no less and that didn't deter Louisville. I used Mack as an example because he's the most recent one.

Holtmann and Mack are both making almost double what Painter is making at their new gig. Any big time program should easily be able to outbid Purdue to lure Painter away, they in theory wouldn't be afraid that he's in a stable environment. But truth be told he just isn't a hot commodity. You aren't going to see a program like Louisville chase Painter after 15 years at Purdue because there's more than enough evidence that suggests he isn't a top flight recruiter nor does he have legitimate tournament success.

So i disagree whole-hardheartedly with the poster that thinks Matt Painter will be here 4 or 5 more years and the big dogs will start calling, because a big time program isn't going to hire a 50 something year old coach who can't recruit nationally nor has marginal tourney success.

Missouri came after Painter almost 10 years ago, when he was in his early 40s, had some successful tournament runs, and while he was recruiting nationally ranked recruiting classes. Matt Painter had a top 10 class back in 2007 and Missouri was drawn to that. Since that time frame, Matt Painter is almost 10 years older, hasn't landed a top 25 recruiting class, and hasn't gotten past the S16. His stock has significantly dropped.

 

[Boilermaker]

Many highly thought of coaches do not reach the FF until they are older than Painter is now. Is it possible Painter will not learn and grow with more experience as these other coaches presumably did, or do you believe he is incapable of getting any better? Are there coaches who have reached their first FF at an age older than Painter is now that had mixed win/loss (and/or recruiting) results prior to that FF?

 

[BoilerGal74]

Here is my best attempt at channeling my inner Wolegib regarding post length (apoligies for the novel, but please read then judge me after).

It keeps coming up on threads and not a lot of direct replies to the ever asked question. Buried in another thread purduepat asked the following and I felt a response, and the replies/input of my fellow Boilers, warranted (yet) another thread.

“My question is how much patience do we give Painter before we can clearly say he isn't going to get this program over the hump (FF, NC contender), or he shows the results? Or are most fans content with the results they've seen the past 14 years?”

Just one man’s humble opinion, but it seems to me that many (most?) PU fans have managed expectations and the fear of sliding backwards outweighs the desire to try a new coach that MIGHT get over the FF hump. There is also the longer leash you’d naturally give one of our own as head coach and the rationale that things COULD get better with said head coach. For me, I am more on the side of the fence that keeps Painter, but I’m willing to listen to the other side of the argument (there are valid points there). As far as how long to keep Painter? That is a very good question and one that I do not have an easy answer for.

Let’s say Painter duplicates his 14 year track record two more times until he retires (minus his 9-19 intital transition year) but he didn’t have untimely injuries (e.g. Baby Boiker redux with no ACL issues). Would most fans take that? Not saying PU gets to a FF but that he has similar recruiting ups/downs and has a few legit chances at a FF. Would that be enough, or too little and worth firing over? I intentionally leave making a FF nebulous as if we KNEW he’d make one or more FFs that would make this an easy question to answer for many.

My answer to that scenario is I’d probably take it, and a large reason is the respect I have for Painter who does it the right way (and because he is an alum). If Painter were a hard to like guy and a non-alum I’d have a shorter leash. I know that is a double standard, and as others have pointed out a reason to avoid hiring alums, but that is me being brutally honest. That said, though this scenario may not include any FF’s, it would put Painter in elite company as one of the all time best B1G coaches. Nothing to sneeze at.

All that said, things never remain static as the landscape is always shifting, especially over so many years as in my scenario above. Over such time would Painter learn and grow? Would he hire new (better?) assistant coaches? Would the current (and future new) AD and school admin support him in new and better ways than in the past? If the team makes a FF appearance does it create sea change that builds great momentum? I believe the answer to all these is yes, though there is the big “if” in that last question. It is this “if” that gets so many passionate Boilermaker fans so animated (and unfortunately a lot of trolls too).

I’ll inquire a little differently than purduepat. Does making (or not) a FF deserve to be the quintessential question?

If you are expecting no let down losing 4 starting Seniors graduating and all our youth then you surely are not a Purdue Grad. That kind of logic would never have made the admittance standards here....