current approach to governing. Purdue is using a representative republic among coaches that are believed to be in a better position to make the right decisions and make those for us. Some consider that obsolete! Some choose to want more of a pure democracy it appears where everyone's opinions are of "equal value" and recognizing that total vote is not counted due to this republic representation. We have the electronic means to accomplish this where we could count EVERY vote and determine the outcome. However, there could be some that would only want Purdue people to vote on Purdue things and we shouldn't disenfranchise others just because they don't have a Purdue verification. If IU fans benefit by their choice, why should it only be contained to Purdue people?
Although the winning sentiments may only obtain a percent or so with rounding due to so many opinions, we will at least have a winner. Punishment should then be handed out by requiring previous coaches to sit in the stands to better understand not only their demise, but why their situation was in error. This needs written somewhere because coaches current and past many times avoid those stands in the midst of fans.
Seriously, there are a lot of legitimate questions people have from all stripes and reasonable reflection about each in a logical manner is something to seek.
Although the winning sentiments may only obtain a percent or so with rounding due to so many opinions, we will at least have a winner. Punishment should then be handed out by requiring previous coaches to sit in the stands to better understand not only their demise, but why their situation was in error. This needs written somewhere because coaches current and past many times avoid those stands in the midst of fans.
Seriously, there are a lot of legitimate questions people have from all stripes and reasonable reflection about each in a logical manner is something to seek.