Rivals updates their 2017 top 150

[BBG]

The best I can gather is Painter is good coach who took his eye off the ball, recruiting-wise at least, while preoccupied with reasons that may have been personal, He, like all of us, should be held accountable for the entirely of his work here.

Things are again trending up for the time being.

Great post. He clearly slipped for a couple years and admitted as much. Why? Who knows and I dare say we all go through things in our lives that impact everything. If you say it has never happened to you, well, you're lying (Not you of course, just a general statement).

There is no coach that will fit the insane expectations of some on here. I truly think things are on the rise as well and expect that come NCAA tourney time, we could be playing very well with a solid starting lineup that will be hard to defend because any one of the starters can go off on you for 20 (my lofty optimism).

At this point I could care less about the B1G season crown. It lacks the meaning it once had and is nice to have, but I would rather finish 3rd in the conference and have a deep NCAA run than win the conference regular season and exit the tourney early.

 

[nagemj02]

His teams are trending upward for regular season W/L percentage and NCAA Tournament appearances, but they haven't made any NCAA Tournament progress. Purdue's last Sweet Sixteen was in 2010: their tournament success has trended downward and then stayed at that lower level for three years (not counting the under .500 seasons) in a row.

 

[cprh9u]

His teams are trending upward for regular season W/L percentage and NCAA Tournament appearances, but they haven't made any NCAA Tournament progress. Purdue's last Sweet Sixteen was in 2010: their tournament success has trended downward and then stayed at that lower level for three years (not counting the under .500 seasons) in a row.

This. Don't expect him to get any better when it counts, but I guess we should be happy he hasn't went all Darrell Hazell on us.

 

[bonefish1]

And he has won. Oh wait sorry, those years negate your argument so they don't count right? Thank God you aren't the AD, you'd have us in the tank in a week with your asinine line of thinking and having no coach in America wanting to come here because you would fire then every year because they didn't make your ridiculous expectations. I can hear your interaction with the coach now: "Sorry coach, I know it's your first year but you didn't get a Final Four so we need to let you go. I know, you had a top ranked team and are trending in the right direction but it doesn't matter. My emotional needs of the basketball team are bigger than the realistic expectations of the basketball program"

You wannabe ADs crack me up because you are so naive and blinded by your own emotions that it severely clouds any rational ability you may of had to think this through realistically. You somehow think you are "experts' based off of your failed perception of the game yet I highly doubt you can even dribble a basketball without tripping over your own two feet.

Wait....are you here to defend Patrick Bade again?

 

[bonefish1]

So again, as has been asked of others with similar thoughts to yours, WHO is your choice to replace Painter? As 1Boilerer has defined: " 2. Willing to take the job and 3. Would take the same or less money?" I am not disputing your opinion, simply asking for your further wisdom regarding solving the problem you define.

Define your parameters:
1. Better than painter: What's 'better' mean? Someone who has a better winning %? Someone who has gotten their team to the FF?
2. Willing to take the job: What do you want us to do? Put together a top 10 list of potential replacements and call them up to see if they'd be willing to take the job? If you throw enough money at them, there are a lot of well known, big name coaches who would come to Purdue.
3.Would take the same or less money: This is impossible to know without knowing who we're discussing, what they're currently making and whether Purdue is willing to pay more. You don't know whether the new AD or BOT would be willing to up the ante or not.

 

[1boilerman8]

Define your parameters:
1. Better than painter: What's 'better' mean? Someone who has a better winning %? Someone who has gotten their team to the FF?
2. Willing to take the job: What do you want us to do? Put together a top 10 list of potential replacements and call them up to see if they'd be willing to take the job? If you throw enough money at them, there are a lot of well known, big name coaches who would come to Purdue.
3.Would take the same or less money: This is impossible to know without knowing who we're discussing, what they're currently making and whether Purdue is willing to pay more. You don't know whether the new AD or BOT would be willing to up the ante or not.

too often people are disrespecting Matt Painter who I believe is a top 20 coach. So do you have someone better in mind? For example, when I am upset about Hazell, I wish we would hire Kevin Sumlin. I believe he is better than Hazell, would be willing to come back to his alma mater, but I don't believe we would offer him enough money. I want someone who is Anti painter to come up with a few realistic names for replacements because honestly, I think he's the best we can get right now

 

[Kesselschmiede]

His teams are trending upward for regular season W/L percentage and NCAA Tournament appearances, but they haven't made any NCAA Tournament progress. Purdue's last Sweet Sixteen was in 2010: their tournament success has trended downward and then stayed at that lower level for three years (not counting the under .500 seasons) in a row.

Again you pick and choose but don't look at the entire body of work. Typical when so uninformed. I will say it again, I am most certainly glad none of you experts are the AD. We would have a new coach every year.

 

[Kesselschmiede]

Wait....are you here to defend Patrick Bade again?

What are you even talking about? You overdosing on paint chips or something?

 

[Kesselschmiede]

too often people are disrespecting Matt Painter who I believe is a top 20 coach. So do you have someone better in mind? For example, when I am upset about Hazell, I wish we would hire Kevin Sumlin. I believe he is better than Hazell, would be willing to come back to his alma mater, but I don't believe we would offer him enough money. I want someone who is Anti painter to come up with a few realistic names for replacements because honestly, I think he's the best we can get right now

They will pick someone that will be ironically similar to Painter but somehow better because it fills whatever agenda they have.

 

[Kesselschmiede]

This. Don't expect him to get any better when it counts, but I guess we should be happy he hasn't went all Darrell Hazell on us.

So basically what we can take from this post is that this is all entirely an emotional thing for you. You have nothing else you are basing your agenda for a replacement for Painter other than your uninformed opinion and unrealistic emotional expectations.

 

[purdue4sure]

Define your parameters:
1. Better than painter: What's 'better' mean? Someone who has a better winning %? Someone who has gotten their team to the FF?
2. Willing to take the job: What do you want us to do? Put together a top 10 list of potential replacements and call them up to see if they'd be willing to take the job? If you throw enough money at them, there are a lot of well known, big name coaches who would come to Purdue.
3.Would take the same or less money: This is impossible to know without knowing who we're discussing, what they're currently making and whether Purdue is willing to pay more. You don't know whether the new AD or BOT would be willing to up the ante or not.

1. Since you want him replaced, isn't the onus on you to define what "better" means? Or are you just looking to change for the sake of change, with no real idea of what your goal is? Give us the names of people who have the qualifications that will satisfy you.
2. "Throw enough money at them"? This isn't a serious point. How much are you willing to throw at Larry Brown? And then tell us why you think it would be worth it.
3. Exactly. It all starts with point #1. Using your own criteria, provide a list of "better" coaches and see what they are making now.

 

[nagemj02]

Again you pick and choose but don't look at the entire body of work. Typical when so uninformed. I will say it again, I am most certainly glad none of you experts are the AD. We would have a new coach every year.

-2011: NCAA Tournament: beat St. Peter's (NY) in their first game. lost to Virginia Commonwealth in their second game.
-2012: NCAA Tournament: beat St. Mary's (CA) in their first game. lost to Kansas in their second game
-2013: College Basketball Invitational (CBI): beat Western Illinois in their first game. lost to Santa Clara in their second game
-2014: no postseason after Big Ten Tournament loss to Ohio State
-2015: NCAA Tournament: lost to Cincinnati (OT) in their first game
-2016: NCAA Tournament: lost to Arkansas-Little Rock (2 OT) in their first game


I pick and choose? This is Purdue in the postseason (after the Big Ten Tournament) in the last 6 years. These are FACTS.

His entire body of work says he's good enough to get his teams to NCAA Tournaments but he still hasn't had any better team in the postseason since the 2009-2010 team (i.e. no postseason progress in 6 years).

 

[Dakota Girl]

Define your parameters:
1. Better than painter: What's 'better' mean? Someone who has a better winning %? Someone who has gotten their team to the FF?
2. Willing to take the job: What do you want us to do? Put together a top 10 list of potential replacements and call them up to see if they'd be willing to take the job? If you throw enough money at them, there are a lot of well known, big name coaches who would come to Purdue.
3.Would take the same or less money: This is impossible to know without knowing who we're discussing, what they're currently making and whether Purdue is willing to pay more. You don't know whether the new AD or BOT would be willing to up the ante or not.

So what you are saying is that we don't know enough to say if a new coach can be found who is better or not due to not knowing the parameters or conditions of the search.
So now your not wanting to replace Painter?

 

[Dakota Girl]

-2011: NCAA Tournament: beat St. Peter's (NY) in their first game. lost to Virginia Commonwealth in their second game.
-2012: NCAA Tournament: beat St. Mary's (CA) in their first game. lost to Kansas in their second game
-2013: College Basketball Invitational (CBI): beat Western Illinois in their first game. lost to Santa Clara in their second game
-2014: no postseason after Big Ten Tournament loss to Ohio State
-2015: NCAA Tournament: lost to Cincinnati (OT) in their first game
-2016: NCAA Tournament: lost to Arkansas-Little Rock (2 OT) in their first game


I pick and choose? This is Purdue in the postseason (after the Big Ten Tournament) in the last 6 years. These are FACTS.

His entire body of work says he's good enough to get his teams to NCAA Tournaments but he still hasn't had any better team in the postseason since the 2009-2010 team (i.e. no postseason progress in 6 years).

Clearly you don't want to include his entire tenure because that is counter to your argument. Fine, lets ignore that utter laps of logic. So you think we can do better. Fine. Who is better? Will it take more money, facilities, etc to land that better coach? Is Purdue willing to support those increases?
I know...you have no idea. Neither do I. So what exactly are the three or four on hear who want Painters head proposing be done in his place?
The coach is a piece of the program puzzle. The money is the real driver. Get Purdue to not run a self supporting athletic program and use state money like almost everyone else does. Get more boosters to provide more money and facilities. Get the president and board to spend more on coaches and create more creative ways to make a degree easy to get while participating in major sports. Everyone hear would enjoy final fours every other year but it's just not as easy as firing the coach and expecting the next guy to just be that much better.

 

[purdue4sure]

Clearly you don't want to include his entire tenure because that is counter to your argument. Fine, lets ignore that utter laps of logic. So you think we can do better. Fine. Who is better? Will it take more money, facilities, etc to land that better coach? Is Purdue willing to support those increases?
I know...you have no idea. Neither do I. So what exactly are the three or four on hear who want Painters head proposing be done in his place?
The coach is a piece of the program puzzle. The money is the real driver. Get Purdue to not run a self supporting athletic program and use state money like almost everyone else does. Get more boosters to provide more money and facilities. Get the president and board to spend more on coaches and create more creative ways to make a degree easy to get while participating in major sports. Everyone hear would enjoy final fours every other year but it's just not as easy as firing the coach and expecting the next guy to just be that much better.

Let it go. Only emotional negatroids could turn a thread about high school player rankings into a whine-fest about Purdue. Getting a new coach will not solve their "problem".

 

[Do Dah Day]

Define your parameters:
1. Better than painter: What's 'better' mean? Someone who has a better winning %? Someone who has gotten their team to the FF?
2. Willing to take the job: What do you want us to do? Put together a top 10 list of potential replacements and call them up to see if they'd be willing to take the job? If you throw enough money at them, there are a lot of well known, big name coaches who would come to Purdue.
3.Would take the same or less money: This is impossible to know without knowing who we're discussing, what they're currently making and whether Purdue is willing to pay more. You don't know whether the new AD or BOT would be willing to up the ante or not.

WTF????? YOU stated you want a new coach!!!! YOU said it. I assume you want a better one and one we can afford and one who will take the job. If my assumptions are wrong, then YOU define what you want tyhat is different AND, AND, AND state who fills your critieria.

How can you state your dislike and then turn my question about who YOU do like around and try to make me look stupid???? DAMN ... YOU take the cake ...

 

[Do Dah Day]

-2011: NCAA Tournament: beat St. Peter's (NY) in their first game. lost to Virginia Commonwealth in their second game.
-2012: NCAA Tournament: beat St. Mary's (CA) in their first game. lost to Kansas in their second game
-2013: College Basketball Invitational (CBI): beat Western Illinois in their first game. lost to Santa Clara in their second game
-2014: no postseason after Big Ten Tournament loss to Ohio State
-2015: NCAA Tournament: lost to Cincinnati (OT) in their first game
-2016: NCAA Tournament: lost to Arkansas-Little Rock (2 OT) in their first game


I pick and choose? This is Purdue in the postseason (after the Big Ten Tournament) in the last 6 years. These are FACTS.

His entire body of work says he's good enough to get his teams to NCAA Tournaments but he still hasn't had any better team in the postseason since the 2009-2010 team (i.e. no postseason progress in 6 years).

BUT, several weeks ago you were challenged to name the better replacements (in your opinion). As I recall, you failed miserably to do that. Am I remembering correctly? If you define a problem at your place of employment, but have no good solution to it, what happens? If you define a problem in your relationship, but have no viable solution to it, what happens?

 

[Do Dah Day]

I'm not even disputing what bonefish and nagem are saying .... All I want is their solutions!!!! I'm not debating whether they are right or wrong .... why do they want to fight against what I'm not even saying. I just want more of their wisdom!

 

[1boilerman8]

I'm not even disputing what bonefish and nagem are saying .... All I want is their solutions!!!! I'm not debating whether they are right or wrong .... why do they want to fight against what I'm not even saying. I just want more of their wisdom!

These comments right now

Grow up. You're adults

 

[1boilerman8]

These comments right now

Grow up. You're adults

I didn't mean to just quote one person. Dont get emotional. Like it or not you represent "the Purdue fan base" to the outside world. Act like adults

 

[BBG]

Clearly you don't want to include his entire tenure because that is counter to your argument. Fine, lets ignore that utter laps of logic. So you think we can do better. Fine. Who is better? Will it take more money, facilities, etc to land that better coach? Is Purdue willing to support those increases?
I know...you have no idea. Neither do I. So what exactly are the three or four on hear who want Painters head proposing be done in his place?
The coach is a piece of the program puzzle. The money is the real driver. Get Purdue to not run a self supporting athletic program and use state money like almost everyone else does. Get more boosters to provide more money and facilities. Get the president and board to spend more on coaches and create more creative ways to make a degree easy to get while participating in major sports. Everyone hear would enjoy final fours every other year but it's just not as easy as firing the coach and expecting the next guy to just be that much better.

Brilliant. Spot on. Well done.

 

[vilehoopster]

Okay, if we’re going to defend Painter so loudly and strongly, let me please give the opposite point. And no, I am not speaking from emotion, I have been on here since the CBI/ Santa Clara debacle asking over and over if Painter should be on the hot seat. Now it is time for him to be way, way past the hot seat.

You people keep talking about how the program is trending up, Yeah, you’re right: Purdue is trending up from LAST PLACE three years ago, and losing at home the year before at home in the CBI to Santa Clara. I got news for you. It’s not hard to trend up from those two years. Hell, Illinois, Northwestern, and Penn State are also trending up from that level of play.

Now you guys who argue that there’s no way that Painter is going to be fired, and use that as a argument that he shouldn’t be fired. Really, football coach Hazell hasn’t been fired yet either. Are you going to argue that Hazell shouldn’t have been fired by now?

When you guys talk about Painter’s full career, it doesn’t sound too bad. But remember, when Painter took over at Purdue, Purdue had the most Big Ten wins of any school in the conference. Purdue had an excellent tradition. Painter didn’t take over a middle-of-the –pack program. Well, it’s middle of the pack now. No NCAA tourney wins for the past six years. Let’s talk about his total career: two Sweet Sixteens in 11 years, only two! For a school that WAS the Big Ten leader in wins. Are you really happy about that? You only have to win two games to get to a Sweet Sixteen, only two! And Painter has only done that twice in 11 years. You guys asking who can replace Painter, hell, WHO CAN’T REPLACE PAINTER? There are, at least, 50 coaches in mid-level conferences who would love to coach at Purdue, who could get to two Sweet Sixteen in 11 years here, and I bet most of them could coach a team how to beat a press and handle pressure with the game on the line (Painter’s inexcusable weakness. Handling the press is a teachable skill in practice. Why can't Painter teach this?).

Also, one of those 50 could also get us more than two top-50 players 11 years. That’s all Painter has gotten in his time. I’m not a 100% sure, but Hummel and Martin were in the 60’s or 70’s and JJ was lower than they. He wasn’t a top-50 guy.

 

[TC4THREE]

But remember, when Painter took over at Purdue, Purdue had the most Big Ten wins of any school in the conference. Purdue had an excellent tradition. Painter didn’t take over a middle-of-the –pack program. Well, it’s middle of the pack now.

You're right. He didn't take over a middle-of-the-pack program. He took over a program that had one winning conference season (and only one NCAA tourney appearance) in the previous 5 seasons. That's a cumulative 31-49 record including 3-13 in the season immediately prior to him taking over. I've got news for you, that's not a middle-of-the-pack program. It's lower tier. What you're trying to tell us is that what happened in 2000 and prior had significant relevance to the program Painter took over five years later. It doesn't. UCLA has tradition. That doesn't mean it's still easy for them to be an elite program in 2016. We have far less tradition than a program like UCLA and Painter took over the program at a very low point. As of last year, we were a top 25 team.

 

[Do Dah Day]

You guys asking who can replace Painter, hell, WHO CAN’T REPLACE PAINTER? There are, at least, 50 coaches in mid-level conferences who would love to coach at Purdue, who could get to two Sweet Sixteen in 11 years here, and I bet most of them could coach a team how to beat a press and handle pressure with the game on the line (Painter’s inexcusable weakness. Handling the press is a teachable skill in practice. Why can't Painter teach this?).

Also, one of those 50 could also get us more than two top-50 players 11 years. That’s all Painter has gotten in his time. I’m not a 100% sure, but Hummel and Martin were in the 60’s or 70’s and JJ was lower than they. He wasn’t a top-50 guy.

Names please. You don't have to list all 50, just the top five will be fine.

 

[bonefish1]

1. Since you want him replaced, isn't the onus on you to define what "better" means? Or are you just looking to change for the sake of change, with no real idea of what your goal is? Give us the names of people who have the qualifications that will satisfy you.
2. "Throw enough money at them"? This isn't a serious point. How much are you willing to throw at Larry Brown? And then tell us why you think it would be worth it.
3. Exactly. It all starts with point #1. Using your own criteria, provide a list of "better" coaches and see what they are making now.

I don't necessarily want Painter replaced....yet. I want to see what he can do recruiting a loaded class of '17 kids from Indiana. If he can't convince a couple of them to stay home, then I think his times up. If he doesn't land a great class for '17, then I think his shot at a FF an NC are gone. I think the new AD will make a change.

 

[bonefish1]

"

WTF????? YOU stated you want a new coach!!!! YOU said it. I assume you want a better one and one we can afford and one who will take the job. If my assumptions are wrong, then YOU define what you want tyhat is different AND, AND, AND state who fills your critieria.

How can you state your dislike and then turn my question about who YOU do like around and try to make me look stupid???? DAMN ... YOU take the cake ...

"We can afford"?
Who is "we"? Are you personally paying for a new coach? The problem isn't money. Purdue has plenty of money. Quit acting like it's coming out of your pocket.
There needs to be a culture change across the administration of the university in which winning is very important and where being average or middle of the pack and good once in a while isn't good enough. And I'm not just talking about the athletic dept. I'm talking about the entire body of decision-makers with power.
I've heard Daniels is a big supporter of athletics but it would be interesting to know what he thinks is needed to get Purdue to compete for Rose Bowls and Final Fours.

 

[bonefish1]

Names please. You don't have to list all 50, just the top five will be fine.

Gregg Marshall: Wich State
Chris Mack: X
Archie Miller: Dayton

 

[BoilerBiker]

we all want painter 1.0 and his results back.
going back to the 2007 tourney (throwing out cmp's year 1), 38 schools have reached the sweet 16 at least 2 times. 25 of those, 3 times. 14 of those, 4 times. so that seems like pretty attainable company for purdue and painter to be among, and improve their consistency.

we seem to be getting back there in stages - we have improved recruiting and are now back to top ten rankings, but not quite competing consistently whether for the reg. season title or obviously in the tourney.
it seems that most expect the team to be even better next year.
with increased expectations, competitive financial backing from the AD (as seen from retaining painter, facilities, hazell's contract, etc), we should be back on track for those painter 1.0 results again, and hopefully more.

 

[purdue4sure]

Okay, if we’re going to defend Painter so loudly and strongly, let me please give the opposite point. And no, I am not speaking from emotion, I have been on here since the CBI/ Santa Clara debacle asking over and over if Painter should be on the hot seat. Now it is time for him to be way, way past the hot seat.

You people keep talking about how the program is trending up, Yeah, you’re right: Purdue is trending up from LAST PLACE three years ago, and losing at home the year before at home in the CBI to Santa Clara. I got news for you. It’s not hard to trend up from those two years. Hell, Illinois, Northwestern, and Penn State are also trending up from that level of play.

Now you guys who argue that there’s no way that Painter is going to be fired, and use that as a argument that he shouldn’t be fired. Really, football coach Hazell hasn’t been fired yet either. Are you going to argue that Hazell shouldn’t have been fired by now?

When you guys talk about Painter’s full career, it doesn’t sound too bad. But remember, when Painter took over at Purdue, Purdue had the most Big Ten wins of any school in the conference. Purdue had an excellent tradition. Painter didn’t take over a middle-of-the –pack program. Well, it’s middle of the pack now. No NCAA tourney wins for the past six years. Let’s talk about his total career: two Sweet Sixteens in 11 years, only two! For a school that WAS the Big Ten leader in wins. Are you really happy about that? You only have to win two games to get to a Sweet Sixteen, only two! And Painter has only done that twice in 11 years. You guys asking who can replace Painter, hell, WHO CAN’T REPLACE PAINTER? There are, at least, 50 coaches in mid-level conferences who would love to coach at Purdue, who could get to two Sweet Sixteen in 11 years here, and I bet most of them could coach a team how to beat a press and handle pressure with the game on the line (Painter’s inexcusable weakness. Handling the press is a teachable skill in practice. Why can't Painter teach this?).

Also, one of those 50 could also get us more than two top-50 players 11 years. That’s all Painter has gotten in his time. I’m not a 100% sure, but Hummel and Martin were in the 60’s or 70’s and JJ was lower than they. He wasn’t a top-50 guy.

For the record, I am not and have not defended Painter. Whining, especially by adults is shameful. People who complain without a plan or a solution are whining like little children who don't get what they want. Firing Painter is not a solution to improving Purdue basketball. People who incessantly claim it is the solution need to stop throwing temper tantrums and blaming a basketball coach and people on a message board for their unhappiness.

 

[Dakota Girl]

"


"We can afford"?
Who is "we"? Are you personally paying for a new coach? The problem isn't money. Purdue has plenty of money. Quit acting like it's coming out of your pocket.
There needs to be a culture change across the administration of the university in which winning is very important and where being average or middle of the pack and good once in a while isn't good enough. And I'm not just talking about the athletic dept. I'm talking about the entire body of decision-makers with power.
I've heard Daniels is a big supporter of athletics but it would be interesting to know what he thinks is needed to get Purdue to compete for Rose Bowls and Final Fours.

Thank you bonefish! This is the first argument from the "prefers change" side of the isle worthy of discussion. I do not agree about money not being a factor and don't think the "my team" "our money" statements are such a horrible crime but I like the acknowledgement that the issue is deeper than who the coach is.
I don't think the decision makers are going to change the approach though.

 

[Dakota Girl]

Gregg Marshall: Wich State
Chris Mack: X
Archie Miller: Dayton

Nice. Now...would any of them leave for Purdue and why? Just looking to further the discussion.

 

[BBG]

For the record, I am not and have not defended Painter. Whining, especially by adults is shameful. People who complain without a plan or a solution are whining like little children who don't get what they want. Firing Painter is not a solution to improving Purdue basketball. People who incessantly claim it is the solution need to stop throwing temper tantrums and blaming a basketball coach and people on a message board for their unhappiness.

Same boat here. I've said a few times that I am on the fence with Painter and am more or less waiting to see how things progress. He seems to have some traction in recruiting going on but now there needs to be some progress in the tourney like he had before. He most certainly is capable, he just needs to do what he can to make it happen.

I also don't see the need to flog him for everything. He is responsible to a point sure, but when the players are on the court it is their responsibility to do what they were instructed to do. Also I fail to see the reason to drag Painter through the coals so much. Simply because he isn't going anywhere and if he keeps having top ranked teams, he won't be going anywhere any time soon. Firing a coach that consistently does that, makes no sense IMO.

I used to think that this forum was the sole place for any discussion on Purdue but found that when the mass exodus of long ago happened, other places cropped up and this forum may not even be the most active place anymore (and no H&R isn't either). So take this forum for what it is worth but keep in mind there are other places out there where good discussions take place without each thread getting flushed down the toilet.

 

[SIBoiler2]

Says a lot about the sad state of Purdue Football that less than two months from the start of the season Boiler fans are on here arguing about the coach of a team that finished the season in the Top 20 nationally and is realistically expected to exceed that this year after losing two starters one of whom went in the NBA draft.

 

[TC4THREE]

Nice. Now...would any of them leave for Purdue and why? Just looking to further the discussion.

My opinion. Miller would. The other two probably not.

 

[TC4THREE]

I don't necessarily want Painter replaced....yet. I want to see what he can do recruiting a loaded class of '17 kids from Indiana. If he can't convince a couple of them to stay home, then I think his times up. If he doesn't land a great class for '17, then I think his shot at a FF an NC are gone. I think the new AD will make a change.

So if he just wins with the recruits he gets, that's not good enough? What a stupid thought.

 

[bonefish1]

Nice. Now...would any of them leave for Purdue and why? Just looking to further the discussion.

Would any of them come to Purdue? I have no idea. If I were able to get a one on one sit down with them, I could find out.
I guarantee if I said "name your price to come to Purdue", the conversation would be different.

 

[bonefish1]

My opinion. Miller would. The other two probably not.

Money talks. If Purdue wants to compete big time, and not just strive to be top 25 and shoot for Sweet 16's, they'll have to pony up and pay market rate for a 'name' coach who can command top dollar. That's the world of big time college sports that we live in.

 

[bonefish1]

So if he just wins with the recruits he gets, that's not good enough? What a stupid thought.

What is 'good enough' in your world?
22 wins, and a tourney appearance?
To me, that's pretty average and should be the minimum expectation.
If your happy with average, then you'll be happy

 

[TC4THREE]

Money talks. If Purdue wants to compete big time, and not just strive to be top 25 and shoot for Sweet 16's, they'll have to pony up and pay market rate for a 'name' coach who can command top dollar. That's the world of big time college sports that we live in.

Purdue is an educational institution. It's mission is not to become a basketball factory. If that's our only goal, by all means let's quit talking Archie Miller and Gregg Marshall and start talking Calipari. If we're going to throw big money at someone let's at least throw it at someone who has won it all. We can throw 15 million a year at him and loosen whatever academic requirements we have for incoming basketball players.

 

[TC4THREE]

What is 'good enough' in your world?
22 wins, and a tourney appearance?
To me, that's pretty average and should be the minimum expectation.
If your happy with average, then you'll be happy

Ah yes. One of these internet guys that no doubt displays the excellence in his own life that he demands from a university sports team. I'm sure your life is Final Four quality.

My world isn't dependent upon Purdue being a basketball force. I'm fine with the program as it is currently but a top 25 team isn't average.