Save me the holier than though BS comments. Yeh, Purdue is an educational institution, that's fine.....yet the 2 highest paid University employees are the basketball and football coach! Ha ha
Rivals updates their 2017 top 150
- Thread starter boilerzz
- Start date
Save me the holier than though BS comments. Yeh, Purdue is an educational institution, that's fine.....yet the 2 highest paid University employees are the basketball and football coach! Ha ha
So your plan is to go find another coach and pay them more money? You are brilliant.
Like I said, if you're happy with average, then keep doing what you're doing.
After all, why strive to be great? Why put in the work and commitment to be better than what you think Purdue can be.
We have a crap football program, a slightly above average basketball program, an average women's program, a less than average baseball program.
So, are you still happy with Purdue athletics?
And like I said. Top 25 isn't average. Until you can deal with reality, you're just making a fool of yourself.
I could give 2 $hits about how much we pay a coach. It has absolutely zero impact on me or my life. Nor does it impact you unless you don't think coaches should make millions. In which case, you probably don't think Etwuan Moore deserves his new $34 million contract.
What I do care about it Purdue winning, and if the university officials are always going to try and be economical in their coaching payscale decisions, then that does impact me in terms of my enjoyment of watching my alma mater. However.......
I think the officials have actually stepped up somewhat with the $ commitment for Hazell and Painters new contract. Obviously, Hazell was a bust, but that happens. You can't win if you don't (pay to) play.
So, my complaint is not what they are currently paying, my complaint is with people like you who bitch about paying a big name coach big money.
No. Hiring the worst coach in the history of the program didn't just "happen". It was the culmination of many bad mistakes in a row. How some morons in our fan base just casually shrug that off while crying about Painter is just a testament to how dumb some people are. Hazell is an example of what happens when things are done your way.
First for TC4three – 1st of all, of course, what happened before 2000 still is important; that tradition is important. You mentioned UCLA. Not last spring but last year is a great example. UCLA is only 11 and 7 in their conference, but because they’re UCLA (with a great history before 2000) they get undeservedly into the NCAA. Where they then make the Sweet Sixteen; showing once again that it’s not that hard to make a Sweet Sixteen unless you’re Purdue. Indiana is another example of the importance of tradition before 2000. They continue to sign McDonald’s All-Americans like it’s nothing, and that’s because of IU’s name. When Cody Zeller signed with IU, do you think it was because of the success of IU during the Mike Davis, Kelvin Sampson, and Tom Crean eras? Cody signed with IU because of their name and tradition of success. Did Cody even take a phone call from Painter? So yes, tradition and name before 2000 still matters.
To your second comment about how your world isn’t dependent on Purdue basketball. Come on? You probably put, at least, 300 comments a year on this forum. Your comment that somehow your life is above Purdue basketball has no validity if you’re on a forum that much. It doesn’t rule any of our lives, but like you, we all want to Purdue to win. We just disagree on how to get there. Don’t insult us by implying that your values and morals are above us just because we’re Painter detractors.
To purdue4sure who says whining by adults is shameful. Really? Insults? That’s all you have? Reply with logic and ideas, not insults. Can’t I just as easily state that acting like a delusional , rose-colored glasses Pollyanna is shameful. Why is one behavior more shameful than the other, but really, just hurtling insults at someone who disagrees with you, that is shameful.
To the guy who wants me to name names. What is the point of that? I’m not going to look up stuff on Wikipedia. But just take the top five coaches of the MAC, the Missouri Valley, or the Atlantic 10. I absolutely believe that anyone of those guys could accomplish what Painter has accomplished at Purdue in 11 years. I don’t have to find specific examples, because my point is that most competent coaches could do what Painter has achieved in 11 years. That’s it; Painter is not good, just competent. Shouldn’t Purdue, with its basketball tradition want a little more than competency?
It comes down to what are you willing to accept.
Was Santa Clara better than Purdue when we lost, at home? Don’t you believe we clearly had better players than Santa Clara?
How about when Northwestern came into Mackey three years ago, and won, condemning Purdue to LAST PLACE in the Big Ten. Do you believe Northwestern had better players?
Okay, now you could argue that Cincinnati was as good as we were. A major school with major tradition in a big conference. But still, we blew a 7 point lead in the last minute. But, I will call that game a push for Painter. In that game, he was competent.
Do you believe that Arkansas Little Rock had better players? Are you okay with that loss?
If you’re okay with that, then fine. Let’s keep Painter. But I am not. I absolutely believe it’s time for a change. And that doesn’t make me a bad guy or worthy of shame.
I know what some people are going to say: I’m not looking at the entire picture, and you’re right. Let’s look at Painter’s early action in the NCAA tourney. Florida, Duke, Connecticut, and Kansas clearly had better players than Purdue, clearly. And you know what?? They won the games; they won, like Purdue, coached by Matt Painter didn’t do against Santa Clara and Northwestern at home and Arkansas Little Rock.
To your second comment about how your world isn’t dependent on Purdue basketball. Come on? You probably put, at least, 300 comments a year on this forum. Your comment that somehow your life is above Purdue basketball has no validity if you’re on a forum that much. It doesn’t rule any of our lives, but like you, we all want to Purdue to win. We just disagree on how to get there. Don’t insult us by implying that your values and morals are above us just because we’re Painter detractors.
To purdue4sure who says whining by adults is shameful. Really? Insults? That’s all you have? Reply with logic and ideas, not insults. Can’t I just as easily state that acting like a delusional , rose-colored glasses Pollyanna is shameful. Why is one behavior more shameful than the other, but really, just hurtling insults at someone who disagrees with you, that is shameful.
To the guy who wants me to name names. What is the point of that? I’m not going to look up stuff on Wikipedia. But just take the top five coaches of the MAC, the Missouri Valley, or the Atlantic 10. I absolutely believe that anyone of those guys could accomplish what Painter has accomplished at Purdue in 11 years. I don’t have to find specific examples, because my point is that most competent coaches could do what Painter has achieved in 11 years. That’s it; Painter is not good, just competent. Shouldn’t Purdue, with its basketball tradition want a little more than competency?
It comes down to what are you willing to accept.
Was Santa Clara better than Purdue when we lost, at home? Don’t you believe we clearly had better players than Santa Clara?
How about when Northwestern came into Mackey three years ago, and won, condemning Purdue to LAST PLACE in the Big Ten. Do you believe Northwestern had better players?
Okay, now you could argue that Cincinnati was as good as we were. A major school with major tradition in a big conference. But still, we blew a 7 point lead in the last minute. But, I will call that game a push for Painter. In that game, he was competent.
Do you believe that Arkansas Little Rock had better players? Are you okay with that loss?
If you’re okay with that, then fine. Let’s keep Painter. But I am not. I absolutely believe it’s time for a change. And that doesn’t make me a bad guy or worthy of shame.
I know what some people are going to say: I’m not looking at the entire picture, and you’re right. Let’s look at Painter’s early action in the NCAA tourney. Florida, Duke, Connecticut, and Kansas clearly had better players than Purdue, clearly. And you know what?? They won the games; they won, like Purdue, coached by Matt Painter didn’t do against Santa Clara and Northwestern at home and Arkansas Little Rock.
What happened before 2000 doesn't change the fact that the program was not a top tier program when Painter took it over which is what you were saying.
And yes, I'm a fan. That doesn't mean I'm irrational. Short of winning a national championship, you will always be able to say Purdue wasn't as good as they could be. That doesn't mean you throw every last disposable dollar towards that pursuit or just throw each coach to the curb if he hasn't reached the Final Four in a certain number of years. If you want to make an honest argument about wanting to replace Painter then go for it. But I'm not going to sit back and watch people like you or bonefish distort reality. The program was in terrible shape when Painter took it over. Also, finishing in the top 25 is NOT average.
Finally, I challenge you to find a program in the country that hasn't lost games they should've won in the past 4 years since you want to go back 4 seasons to grab Santa Clara as an example. Please look long and hard and let me know what you find.
But the fact remains, that Purdue, which is probably viewed nationally as a solid basketball program, hasn't made a FF in 36 years.
During those 36 years, we've had 2 coaches with very similar basketball philosophies (seeing how one came up through the others system, that's not surprising) and also an uncanny ability to not be good tourney coaches.
That's why, when we do get a new coach, I want them to be completely outside the Purdue coaching tree.
True but show a school where that isn't the case. Now your getting into what our society values...seems too deep for a sports message board.
it's the case just about everywhere. It shows that while, yes, the schools are there for academic and educational purposes, but everyone knows the value of solid athletics to a schools reputation, enrollment, financial contributions, etc.
I don't see a message board discussing Purdue's more recent research in engineering. Nor could I tell you who the highest paid professor is.
Pointing out that someone is yelling, crying, whispering, or whining is not an insult. Adults incessantly hijacking threads with whining and crying about a college basketball team during the middle of the summer is shameful. Stating that it is shameful is not an insult.
Question: Do you guys really think that any athletic director is going to fire Painter and hire a top-5 MAC coach, Larry Brown, Calipari, or your coach du jour before the 2016-17 season starts?
The athletic department has no impact on Purdue's enrollment. Even with all of the doom-and-gloom in Purdue's athletics (by your standards) Purdue will be over-enrolled again this year. And there is no link between a school's athletic performance and it's reputation as an academic institution.
Sorry I have pm disabled. I know I can't link/promote other sites on here, but if you spend some time on reddit you will find them
There is at least a moderate link to an increase in applicants (though that does not guarantee quality)
Not to jump into the argument last minute, but I think that line of thinking is a little naive. Athletics can play a big factor in portraying a school's image. Sure, sports may not directly inflate academic reputation, but that doesn't mean there couldn't be an indirect consequence down the line. Athletics drive finances. Finances drive University offerings (new programs, quality of professors, housing, etc.). These offerings can attract more students. And the more students Purdue attracts, the more selective it can be on admissions. So it's not crazy to think that - over time - consistently good athletic programs can help shape and enhance academics and the overall institution.
I know some people will say "no good student is ever going to pick a school just because their football team or basketball team is good". In a vacuum, that may be true. But sports provide an entry point for that initial connection with young people. It builds familiarity and comfort with an institution that you'd otherwise know nothing about. Granted, that might not lead to anything in a lot of instances. In other instances it might lead to a University having an "in" for really bright students.
A good example of the financial element in play is Butler. I have lived 1/2 mile from Hinkle Fieldhouse since before their 2 title game runs. Since that time, they have built the Schrott Center (great theatre), a new parking and commercial facility next to Hinkle, remade the primary entrance to campus including street-scape work, they're opening a new residence hall this fall, and in the process of replacing their 2nd residence hall in the coming year. That's a tremendous amount of capital investment in the last 5 years (and these are just the big ones that come to mind at first thought). Would they have commissioned any or all of these projects without their tourney run? Maybe, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that it's been a lot easier to stomach financially with increased donor support, etc.
Now, I can't speak for any movement in their academics; I have no way to have visibility to that, and that may very well take more than 5-6 to years to make a difference anyway. But they certainly didn't hurt their chances of recruiting top students, that's for sure.
"As the Hammer Falls........"
Come see the RIVETING tension and gripping story-lines......and ride the roller coaster that reflects the stages of being a Purdue sports follower.........
Boiler Up, my friends....
Come see the RIVETING tension and gripping story-lines......and ride the roller coaster that reflects the stages of being a Purdue sports follower.........
Boiler Up, my friends....
That is 100% false.
Ask Butler what happened to their applications and donations to the school after their 2 Final Four runs.
100% false? LOL! Having a son enrolled at Purdue, I can tell you that the university has so many applicants that they don't have enough housing for those who are accepted. How does that happen with such pathetic athletics? Why would anyone want to attend such a pitiful institution? Why, oh why?
Butler was an obscure little school, even in the USA, before their 2 Final Fours. I can guarantee that Purdue doesn't suffer from that problem. It is well known and highly regarded globally. Do you really believe that every young scholar will suddenly discover Purdue University academics and flock to enroll because they went to a Final Four?
You're acting like children. You represent Purdue on this board. Try to show some class. You never know who is reading
Back to the original topic. Here is an update article on the in-state players and colleges.
http://www.indystar.com/story/sport...e-players-programs-busy-july-period/86717760/
After sifting through some of this thread and reading responses, I think we all need to come to grips with a few things (me included):
1) Painter isn't going anywhere. If he continues to have a season like he did just last year... even with the early NCAA exit ...... even the new AD will keep him.
2) None of us can predict the future. Painter may never get a Final Four or could be get one next year.
3) A new coach may perform worse. Sure he might do better, but I think the risk is higher that they will do poorly. I mean why else would they leave their current spot unless they were fired or in danger of it? Purdue can't just throw money at a coach and they will come riding in on a white steed blaring the Cry of the Valkyries and instantly get to the Final Four.
4) We need to stop acting like douchebags. Myself included and I have done my best to avoid the needless banter.
5) WE ALL WANT TO WIN!
6) "Defending" Painter doesn't make you less of a Purdue fan or blind to issues.
7) Some on here do have an agenda of some sort.
8) NO COACH IS PERFECT!
9) We have a solid team and an above average coach. Why not support them?
10) There isn't enough beer in the world to make Hillary or Donald look attractive.
Lastly my own personal take, I fail to see the reason to constantly rake Painter through the coals. I'm not saying he is perfect nor am I saying not to criticize him, but what good does constantly regurgitating the same thing do? It isn't changing any time soon.
Okay .. my rant is done. BOILER UP PEOPLE OR I WILL JUST HAVE TO START SLAPPING PEOPLE!
1) Painter isn't going anywhere. If he continues to have a season like he did just last year... even with the early NCAA exit ...... even the new AD will keep him.
2) None of us can predict the future. Painter may never get a Final Four or could be get one next year.
3) A new coach may perform worse. Sure he might do better, but I think the risk is higher that they will do poorly. I mean why else would they leave their current spot unless they were fired or in danger of it? Purdue can't just throw money at a coach and they will come riding in on a white steed blaring the Cry of the Valkyries and instantly get to the Final Four.
4) We need to stop acting like douchebags. Myself included and I have done my best to avoid the needless banter.
5) WE ALL WANT TO WIN!
6) "Defending" Painter doesn't make you less of a Purdue fan or blind to issues.
7) Some on here do have an agenda of some sort.
8) NO COACH IS PERFECT!
9) We have a solid team and an above average coach. Why not support them?
10) There isn't enough beer in the world to make Hillary or Donald look attractive.
Lastly my own personal take, I fail to see the reason to constantly rake Painter through the coals. I'm not saying he is perfect nor am I saying not to criticize him, but what good does constantly regurgitating the same thing do? It isn't changing any time soon.
Okay .. my rant is done. BOILER UP PEOPLE OR I WILL JUST HAVE TO START SLAPPING PEOPLE!
Just for reference, Bo Ryan was a Div I head coach for 14 years before he went to a Final Four. No one predicted it, or the Final Four the following year. As much as we would all like it not to be true, but especially for programs like Wisconsin and Purdue, everything has to come together.
I actually agree with a lot of BBG's post, except for :
3) A new coach may perform worse. Sure he might do better, but I think the risk is higher that they will do poorly. I mean why else would they leave their current spot unless they were fired or in danger of it? Purdue can't just throw money at a coach and they will come riding in on a white steed blaring the Cry of the Valkyries and instantly get to the Final Four.
36 years without a FF is a ridiculously long time for what many consider a 'basketball' school and a good program.
Will Painter get there? Not sure, but in his 11 years at P, he hasn't come close.
You seem to be happy with 22 wins and a tourny appearance. Which may also be the case for the administration of Purdue. Therefore, without the desire to go from good to great, why even consider changing the culture of the program (which is what is needed IMHO)?
3) A new coach may perform worse. Sure he might do better, but I think the risk is higher that they will do poorly. I mean why else would they leave their current spot unless they were fired or in danger of it? Purdue can't just throw money at a coach and they will come riding in on a white steed blaring the Cry of the Valkyries and instantly get to the Final Four.
36 years without a FF is a ridiculously long time for what many consider a 'basketball' school and a good program.
Will Painter get there? Not sure, but in his 11 years at P, he hasn't come close.
You seem to be happy with 22 wins and a tourny appearance. Which may also be the case for the administration of Purdue. Therefore, without the desire to go from good to great, why even consider changing the culture of the program (which is what is needed IMHO)?
I get the frustration. But those who are the most frustrated about it shouldn't lay all 36 years at MP's feet. BTW, MP has been head coach 10 years, not 11.
Didn't say I was happy with it, but I also am not going to rake it through the coals since many schools don't even get that. It's simply not an "all or nothing" thing for me. It's a "wait and see and deal with the outcome" more than anything else.
Also 4sure is right, laying all 36 years at Matt's feet is rather unfair as well. We all have the same frustration lenny, it's all in how you handle it.
Didn't say I was happy with it, but I also am not going to rake it through the coals since many schools don't even get that. It's simply not an "all or nothing" thing for me. It's a "wait and see and deal with the outcome" more than anything else.
Also 4sure is right, laying all 36 years at Matt's feet is rather unfair as well. We all have the same frustration lenny, it's all in how you handle it.
Like I've said before, I don't hate Painter and I'm not raking him over the coals. But....if he doesn't kill it with the '17 class considering how much talent is in his backyard, then I think his prospects for a FF are about over.
If he does kill it, and lands a great '17 class, then he's earned 3 more years to see what he can do.
By that time, it'll be 15 years and if he hasn't done it by then, well.....
Then again, it took Bo Ryan 14 years, and I don't think his teams have ever been considered to be FF bound. So that argument can certainly be made.
I think this will all depend on who the next AD is and does he/she want to change the culture of Purdue athletics.
Yes. I'm sure glad they decided Hope wasn't acceptable so they changed the culture and brought in the worst football coach in program history. They sure "changed the culture' alright.
We actually more on the same page than we may of thought. Like you said it took Ryan 14 years to get there and it was a surprise to say the least. So you just never know...
Also I think there is a bit of hesitation to the idea of replacing him because of the football debacle. Even with a new AD I would be hesitant to support a change at least until the new AD shows they actually give two craps about athletics. A really good indicator will be what they do with the football program and what changes they make there. IMO before any basketball changes are made that whole mess needs addressed first as it will set the stage for Purdue athletics going forward.
Back to CMP though, I have said I am on the fence with him and still am. I support him and the team but it's more of a cautious support because I think the potential is there as it seemed to be there in the past. He just needs to get a good 17 class and go from there.
Hazell was a swing and a miss, big time. No way around that. But, I think people were generally excited with the hire and he was regarded as a great hire by former coaches and players.
But, it was a whiff, it happens.
I agree that changing coaches doesn't guarantee anything, but there are a few things that can be don't to mitigate some of that risk and hopefully make a coaching change less risky.
Fans are sheep. If they are disappointed in the old coach, they are going to buy whatever new coach is brought in until he starts to actually coach games.
Still, you can't just dismiss the Hazell disaster with "it happens". That kind of whiff should never happen and would probably cost most AD's their job if they were less established in their position than Burke is.
not sure what is being referenced,but one quiet now is http://oldgoldfreepress.com/forums/MrHoops/ older people generally and was established before rivalsSorry I have pm disabled. I know I can't link/promote other sites on here, but if you spend some time on reddit you will find them
Was where I started before I landed here. Didn't know if it was even still up and running. I know it's taboo to mention other sites on here as on most forums but if you aren't going to police the idiocy you shouldn't be shooting others for reporting options. I'd be a lot more disturbed by this thread if I thought Purdue fans were the only fans doing so but it seems to be a national trend of internet posturing and chest thumping made worse in this case by the absolute lack of any desire to discuss football as fall approaches.
I'm on a semi vacation right now, but will add some clarification and perhaps explanation to some of your concerns. First, I think there are coaches out there better than any in the Big. Improving the current situation with them is more improbable than probable. The biggest disappointment in the tourney has to be IU's loss to the Orange with the loaded team IU had in recent history. None of Purdue's losses under Matt equal that.
I think those that have worked with players in a competitive situation understand that sometimes the underdog wins and I've been involved with a few of those. Three years ago Northwestern beat Purdue when Purdue had Ronnie Johnson trying out for Ronnie's team. There were other losses that year as well. The Santa Clara game was won by an asst coach for Santa Clara. Purdue was shuffling players early and not putting people away as establishing players times and roles typically happen during pre-season. If Santa Clara is the game I'm thinking where a baseline shot won the game. I do think Purdue's matching up with AJ on the trigger man in a 2-3 zone and then leaving him to cover the inside of the zone was a strategic mistake the first part of the season. I saw what Santa Clara did before the shot. The last two years have been struggles against different styles of zone presses and yet that same coach never had problems before that class or timing of players. UALR was picked to upset Purdue and so somebody saw the potential in beating Purdue due to match-up with a team that had nothing to lose.
I don't believe there are great tourney coaches that only get great in the tourney. I don't think basketball changes and the players become more important when the coaches know less about who they are playing. I've never been nor heard of a sport where there were not different opinions on the coach...
I don't always agree with TC, but when I do, I have a Dos Equis.....
In fairness to Bone, many did like the Hazell hire.....I was in that group, although I tended to think "good" hire.....not "great." And by all indications to me, he is a fine man and works hard and wants to succeed. Just in way over his head without the ability to adjust as needed to be more successful.
But like TC states......this wasn't just a "whiff" (it happens)......this was a major league "whiff." Not only the wrong man for the job as it turns out but a "colossally" bad contract negotiated......that's on Purdue and Morgan Burke. Purdue football right now is close to what Northwestern was in the 70's......that is really bad......this all while having the good "fortune" (if you can call it that) of being in the mediocre-to-weak West division.
A word of caution.....if you are trying to pin hopes on the '17 class, you might be in for more disappointment.....at least as to the State of Indiana recruits.....we shall see. I get the frustration.....I'm there too in some ways,.....although I've seen better signs the last couple of years.....and have posted where I thought things were turned in the right direction......admittedly, there's still ongoing issues that are troubling.
I think there's more positive than negative, but as each year goes by, yes, there should be more scrutiny/urgency. I think you have to let next year play out, see what the recruiting looks like......get the next AD, and have a plan, whether it's extension or not. Purely, just a hunch and gut feeling......I don't see CMP being let go.....I just don't.....
I understand people want to have the heat turned up (whether some want to call it a personal agenda, an emotional response, or whatever other reason), I just don't see Purdue operating that way......whether they should is a separate issue/discussion and more factors involved, including how Purdue allocates resources, defines "performance" and rewards performance.
JMO, folks.....trying to keep the conversation lively.
