The Facts
- Thread starter collegehoopsfan123
- Start date
U do realize the ball is smaller in women's basketball, so that is not a level playing field?
What do you think determines a schools ability to hire a new coach? First and foremost, it's money. And MBob has proven with his contract for Brohm, that he's willing to play the money game.
You also have arguably one of the best home court environments in college basketball.
You're sitting in the middle of pretty fertile recruiting grounds between Chicago, Indy, Detroit, St. Louis, etc.
So again, why wouldn't Purdue be attractive to a new coach?
What metrics are you using to believe that Painter is on the verge of 'breaking through'? He's actually gotten worst in the tourney the last 3 years.
I agree and it's what I said previously. This administration (like a lot of Purdue fans) is happy to win a lot or regular season games and make sure Mackey is full for home games (because it generates $$). Winning in the tourney isn't the priority like it is at a lot of schools. Painter is the safe option.
However, another embarrassing early tourney exit next year and some big $ donors might raise their voice and that will get the attention of the AD.
Explain what disadvantages Painter faces in recruiting to Purdue?
And as far as who would the replacement would be, we've played that game before. I throw out 4-5 names (and I'm not talking Self, Izzon, Cal, Few, etc) and you give me the predictable response of "WHAT! He would never come to Purdue!"
I'm guessing CMP did recruit most of those players, they just didn't pick Purdue.
Football is a completely different business. Much higher ROI potential for Purdue football than basketball, for each additional dollar invested.
Our campus has almost 2:1 male female ratio, our NIL sucks, the weather in central Indiana sucks compared to about 70% of other schools, Purdue actually makes their athletes go to school, the only fans are Purdue grads and their families, spending on the program is limited, and Lafayette is a pretty awful town.
Going for us is basketball tradition, good local recruiting, sustained success, national spotlight, solid facilities, although limited to grads the fan base is very loyal, and although they don't last we get a decent number of players drafted.
And for your names that you won't even list, the only ones that I can think of that would possibly move with a large enough offer that would be potential upgrades are Musslemen, Beard, and Oats. 2 of those have a lot of baggage for the administration to reach for though. Other than those 3 I'm not sure who you are thinking would be a big win to replace Painter.......
Agreed, but I was just trying to figure out who the delusional fire painter people think we could get if we throw a $9 million bag at a someone. We will never do that but trying to understand who this magical coach that will take us to the sacred land is?
I am pretty sure bonefish wanted Shaka over Painter but he is an even bigger choke artist than Painter.......
Our campus has almost 2:1 male female ratio: Irrelevant. Do you really think that an athlete cares that on a campus of almost 50,000 student that there's only 19,000 woman? How many do they need at a time?
Our NIL sucks: How do you know? How much do we have in the NIL bank?
Weather: Ever been to East Lansing, Manhattan, KS, Madison, Syracuse....etc, etc. etc. (basketball is played inside).
Purdue makes their athletes go to school: Yeh, right. Like the cush majors, study halls, academic advisors, etc, don't help athletes stay eligible? You think Duke, UM, Stanford, etc don't have high academic standards?
Only fans: Mackey is one of the, if not the best home court in college hoops. Try again.
Spending on the program is limited: Yes, I'd like to see more $ put into the program
West Lafayette is awful: Again, it's a college town. If being in a big city were so great, why can't Northwestern recruit? St. Johsn? Georgetown? GA Tech?
No it doesn't, it regarding the size of ball compared to the size of the hoop... that this has to be explained to you is remarkable.
Shaka's team ran Painters off the floor on his way to a Final Four! The only FF Painter has been to, he had to buy a ticket.
Do you think Painter is the best Purdue can ever get ?
Trust me, there are several people here who believe Painter is the pinnacle of who could/would coach Purdue. They may be in hiding, but the thought of replacing Painter makes their tummy ache.
Shaka exited in the first round 7 of his last 8 tourneys, and only made the round of 32 in the other. Most of that was at Texas........ Tom Crean had a final 4 too, I guess we should go hire him huh?
How about Porter Moser? He went to a FF at Loyola and has been killing it at Oklahoma… oh wait no he hasn’t…
Getting his plan A recruits over the last 6 years, getting the first #1 ranking for Purdue last year followed by being #1 for half the season this year, getting to the S16 or better in 4 of the last 6 tourneys, getting a 4 seed then a 3 seed then a 1 seed, etc.
If you compare Purdue's past 6 years to teams like Virginia and Baylor in the years before they broke through it is very very similar. Long time coach that underperformed in the tourney but had very good regular seasons, consistently a top seed but losing to lesser opponents, until one day they didn't.
Except for in March, where he's arguably one of the worst in history.
if Painter is getting his Plan A recruits, then maybe he needs to change his recruiting because his classes are usually ranked well outside of the top 25.
As opposed to what? The "tried his darndest but just has the most worstest luck ever" metric?
Uh no, the goal is to win games, not to “beat higher seeds”. By that logic, we would try to never be a 1 seed, because then it would be literally impossible to “beat a higher seed.”
And Painter averages an NCAA win per season. Not very many schools can say that.
Painter is the college basketball version of “money ball”….can win in the regular season, but not built for the tournament…. And throw in the fact that by March there is enough tape on how to stop Purdue and knowing Painter wont make any changes, is a losing combination.
That is the most bad-faith, context-free argument i have ever seen. Nobody said or even implied that the goal is to beat higher seeds. But at some point you have to do it in order to get where you ultimately want to go. And top coaches at least have some history of doing so. It's all part of the analysis of Painter's record.
2007, 9 seed, 2nd rd, beat 8, lost to 1, +1 round over expected
2008, 6 seed, 2nd rd, beat 11, lost to 3, +0
2009, 5 seed, S16, beat 4, lost to 1, +1
2010, 4 seed, S16, beat 5, lost to 1, +0
2011, 3 seed, 2nd rd, beat 14, lost to 11, -1
2012, 10 seed, 2nd rd, beat 7, lost to 2, +1
2015, 9 seed, 1st rd, lost to 8, +0
2016, 5 seed, 1st rd, lost to 12, -1
2017, 4 seed, S16, lost to 1, +0
2018, 2 seed, S16, lost to 3, -1
2019, 3 seed, EE, beat 2, lost to 1, +1
2021, 4 seed, 1st rd, lost to 13, -2
2022, 3 seed, S16, lost to 15, -0
2023, 1 seed, 1st rd, lost to play-in 16, -3 (at least)
4 wins over higher seeds (9v8, 5v4, 10v7, 3v2). That means occasional minor over-achieving (once in last 10 years) versus severe and increasingly-frequent under-achieving (5 losses to teams 7 or more seeds lower). Any of the results above would be palatable on their own (save this year) if there were something to offset. Yes Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, etc all have bad early losses. It happens. When there is no high level post season success to pair with it, the issue becomes a glaring one to many fans. This is what is being argued. The entirety of his post season work. Please stop pedantically pretending otherwise.
You not leveraging your highly successful career and ponying up for the 5-star players you have always craved. Just step up. Contribute to your happiness.
Similar threads
