ADVERTISEMENT

UCLA and IU

They haven't consistently kicked IU's ass on the court. In my lifetime (born in 76), IU has a better H2H record, more Big Ten titles, more tourney appearances, more Sweet 16's, more Elite 8's, more Final Four's, and most importantly more national titles. I'm not wrong about anything. You guys have been the better program the last 5 years and I give credit where credit is due, there's no denying that. I actually respect the program Painter has built, but it's ass hat fans like yourself who act like 5 years defines a program.
You are actually wrong on one point...

Claim: IU has more head to head victories since 1976....FALSE
Actuality: Purdue leads the head to head series 43 to 41 in that time span

Also, it doesn't really matter for relevancy in your lifetime. It has more to do with relevancy during the relative lifetime of those players who are being recruited. Let's say the last 20 years.

In the last twenty years (since 1999):
NCAA Appearances:
Purdue: 14
IU: 12

NCAA S16:
Purdue: 7
IU: 4

NCAA E8:
Purdue: 2
IU: 1

NCAA Final 4:
Purdue: 0
IU: 1

H2H:
Purdue: 18
IU: 18

B1G Titles:
Purdue: 3
IU: 3

B1G Tourney Championship:
Purdue: 1
IU: 0

NCAA Titles:
Purdue: 0
IU: 0

Now, tell me how much more relevant IU is than Purdue when you look at what is relevant to the players that are in the program now. Yes, most...if not all....Purdue fans realize the history of IU basketball. But nobody from Minnesota football is parading their national titles around like it is relevant to this day and that takes in to account PJ Fleck who is the biggest self promoter in the business.

I also realize I immediately went back on my own suggestion to ignore the IU posters. Some times stats need to be presented in an argument that are truthful and rational.
 
Last edited:
You are actually wrong on one point...

Claim: IU has more head to head victories since 1976....FALSE
Actuality: Purdue leads the head to head series 43 to 41 in that time span

Also, it doesn't really matter for relevancy in your lifetime. It has more to do with relevancy during the relative lifetime of those players who are being recruited. Let's say the last 20 years.

In the last twenty years (since 1999):
NCAA Appearances:
Purdue: 14
IU: 12

NCAA S16:
Purdue: 7
IU: 4

NCAA E8:
Purdue: 2
IU: 1

NCAA Final 4:
Purdue: 0
IU: 1

H2H:
Purdue: 18
IU: 18

B1G Titles:
Purdue: 3
IU: 3

B1G Tourney Championship:
Purdue: 1
IU: 0

NCAA Titles:
Purdue: 0
IU: 0

Now, tell me how much more relevant IU is than Purdue when you look at what is relevant to the players that are in the program now. Yes, most...if not all....Purdue fans realize the history of IU basketball. But nobody from Minnesota football is parading their national titles around like it is relevant to this day and that takes in to account PJ Fleck who is the biggest self promoter in the business.

Purdue has bragging rights on Indiana now, stemming from the last 5 years. I've never argued otherwise. But how does that translate to recruits. Are 5* and McD's AA lining up to play for Purdue? Of course they aren't. None of that translates because Purdue isn't a nationally recognized program. There's a reason why Indiana still recruits at an extremely high level and it's because recruits recognize Indiana as basketball school. That's what I'm talking about in terms of national relevancy.
 
Purdue has bragging rights on Indiana now, stemming from the last 5 years. I've never argued otherwise. But how does that translate to recruits. Are 5* and McD's AA lining up to play for Purdue? Of course they aren't. None of that translates because Purdue isn't a nationally recognized program. There's a reason why Indiana still recruits at an extremely high level and it's because recruits recognize Indiana as basketball school. That's what I'm talking about in terms of national relevancy.

And you are correct and literally zero Purdue fans would argue any differently. But would you rather recruit at a high level and consistently under achieve (which IU has done over the last 10-15 years) vs. get players that fit the program culturally and have success? Honest question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoistNecessary
And you are correct and literally zero Purdue fans would argue any differently. But would you rather recruit at a high level and consistently under achieve (which IU has done over the last 10-15 years) vs. get players that fit the program culturally and have success? Honest question.

Rather consistently recruit at a high level easily because one day or another it's going to pay off. Purdue just arguably had its greatest three year run in program history and it didn't move the needle an inch in terms of Purdue's national relevancy. Your greatest 3-5 year run in program history isn't far off from what Indiana accomplished from 2012-2016 and in the last 10-15 years it's been the worst era in program history. IU is miles ahead of Purdue in the national landscape. You know it, I know it, recruits know it.
 
And you are correct and literally zero Purdue fans would argue any differently. But would you rather recruit at a high level and consistently under achieve (which IU has done over the last 10-15 years) vs. get players that fit the program culturally and have success? Honest question.
I'd choose option C... recruit at a high level and have success.... :D.

Obviously given the results of the last 10-15 years, I would gladly take Purdue's success given where IU has been. However, recruiting at a high level is a big part of winning a national championship which is the main goal in most IU fans' minds.
 
Purdue just arguably had its greatest three year run in program history and it didn't move the needle an inch in terms of Purdue's national relevancy.
Based on who's interpretation? Yours? Are you pulling things out of hat?

Do you see why people on here are clamoring the whole "approval" thing at you? You are touting IU and putting Purdue down to satisfy your own notion and no one else's because there is no way you can know what every recruit in all of the country thinks about Purdue. Stop with the hyperbole already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purdue85
I'd choose option C... recruit at a high level and have success.... :D.

Obviously given the results of the last 10-15 years, I would gladly take Purdue's success given where IU has been. However, recruiting at a high level is a big part of winning a national championship which is the main goal in most IU fans' minds.
Very true and there is a direct correlation between high recruiting ability and success. But given CMP's recruiting ability as one to develop talent and then getting that talent to stay 3-4 years, does it not give a team a greater ability to have sustained success over the course of time? Obviously Duke, Kansas, UNC, UK are vastly different from every one else because their recruiting is at such a staggering level...but if you aren't one of those types of programs (and arguably IU is not there any more), to have success against those programs you have to have the type of success Purdue has built on over the last 8 years.

Archie could very easily learn from his mistakes and begin to develop talent at a level where he gets his players 'old' most consistently and has sustained success....but are IU fans willing to have that type of cultural shift in the perception of who they are? As close of a comparison I can think of is Illinois. Illini fans didn't want Bruce Weber to keep recruiting guys that fit his program culturally and not being at the absolute top of the entire country/conference every year...so they ran him out after he tried to shift his strategy. There is a reason why Kansas State is relevant again.
 
Based on who's interpretation? Yours? Are you pulling things out of hat?

Do you see why people on here are clamoring the whole "approval" thing at you? You are touting IU and putting Purdue down to satisfy your own notion and no one else's because there is no way you can know what every recruit in all of the country thinks about Purdue. Stop with the hyperbole already.

If this isn't the greatest 3-5 year run in program history please enlighten me?

From 2014-2109
Purdue:
5 consecutive tourney appearances
2 S16's
Elite 8
2 Big Ten titles

Explain to me a better run in your program's history? And while it's better than IU's recent run it's only incrementally better.

From 2011-2016
Indiana:
4/5 tourney appearances
3 Sweet 16's
2 Big Ten titles

Your best 5 years as a program is only marginally better than IU's recent run that has been sandwiched during the worst 10-15 year period of Indiana basketball. And what has it netted you guys? You still aren't landing high profile recruits. You still aren't considered an elite program by national pundits. You're nowhere near pushing the needle in national relevancy.
 
Rather consistently recruit at a high level easily because one day or another it's going to pay off. Purdue just arguably had its greatest three year run in program history and it didn't move the needle an inch in terms of Purdue's national relevancy. Your greatest 3-5 year run in program history isn't far off from what Indiana accomplished from 2012-2016 and in the last 10-15 years it's been the worst era in program history. IU is miles ahead of Purdue in the national landscape. You know it, I know it, recruits know it.
There’s not a Purdue fan in the world who thinks we just experienced our best 3-5 year run ever. Thats not “arguable”. That’s laughable.

IU fans have resorted to recruiting as the best measure of success because it’s the only measure they’ve had any recent success in. Keep out recruiting us. We will keep beating you win it matters. Sooner or later they’ll start hanging recruiting ranking banners in AH when the moths eat the five they have.
 
There’s not a Purdue fan in the world who thinks we just experienced our best 3-5 year run ever. Thats not “arguable”. That’s laughable.

IU fans have resorted to recruiting as the best measure of success because it’s the only measure they’ve had any recent success in. Keep out recruiting us. We will keep beating you win it matters. Sooner or later they’ll start hanging recruiting ranking banners in AH when the moths eat the five they have.

Then name a better run? 93-98? Maybe. Even when you got hammered with major NCAA violations and had to vacate wins. Tell me a time in Purdue basketball history where they've had this much consistent success. Don't call it laughable when you can't give an answer.
 
If this isn't the greatest 3-5 year run in program history please enlighten me?

From 2014-2109
Purdue:
5 consecutive tourney appearances
2 S16's
Elite 8
2 Big Ten titles

Explain to me a better run in your program's history? And while it's better than IU's recent run it's only incrementally better.

From 2011-2016
Indiana:
4/5 tourney appearances
3 Sweet 16's
2 Big Ten titles

Your best 5 years as a program is only marginally better than IU's recent run that has been sandwiched during the wrost 10-15 year period of Indiana basketball. And what has it netted you guys? You still aren't landing high profile recruits. You still aren't considered an elite program by national pundits. You're nowhere near pushing the needle in national relevancy.
Well since the season just ended it is entirely too early to say that it hasn't had an impact on recruiting. You have no way of knowing that anyway.

And sure, we aren't considered and elite school by the pundits, but then again neither is IU. We are trending that direction why IU isn't yet and at this point we are far more relevant than IU since you just flopped out of the NIT. Those are just the facts, sorry man it's so hard for you to deal with.

But again do you see why you are being labeled as needing affirmation on here? That is all your responses have done so far, you are looking for us to anoint Iu to something we are never going to do nor do we truly care. It's almost like you are trying to deflate our E8 just to make yourself feel better about the flame out IU did in the NIT. I truly am sorry that you are that insecure about a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purdue85
If this isn't the greatest 3-5 year run in program history please enlighten me?

From 2014-2109
Purdue:
5 consecutive tourney appearances
2 S16's
Elite 8
2 Big Ten titles

Explain to me a better run in your program's history? And while it's better than IU's recent run it's only incrementally better.

From 2011-2016
Indiana:
4/5 tourney appearances
3 Sweet 16's
2 Big Ten titles

Your best 5 years as a program is only marginally better than IU's recent run that has been sandwiched during the worst 10-15 year period of Indiana basketball. And what has it netted you guys? You still aren't landing high profile recruits. You still aren't considered an elite program by national pundits. You're nowhere near pushing the needle in national relevancy.
You seem to think we care about national relevancy. I don’t. I care about winning. Which we do. I care about recruiting, developing, and graduating great players. Which we do. I also - if I’m being honest - care about beating a “nationally relevant” program and their “great”recruits like IU. Which we do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoistNecessary
Then name a better run? 93-98? Maybe. Even when you got hammered with major NCAA violations and had to vacate wins. Tell me a time in Purdue basketball history where they've had this much consistent success. Don't call it laughable when you can't give an answer.
Don't ignore what he said just because you don't understand it.
 
Then name a better run? 93-98? Maybe. Even when you got hammered with major NCAA violations and had to vacate wins. Tell me a time in Purdue basketball history where they've had this much consistent success. Don't call it laughable when you can't give an answer.
Major? What was the major violation. We weren’t hammered.
 
Very true and there is a direct correlation between high recruiting ability and success. But given CMP's recruiting ability as one to develop talent and then getting that talent to stay 3-4 years, does it not give a team a greater ability to have sustained success over the course of time? Obviously Duke, Kansas, UNC, UK are vastly different from every one else because their recruiting is at such a staggering level...but if you aren't one of those types of programs (and arguably IU is not there any more), to have success against those programs you have to have the type of success Purdue has built on over the last 8 years.

Archie could very easily learn from his mistakes and begin to develop talent at a level where he gets his players 'old' most consistently and has sustained success....but are IU fans willing to have that type of cultural shift in the perception of who they are? As close of a comparison I can think of is Illinois. Illini fans didn't want Bruce Weber to keep recruiting guys that fit his program culturally and not being at the absolute top of the entire country/conference every year...so they ran him out after he tried to shift his strategy. There is a reason why Kansas State is relevant again.
I think IU should be emulating the Villanova approach. Get a healthy base line of 3 and 4 year players, and mix in the 5* game changers.

39/41 years now a McDonald's AA has been on the winning team's roster. 40/41 there are either a McDonald's AA, or a 5* player on the roster.
 
If this isn't the greatest 3-5 year run in program history please enlighten me?

From 2014-2109
Purdue:
5 consecutive tourney appearances
2 S16's
Elite 8
2 Big Ten titles

Explain to me a better run in your program's history? And while it's better than IU's recent run it's only incrementally better.

From 2011-2016
Indiana:
4/5 tourney appearances
3 Sweet 16's
2 Big Ten titles

Your best 5 years as a program is only marginally better than IU's recent run that has been sandwiched during the worst 10-15 year period of Indiana basketball. And what has it netted you guys? You still aren't landing high profile recruits. You still aren't considered an elite program by national pundits. You're nowhere near pushing the needle in national relevancy.
93-98 was a better run and IU missed the tourney twice from 2011-2016.
 
They haven't consistently kicked IU's ass on the court. In my lifetime (born in 76), IU has a better H2H record, more Big Ten titles, more tourney appearances, more Sweet 16's, more Elite 8's, more Final Four's, and most importantly more national titles. I'm not wrong about anything. You guys have been the better program the last 5 years and I give credit where credit is due, there's no denying that. I actually respect the program Painter has built, but it's ass hat fans like yourself who act like 5 years defines a program.
And Purdue won the series vs IU in the 90s and in this decade.You can remember those decades also,cant you.?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoistNecessary
Then name a better run? 93-98? Maybe. Even when you got hammered with major NCAA violations and had to vacate wins. Tell me a time in Purdue basketball history where they've had this much consistent success. Don't call it laughable when you can't give an answer.
Wait, courtsense2 is that you? Has to be.
 
Exactly because no one cares about Purdue. But there are people that care about IU and that’s why they’re constantly nationally televised. It’s because IU is a nationally recognized program. I wouldn’t expect a Purdue fan to understand this.
How much recognition did the Hoosiers get for losing their third NIT game,played at Gloomington compared to the publicity Purdue got for their Elite Eight appearance this season.?Dont waste your time trying to convince us what a great following IU has after they averaged a whopping 9,500 fans at Assembly Hall for the three games played there in this years Not Invited Tournament.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoistNecessary
93-98 was a better run and IU missed the tourney twice from 2011-2016.
Hell any 5 years from ‘25-‘40 were better. We were a top national team during the run. Does that make us a blue blood too?

Mid 90s. Late 90s. Mid 80s. Late 60/early 70. All have comparable or better runs to the past 5 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAG10
Hell any 5 years from ‘25-‘40 were better. We were a top national team during the run. Does that make us a blue blood too?

Mid 90s. Late 90s. Mid 80s. Late 60/early 70. All have comparable or better runs to the past 5 years.
I am not sure what you are saying, but, I do find it hilarious that IU is at a level that they try to compare themselves to our program in an attempt to make them feel better.

IU is a shit show. Has been for quite some time now. Next year will be the fourth time they have missed the tourney in a row, 8 out of 12 years, and we have their fans here trying to compare Crean years to Painter. It’s laughable to be honest.
 
The issue here is not whether we had a good run recently
Rather consistently recruit at a high level easily because one day or another it's going to pay off. Purdue just arguably had its greatest three year run in program history and it didn't move the needle an inch in terms of Purdue's national relevancy. Your greatest 3-5 year run in program history isn't far off from what Indiana accomplished from 2012-2016 and in the last 10-15 years it's been the worst era in program history. IU is miles ahead of Purdue in the national landscape. You know it, I know it, recruits know it.
Just curious. How do you know that fictitious national relevancy needle didn’t move?

Seem like we got lots of publicity from our run to the E8. Also played one of the best games in the tournament per many of the talking heads. We were even featured in some commercials.

IU not mentioned nationally once the BIG season started.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoistNecessary
Purdue has bragging rights on Indiana now, stemming from the last 5 years. I've never argued otherwise. But how does that translate to recruits. Are 5* and McD's AA lining up to play for Purdue? Of course they aren't. None of that translates because Purdue isn't a nationally recognized program. There's a reason why Indiana still recruits at an extremely high level and it's because recruits recognize Indiana as basketball school. That's what I'm talking about in terms of national relevancy.
IU recruits All-Americans. Purdue develops All-Americans.
 
IU recruits All-Americans. Purdue develops All-Americans.
Let's see. Archie recruited Romeo Langford (not). He had no idea Romeo was coming to IU until the press conference. If Pitino had remained coach at L'ville, this long line of 5 star players would be a total of one (?) player, TJD. One point does not trend make.
 
Let's see. Archie recruited Romeo Langford (not). He had no idea Romeo was coming to IU until the press conference. If Pitino had remained coach at L'ville, this long line of 5 star players would be a total of one (?) player, TJD. One point does not trend make.
Crean had 5 classes in a row with a 5* all American. It's not exactly a stretch to think Archie might do something similar.
 
Yeah their national irrelevance. Considering they’re one of the most nationally branded programs in the country in terms of revenue, marketability, and exposure. There’s a reason why IU always draws Duke or UNC on prime time television in the ACC/B10 challenge and Purdue plays Florida State on ESPN2. There’s a reason why top flight recruits and McDonald’s AA still come to IU. There’s a reason for all this and it’s because IU is still a nationally recognized basketball program ie Blue-Blood and reason why Purdue isn’t. It’s because nobody outside Purdue cares about Purdue.
If IU is "Blue Blood" why aren't established big name coaches lining up for the job? Instead you are hiring mid major coaches and hoping they work out.
 
If IU is "Blue Blood" why aren't established big name coaches lining up for the job? Instead you are hiring mid major coaches and hoping they work out.


source.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: SIBoiler2 and BBG
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT