Was the 2021-22 Basketball Year a Success??

[titaniumbolt]

When your biggest achievement was going down in the record books as the first team to lose to a 15 seed in the sweet sixteen, no, it was definitely not a success. Couldn't have asked for things to break better in the tournament and then absolutely under achieved.

Success? No. Didn't achieve any of the 3 goals that CMP himself set: B1G Regular, B1G Tournament and FF.

I loved November and December. Fun team to watch and I fell for the hype. I knew in my head that we turned it over too much and didn't play good enough defense. But damn was I excited to have the #1 team and the depth was intoxicating. Reality started to hit in January and like others have said, it became hard for me to watch.

I know this may sound strange, but this was the most unsatisfying 29 win season I can imagine.

He's only 3 years older than CMP, he's been to 2 final 4's and was at OSU for 13 year. Not sure what isn't to like or why you said he wouldn't be an upgrade. He also won the B1G 4 times.

These posters get it. The season was an unmitigated failure.

1) No B1G championship in a year in which the conference was clearly down, continuing a multi-year (decade?) trend, as evidenced by its implosion in March.
2) No B1G tourney win
3) No FF despite the clearest path the team has had in recent memory. In the past the justification for this type of exit was "well this team that beat Purdue eventually became national champion" or "this team that beat Purdue played every team tight". But UNC demolished both of those excuses. Absolutely no excuse for this March performance.

I'll add - if I said to fans prior to the season that the team wouldn't achieve ANY of the goals above, the first question would be: "did Ivey/Edey/Tre blow their ACL? That always happens to us!". But it didn't. The team wasn't hit by the injury bug and got pasted by a team with inferior talent but superior coaching.

On top of all that - teams that the Boilers beat in March clearly improved over the course of the season, where the Boilers were stagnant at best or regressed at worst.

Totally unacceptable in a results-oriented business.

 

[FirstDownB]

These posters get it. The season was an unmitigated failure.

1) No B1G championship in a year in which the conference was clearly down, continuing a multi-year (decade?) trend, as evidenced by its implosion in March.
2) No B1G tourney win
3) No FF despite the clearest path the team has had in recent memory. In the past the justification for this type of exit was "well this team that beat Purdue eventually became national champion" or "this team that beat Purdue played every team tight". But UNC demolished both of those excuses. Absolutely no excuse for this March performance.

I'll add - if I said to fans prior to the season that the team wouldn't achieve ANY of the goals above, the first question would be: "did Ivey/Edey/Tre blow their ACL? That always happens to us!". But it didn't. The team wasn't hit by the injury bug and got pasted by a team with inferior talent but superior coaching.

On top of all that - teams that the Boilers beat in March clearly improved over the course of the season, where the Boilers were stagnant at best or regressed at worst.

Totally unacceptable in a results-oriented business.

That's a bit dramatic. Unmitigated failure would be missing the tourney or having some sort of scandal.

The things you list fall into the category of 'disappointment'.

I posted a poll a few weeks ago. The subject was which Big Ten team had the most successful season. The results were interesting because there was no clear-cut answer. The top 4 teams each had a different claim to success. Purdue= Highest Win total (29), Highest Ranking (Top 10), Farthest in Tourney (S16); Wisconsin= Reg Season Co-Champ; Illinois= Reg Season Co-Champ; Iowa= BTT Champ.

 

[bonefish1]

For Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, not getting to FF is unsuccessful. For Purdue what is it? Lots of regular season wins and no championships? I have long said Purdue has a “nice “ program. They play by the rules, win a Big Ten Championship here and there ( not the tournament except 2009) and get to sweet 16 often, counter balanced by getting knocked out early by lesser teams often. Pretty sweet, very good, but not great. I am not saying Purdue should or could be where the aforementioned programs are. But what should expectations be? FF every 10 years and win the the BTT and regular season a few times a decade Sound ok?

This is a good description of the Purdue mentality too many fans have. They don't think the Purdue program is capable of being elevated to where a S16 isn't good enough and FF should be the expectation. They don't think we can recruit at the highest level, they don't think we could ever do better than Painter as a coach.
To many fans, 20 wins and a NCAA appearance is good enough.

 

[Chris P Bacon]

This is a good description of the Purdue mentality too many fans have. They don't think the Purdue program is capable of being elevated to where a S16 isn't good enough and FF should be the expectation. They don't think we can recruit at the highest level, they don't think we could ever do better than Painter as a coach.
To many fans, 20 wins and a NCAA appearance is good enough.

I don't think this is accurate at all. While I don't think a S16 is good enough and the FF is always the goal, I also am not going to frown at the success of getting to a S16 either.

As far as doing better than Painter, he has done nothing to warrant being fired other than stirring up the emotions of some folks on the internet. He is a successful coach and while not as successful as I am sure even HE wants to be, he is still successful regardless.

I also guarantee that every start of the season everyone on the team from Painter on down is expecting to make a Final Four and that includes the fans. But again, just because most are appreciative of getting to a S16, it in no way shape or form negates the desire for more. You can do both.

 

[bonefish1]

I don't think this is accurate at all. While I don't think a S16 is good enough and the FF is always the goal, I also am not going to frown at the success of getting to a S16 either.

As far as doing better than Painter, he has done nothing to warrant being fired other than stirring up the emotions of some folks on the internet. He is a successful coach and while not as successful as I am sure even HE wants to be, he is still successful regardless.

I also guarantee that every start of the season everyone on the team from Painter on down is expecting to make a Final Four and that includes the fans. But again, just because most are appreciative of getting to a S16, it in no way shape or form negates the desire for more. You can do both.

I agree with all of this. But....but....Painter has been at Purdue 18 years and has 1 E8 and many upsets from double digit seeds.
Many on here think that he's earned the right to be here as long as he wants as long as he wins 20 and gets to the tourney. That should really be the minimum expectation.
i do think Painter has adapted to realizing you need an alpha ball handling scoring guard, and that's been reflected in his guard recruiting (to some extent) since Edwards.
The reality is, the program makes money, which to the administration, is far more important than the W/L column.
As long as Mackey stays full, Painter is safe.

 

[Chris P Bacon]

I agree with all of this. But....but....Painter has been at Purdue 18 years and has 1 E8 and many upsets from double digit seeds.
Many on here think that he's earned the right to be here as long as he wants as long as he wins 20 and gets to the tourney. That should really be the minimum expectation.
i do think Painter has adapted to realizing you need an alpha ball handling scoring guard, and that's been reflected in his guard recruiting (to some extent) since Edwards.
The reality is, the program makes money, which to the administration, is far more important than the W/L column.
As long as Mackey stays full, Painter is safe.

And as I said Painter has done zero to warrant being let go other than just not meeting the expectations of the internet. He has put us in a position to want to raise our expectations and there is no taking that away from him.

He also has shown he is willing to adapt and change as we are seeing that unfold under our very eyes. Gene was more or less set in his ways and while that was a totally different era in basketball, that is a very real difference between Painter and Keady.

I will say if something happens and he has 2 or 3 seasons in a row like he did in the past, then I can see things changing. But at his current pace, yeah he isn't going anywhere and realistically he shouldn't be.

 

[bonefish1]

And as I said Painter has done zero to warrant being let go other than just not meeting the expectations of the internet. He has put us in a position to want to raise our expectations and there is no taking that away from him.

He also has shown he is willing to adapt and change as we are seeing that unfold under our very eyes. Gene was more or less set in his ways and while that was a totally different era in basketball, that is a very real difference between Painter and Keady.

I will say if something happens and he has 2 or 3 seasons in a row like he did in the past, then I can see things changing. But at his current pace, yeah he isn't going anywhere and realistically he shouldn't be.

as far as adapting, I do think he needs to be willing to do something differently defensively. Playing straight man/man D against teams that constantly beat you off the dribble is just stubborn.

It will also be interesting to see if he continues to run the O through the low post. Unfortunately, the low post offense isn't effective as is used to be because now you have 5's who can play PnR and hit jumpers. That's a function of personnel but if Painter is going to still try and recruit 7 footers, they need to be really mobile and have more to their offense than just a back to the basket game.

 

[BBG]

as far as adapting, I do think he needs to be willing to do something differently defensively. Playing straight man/man D against teams that constantly beat you off the dribble is just stubborn.

It will also be interesting to see if he continues to run the O through the low post. Unfortunately, the low post offense isn't effective as is used to be because now you have 5's who can play PnR and hit jumpers. That's a function of personnel but if Painter is going to still try and recruit 7 footers, they need to be really mobile and have more to their offense than just a back to the basket game.

Stubborn for not bending the knee to the zone folks? You do realize lenny our man D isn't traditional man and is more help/match and has zone elements in it right?

Plus the man D has worked countless times in the past to stop exactly what you say Painter is being stubborn about and got better as the year went on. Come on now Lenny this has been explained to you many times through the season.

 

[mathboy]

These posters get it. The season was an unmitigated failure.

1) No B1G championship in a year in which the conference was clearly down, continuing a multi-year (decade?) trend, as evidenced by its implosion in March.
2) No B1G tourney win
3) No FF despite the clearest path the team has had in recent memory. In the past the justification for this type of exit was "well this team that beat Purdue eventually became national champion" or "this team that beat Purdue played every team tight". But UNC demolished both of those excuses. Absolutely no excuse for this March performance.

I'll add - if I said to fans prior to the season that the team wouldn't achieve ANY of the goals above, the first question would be: "did Ivey/Edey/Tre blow their ACL? That always happens to us!". But it didn't. The team wasn't hit by the injury bug and got pasted by a team with inferior talent but superior coaching.

On top of all that - teams that the Boilers beat in March clearly improved over the course of the season, where the Boilers were stagnant at best or regressed at worst.

Totally unacceptable in a results-oriented business.

Wow, 15 posts and you lay this turd on us?

 

[BSIT]

This has been a thread that I have been thinking about writing ever since we were eliminated from the tournament. However, I wanted to give it about a week and a half or so to reflect on this last season.

Was this last season a success? That is hard to answer. It depends on how you define success.

It was a great and fun season. We had some many positive moments. We were ranked #1 for the first time in our history. We had 29 wins, and we had another Final 16 appearance in the tournament.

However, we did not win the BT Title and/or Tournament Title this year. Those were definitely both in our grasp, but we failed to make it happen. It was great to get to the second week of the tournament again. However, the Final Four appeared to be in our sight finally this year, but again it did not happen. What made it worse was that one team that we beat early in the season got to the Finals. It seemed like our team peaked too soon and never recovered that momentum that we had early in the season.

To me, it was a satisfying season and one to be proud of. However, I am not sure if I one would classify it as a complete success. I guess I had higher aspirations in my mind on what this team could do. Maybe I was looking through rose colored glasses.

What does everyone else think of this season now that we have had some time to evaluate it?

For settlers yes. For high expectation fans no

 

[BSIT]

Not a success. Purdue has a lottery pick and had arguably the easiest path to the elite 8 that any team will ever have and got pushed around by a 15 seed. Our guards were outplayed by a white guy with a mustache named Doug. I honestly can’t see how anyone could see this season as successful.

The mullet man will live in infamy

 

[Erock_94]

It really is hard to imagine Purdue going to a final four under Painter. It is what it is I guess, hope I'm wrong.

 

[Chris P Bacon]

It really is hard to imagine Purdue going to a final four under Painter. It is what it is I guess, hope I'm wrong.

I disagree because we were close to being in one under Painter just a few short years ago.

 

[Purdue_BS_90]

It really is hard to imagine Purdue going to a final four under Painter. It is what it is I guess, hope I'm wrong.

How did they almost get to one? It took a herculean performance from a once in a generation stud alpha guard. You're not wrong.

 

[Dryfly88]

Stubborn for not bending the knee to the zone folks? You do realize lenny our man D isn't traditional man and is more help/match and has zone elements in it right?

Plus the man D has worked countless times in the past to stop exactly what you say Painter is being stubborn about and got better as the year went on. Come on now Lenny this has been explained to you many times through the season.

"zone folks" if by that term you include people that think CMP was ill prepared for the St, Peters game as well as other games than that group has grown. It wasn't just Barkley. The game day show spent several minutes talking about how poorly prepared PU was. It's very rare for them to spend that kind of time and be that direct in their criticism.
CMP is a good coach, and I don't want him gone. But put me in the "zone folks" group that wants to see some changes. We are so easy to prepare for. Even our substitutions are predictable. Specifically to the zone debate, if you watched any college hoops this past season besides the B1G, you would see numerous times that switching even briefly to a zone changed the course of the game. Duke, UNC and Kansas to just name a few, used zones to effectively change up games. They are all primarily M to M defensive teams, but they all have zone in the bag when they need it.
I'm sick of people on here acting like suggesting zone is some sort of crazy concept that couldn't possibly help. Those folks need to watch more games than just B1G. Our conference hasn't won a championship in 23 years. Maybe it's time we stop being a "man to man" league (CMP used that phrase). That press conference where he went on that rant about why he doesn't play zone was embarrassing. Some on here thought he really "gave it to the reporter". Far from it. The only part that was accurate was when he said "I don't know how to teach it". He needs to find an assistant that does.

 

[CraigAllen]

This has been a thread that I have been thinking about writing ever since we were eliminated from the tournament. However, I wanted to give it about a week and a half or so to reflect on this last season.

Was this last season a success? That is hard to answer. It depends on how you define success.

It was a great and fun season. We had some many positive moments. We were ranked #1 for the first time in our history. We had 29 wins, and we had another Final 16 appearance in the tournament.

However, we did not win the BT Title and/or Tournament Title this year. Those were definitely both in our grasp, but we failed to make it happen. It was great to get to the second week of the tournament again. However, the Final Four appeared to be in our sight finally this year, but again it did not happen. What made it worse was that one team that we beat early in the season got to the Finals. It seemed like our team peaked too soon and never recovered that momentum that we had early in the season.

To me, it was a satisfying season and one to be proud of. However, I am not sure if I one would classify it as a complete success. I guess I had higher aspirations in my mind on what this team could do. Maybe I was looking through rose colored glasses.

What does everyone else think of this season now that we have had some time to evaluate it?

It was very disappointing and they underachieved and Peaked too early. They didn’t win the Big Ten regular season, Big Ten Tourney, Final 4 And lost to 15seed St. Peter’s.

 

[pubill]

I agree with all of this. But....but....Painter has been at Purdue 18 years and has 1 E8 and many upsets from double digit seeds.
Many on here think that he's earned the right to be here as long as he wants as long as he wins 20 and gets to the tourney. That should really be the minimum expectation.
i do think Painter has adapted to realizing you need an alpha ball handling scoring guard, and that's been reflected in his guard recruiting (to some extent) since Edwards.
The reality is, the program makes money, which to the administration, is far more important than the W/L column.
As long as Mackey stays full, Painter is safe.

Matt is a Top 20 coach in the nation, to even talk of firing him is idiot.

 

[bonefish1]

Stubborn for not bending the knee to the zone folks? You do realize lenny our man D isn't traditional man and is more help/match and has zone elements in it right?

Plus the man D has worked countless times in the past to stop exactly what you say Painter is being stubborn about and got better as the year went on. Come on now Lenny this has been explained to you many times through the season.

What you're referring to is called a "switching D". It's pretty simple really. Not surprised you don't quite get it.
It doesn't change the fact that when your guards can't stop dribble penetration or defend the high PnR, you should do something different.

 

[cgnops]

Depends on which set of expectations i choose as the basis of success. Prior to the start of last season I said I would be happy to end up top third in the big ten and get to the sweet 16. After we saw all the potential, I like others expected more from the team.

 

[bonefish1]

"zone folks" if by that term you include people that think CMP was ill prepared for the St, Peters game as well as other games than that group has grown. It wasn't just Barkley. The game day show spent several minutes talking about how poorly prepared PU was. It's very rare for them to spend that kind of time and be that direct in their criticism.
CMP is a good coach, and I don't want him gone. But put me in the "zone folks" group that wants to see some changes. We are so easy to prepare for. Even our substitutions are predictable. Specifically to the zone debate, if you watched any college hoops this past season besides the B1G, you would see numerous times that switching even briefly to a zone changed the course of the game. Duke, UNC and Kansas to just name a few, used zones to effectively change up games. They are all primarily M to M defensive teams, but they all have zone in the bag when they need it.
I'm sick of people on here acting like suggesting zone is some sort of crazy concept that couldn't possibly help. Those folks need to watch more games than just B1G. Our conference hasn't won a championship in 23 years. Maybe it's time we stop being a "man to man" league (CMP used that phrase). That press conference where he went on that rant about why he doesn't play zone was embarrassing. Some on here thought he really "gave it to the reporter". Far from it. The only part that was accurate was when he said "I don't know how to teach it". He needs to find an assistant that does.

Easy to predict is easy to prepare for.

 

[Chris P Bacon]

"zone folks" if by that term you include people that think CMP was ill prepared for the St, Peters game as well as other games than that group has grown. It wasn't just Barkley. The game day show spent several minutes talking about how poorly prepared PU was. It's very rare for them to spend that kind of time and be that direct in their criticism.
CMP is a good coach, and I don't want him gone. But put me in the "zone folks" group that wants to see some changes. We are so easy to prepare for. Even our substitutions are predictable. Specifically to the zone debate, if you watched any college hoops this past season besides the B1G, you would see numerous times that switching even briefly to a zone changed the course of the game. Duke, UNC and Kansas to just name a few, used zones to effectively change up games. They are all primarily M to M defensive teams, but they all have zone in the bag when they need it.
I'm sick of people on here acting like suggesting zone is some sort of crazy concept that couldn't possibly help. Those folks need to watch more games than just B1G. Our conference hasn't won a championship in 23 years. Maybe it's time we stop being a "man to man" league (CMP used that phrase). That press conference where he went on that rant about why he doesn't play zone was embarrassing. Some on here thought he really "gave it to the reporter". Far from it. The only part that was accurate was when he said "I don't know how to teach it". He needs to find an assistant that does.

I don't disagree with your post and I know you weren't talking to me, but our problem against SPU wasn't the defense we ran but the amount of turnovers we had that gave them a bunch of free points. Especially in the first half and we just dug too deep of a hole because of it.

While zone isn't some crazy concept, it also isn't remotely a silver bullet that this thread seems to indicate that it is. Especially when there were larger issues than the defense we played and those issues impacted us the most all season long.

I'm not anti-zone at all, I just think the focus on what to fix is in the wrong order.

 

[BBG]

What you're referring to is called a "switching D". It's pretty simple really. Not surprised you don't quite get it.
It doesn't change the fact that when your guards can't stop dribble penetration or defend the high PnR, you should do something different.

Lenny this has been explained to you countless times, so the only one not getting it is you.

Guard penetration wasn't even our biggest flaw on defense as we were shot over ALOT which zone would do squat against.

 

[bonefish1]

Lenny this has been explained to you countless times, so the only one not getting it is you.

Guard penetration wasn't even our biggest flaw on defense as we were shot over ALOT which zone would do squat against.

BBQ,
I know you think every decision Painter makes is the correct one, but you don't understand why the defense struggled.
The other benefit of a zone is that it forces the other team to adapt. As of now, the only defense an opposing team needs to prepare for is man to man. And when the opposing coach finds who he can expose in the defense, it makes it easier to game plan against.

 

[pboiler18]

In short no, it was not a success.

Wasn’t a total disaster either but 3-4 games in a different direction we would certainly feel better about the year.

 

[BBG]

BBQ,
I know you think every decision Painter makes is the correct one, but you don't understand why the defense struggled.
The other benefit of a zone is that it forces the other team to adapt. As of now, the only defense an opposing team needs to prepare for is man to man. And when the opposing coach finds who he can expose in the defense, it makes it easier to game plan against.

Lenny

I know you think Painter never makes the right decision, but you don't understand how defense works.

When man to man is executed effectively, you can't prepare for it. We've seen that happen with Painter's teams many times in the past. You as usual are just choosing to ignore those fact.

And now you will predictably move the goalposts.

Here is a good read for you Lenny:

Rec Basketball - Zone or Man-to-Man Defense? | Calgary Sport & Social Club

www.calgarysportsclub.com

It's for a rec league but still applies. Especially when it comes to your basketball "knowledge".

I'm heading out for the day, so have a good one. One day we will get to have that beer

 

[Chris P Bacon]

The whole zone vs man debate is silly anyway because neither are wrong answers and neither are a magic bullet.

Plus let's also keep in mind that the college game is less about defense and more about offense. That change has been happening for a few years now so what we do on defense is becoming more and more irrelevant in my opinion.

We need to score and score a lot of points in all facets and with how the game is getting called by some poor officials, playing good defense of any kind is likely a thing of the past.

 

[KenTre1983]

I definitely think this is true.

Any Final Four run by Purdue is unexpected.

 

[bonefish1]

Lenny

I know you think Painter never makes the right decision, but you don't understand how defense works.

When man to man is executed effectively, you can't prepare for it. We've seen that happen with Painter's teams many times in the past. You as usual are just choosing to ignore those fact.

And now you will predictably move the goalposts.

Here is a good read for you Lenny:

Rec Basketball - Zone or Man-to-Man Defense? | Calgary Sport & Social Club

www.calgarysportsclub.com

It's for a rec league but still applies. Especially when it comes to your basketball "knowledge".

I'm heading out for the day, so have a good one. One day we will get to have that beer

It would be rude of me to turn down a free beer.

 

[*4purdue*]

Stubborn for not bending the knee to the zone folks? You do realize lenny our man D isn't traditional man and is more help/match and has zone elements in it right?

Plus the man D has worked countless times in the past to stop exactly what you say Painter is being stubborn about and got better as the year went on. Come on now Lenny this has been explained to you many times through the season.

Pulling your center away from the basket to guard on the perimeter is not a "zone element". If anything, we are as far away from a zone as you can get. Painter doesn't even switch on D. He prefers to be into the defender more than any team I've watched. When you don't have the athletes or players don't buy in, this year is an example of what happens.

 

[HoosierfanJM]

Pulling your center away from the basket to guard on the perimeter is not a "zone element". If anything, we are as far away from a zone as you can get. Painter doesn't even switch on D. He prefers to be into the defender more than any team I've watched. When you don't have the athletes or players don't buy in, this year is an example of what happens.

For sure, and Painter's roster construction necessitates that. When you have a lineup of 6'3" - 6'8" athletes, switching many screens can be effective if done properly. However, when Edey and Isaiah Thompson were in the lineup together, switching screens can be a real problem.

Painter is smart and recognizes this. Not switching is better when opponent bigs cannot hit perimeter shots - if the opponent has a big that Edey doesn't need to pop out to, both him and the guard can cover the opponent's guard on a 25 foot out hedge, and Edey can try to recover before the big gets to the rim. When the big was a someone like Bingham that can hit a three that's a problem.

 

[ghostoffatjack]

Simple answer is yes it was!

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

Hard to call it a success when the only hardware they won was a silver bowl of CheezIts in November. A pretty good team that maybe raised expectations to a level that was destined to disappoint. They were #1 in the country for one game. Wisconsin and Illinois basically begged Purdue to share the title with them, but they simply refused. Made it to the conference tournament final and lost. And of course, the cherry on the sundae losing to a 15 seed in the sweet 16 who were then easily dealt with and dismissed by the 8 seed that Purdue had beat earlier in the season.

Personally, and it seems cynical, but I did not really enjoy this season as much as some in the past and I think it’s because the expectations made every game stressful: wins were basically just a sense of relief and losses seemed more painful.

Win either Big Ten or Big Ten tournament or get into FF and it would have met expectations that were lofty back in November. None of that happened. It was disappointing.

That said, we won't have those lofty expectations this year. Will be interesting to see how they can perform without the targets on their back. Losing two NBA players and a few portal transfers will make for an interesting off season.

 

[Gman544]

"zone folks" if by that term you include people that think CMP was ill prepared for the St, Peters game as well as other games than that group has grown. It wasn't just Barkley. The game day show spent several minutes talking about how poorly prepared PU was. It's very rare for them to spend that kind of time and be that direct in their criticism.
CMP is a good coach, and I don't want him gone. But put me in the "zone folks" group that wants to see some changes. We are so easy to prepare for. Even our substitutions are predictable. Specifically to the zone debate, if you watched any college hoops this past season besides the B1G, you would see numerous times that switching even briefly to a zone changed the course of the game. Duke, UNC and Kansas to just name a few, used zones to effectively change up games. They are all primarily M to M defensive teams, but they all have zone in the bag when they need it.
I'm sick of people on here acting like suggesting zone is some sort of crazy concept that couldn't possibly help. Those folks need to watch more games than just B1G. Our conference hasn't won a championship in 23 years. Maybe it's time we stop being a "man to man" league (CMP used that phrase). That press conference where he went on that rant about why he doesn't play zone was embarrassing. Some on here thought he really "gave it to the reporter". Far from it. The only part that was accurate was when he said "I don't know how to teach it". He needs to find an assistant that does.

"zone folks" if by that term you include people that think CMP was ill prepared for the St, Peters game as well as other games than that group has grown. It wasn't just Barkley. The game day show spent several minutes talking about how poorly prepared PU was. It's very rare for them to spend that kind of time and be that direct in their criticism.
CMP is a good coach, and I don't want him gone. But put me in the "zone folks" group that wants to see some changes. We are so easy to prepare for. Even our substitutions are predictable. Specifically to the zone debate, if you watched any college hoops this past season besides the B1G, you would see numerous times that switching even briefly to a zone changed the course of the game. Duke, UNC and Kansas to just name a few, used zones to effectively change up games. They are all primarily M to M defensive teams, but they all have zone in the bag when they need it.
I'm sick of people on here acting like suggesting zone is some sort of crazy concept that couldn't possibly help. Those folks need to watch more games than just B1G. Our conference hasn't won a championship in 23 years. Maybe it's time we stop being a "man to man" league (CMP used that phrase). That press conference where he went on that rant about why he doesn't play zone was embarrassing. Some on here thought he really "gave it to the reporter". Far from it. The only part that was accurate was when he said "I don't know how to teach it". He needs to find an assistant that does.

Zone only crazy if not part of plan from the beginning of the year including preseason practice. You can’t just suddenly decide to play zone.

 

[rsomm]

What a bunch of Marshmallows! What have we become! I'm a proud Boiler! I will cheer on the men and women who represent us! Quit your damn crying!

 

[BoilerAndy]

I'm seeing all of these old, worn-out reasons why Purdue lost. Painter, the team, and anyone who watched can tell you that turnovers cost them every game they lost. It worked for them most of the season, but for some reason they thought that they could outscore every opponent, even with fewer possessions. They never learned from their losses. Clearly zone defense was not going to save them when they gave up so many possessions.

 

[Dryfly88]

Zone only crazy if not part of plan from the beginning of the year including preseason practice. You can’t just suddenly decide to play zone.

No one is suggesting we "suddenly" play it. It should have been in the arsenal all season.

 

[Dryfly88]

I don't disagree with your post and I know you weren't talking to me, but our problem against SPU wasn't the defense we ran but the amount of turnovers we had that gave them a bunch of free points. Especially in the first half and we just dug too deep of a hole because of it.

While zone isn't some crazy concept, it also isn't remotely a silver bullet that this thread seems to indicate that it is. Especially when there were larger issues than the defense we played and those issues impacted us the most all season long.

I'm not anti-zone at all, I just think the focus on what to fix is in the wrong order.

You're new. This is a very long debate on here. It isn't about just the St Peters game. Stick around long enough and you'll see how this goes. Some say CMP knows everything and he doesn't believe in the effectiveness of zone. Then there are some of us (me included) that would love to see it in the bag of options. No one is suggesting it's a magic bullet. What I would suggest is people watch more than just the B1G and you'll see how effective switching defenses can be. Coach K and Bill Self are just 2 examples of very successful coaches that love to play man to man. But they both also have zones to go to when needed.

 

[*4purdue*]

You're new. This is a very long debate on here. It isn't about just the St Peters game. Stick around long enough and you'll see how this goes. Some say CMP knows everything and he doesn't believe in the effectiveness of zone. Then there are some of us (me included) that would love to see it in the bag of options. No one is suggesting it's a magic bullet. What I would suggest is people watch more than just the B1G and you'll see how effective switching defenses can be. Coach K and Bill Self are just 2 examples of very successful coaches that love to play man to man. But they both also have zones to go to when needed.

Not only that, but if you can play a zone, then you can also more effectively practice against it, which makes your offense better and perhaps eliminates a few turnovers.

 

[Owl73]

Ranked #10 in the final poll.
Sweet 16 in the NCAA Tournament.

 

[titaniumbolt]

Ranked #10 in the final poll.
Sweet 16 in the NCAA Tournament.

Where is this compared to pre-season expectations?