We are in the same conference. WE ARE NOT ON THE SAME LEVEL. We'd like to be, are capable, and we are competing to be, but the talent level and attraction has not been in the same level.
If you read my post before, our basketball program spend less than those of all the schools you mentioned.
https://www.jconline.com/story/spor...xpenses-where-purdue-ranks-big-ten/100331366/
In fact, the only school that spend less on their basketball program than Purdue is Rutgers (Penn State's number is also less than Purdue, but as the article states, the number of Penn State does not include salaries and bonuses for the coach and the assistants). We have not invested in the program as much as those top tiers of the conference, so Painter's budget is limited and we are not a destination school, not because of the on-court performance, but because of our location. Remember when the media did a poll on the Big Ten basketball program? Our disadvantage was simple: "the city of West Lafayette. It’s just … not very good."
https://watchstadium.com/news/big-t...k-the-best-jobs-in-the-conference-10-11-2018/
We are ranked higher on that list BECAUSE of the success of Painter, not despite of him. We are just not a place where the high-ranked recruits are eager to come to, and our academic standard is tough.
Again, I'm not saying Purdue can be better. It can. But just thinking it is the natural order of things is idiotic, because it isn't.