Zeke Nnaji's Visit
- Thread starter TooPoorToBleedGold
- Start date
So, are you saying that it bothers you that arguably the two best Purdue players in the last 30 years (at least from a recruit ranking perspective) Glenn Robinson and Biggie, left school early and didn't get degrees?
Just like I tell my wife, "it's now always what you say, but how you say it"
There's a reason why some people are great motivators, great teachers, great politicians, great salesmen, great recruiters. It's all about how they sell the opportunity, overcome objections, differentiate themselves. It's that special something that makes great recruiters great and average recruiters average. For some reason, Painter hasn't (yet) found that special something that gets these top 50 kids say "Yes, you've sold me on Purdue."
This is absolutely part of the salesmanship part of recruiting. I'm not saying 'lie', but sometimes you tell someone what they 'want' or 'need' to hear. There's a lot of grey area and the best recruiters can work within that space.
If the no BS were that great of a recruiting tactic, we'd have landed more that 1 top 50 players in his 14 years at Purdue.
Not at all - especially since Biggie plans on eventually getting his degree. The only thing tougher than making the NBA is staying in the NBA, so I want Purdue players to make good decisions for the rest of their lives. If the NBA is the right move for a kid, they should go for it, but that is a big if.
That's not specific. What are they not doing or saying, in your mind? It appears that the only people who have "it" are the head coaches at UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona, Louisville, UCLA, MSU, Oregon, and a few others that seem to load up every year on the Top 50 players. Some of the other schools out of the 350 total are able to get one occasionally, but not on a regular basis.
So, as much as I'd like to think that all you have to do is say the right words, in the right tone, and with a sincere look on your face, I've been around long enough to know that if it was that easy, the coaching staff and administration at Purdue would have figured it out and would be putting it to use. And so would at least some of the other 330-340 schools that don't seem to know the obvious.
There are only 30-40 schools capable of landing a 5* player not 330-340(Purdue is one of them).
I'm guessing you arent in sales as a profession are you? For a given product, good salesmen will outsell poor salesmen every time.
Imo, Purdue should be recruiting on the same level as schools like IU, OSU, Missouri, and Vanderbilt.
Big Dog may have left school early, but he did work hard and did complete his Purdue degree in Communications.
I believe we need to point that out more to recruits tha t we care about their education, but if they are ready for the NBA , we should support tha t decision, and as a school, we will be there to support them in finishing their degree.
I like the truthful sales pitch. but sometimes, I think we sell ourselves short of all the things we can offer. I believe we all agree painter is tremendous at developing 3 star talent into becoming great players and potential NBA prospects. But what we need to also say is he can develop elite prospects into NCAA players of the year.
I believe we need to point that out more to recruits tha t we care about their education, but if they are ready for the NBA , we should support tha t decision, and as a school, we will be there to support them in finishing their degree.
I like the truthful sales pitch. but sometimes, I think we sell ourselves short of all the things we can offer. I believe we all agree painter is tremendous at developing 3 star talent into becoming great players and potential NBA prospects. But what we need to also say is he can develop elite prospects into NCAA players of the year.
Coming home from what sounds to have been very positive experience visiting Purdue as well as very nice comments about CMP, I find it quite troubling to hear the father speaking about UNC's offer to include the words "They make a pretty good case."
Had this been before the visit I wouldn't have thought much of it. However, immediately following would not seem to be a positive.
Had this been before the visit I wouldn't have thought much of it. However, immediately following would not seem to be a positive.
Until they don't get to play the position that was promised to them.
Yea, and if CMP has to start a player of Brooks talent at the 2 instead of the 3 to start the year, then that shouldn't be a big deal. Give it a shot. If it doenst work, then switch it up. I think we may see that with the team this year as well.
You need to look at the data. For the 2018 class, 5 or 6 schools took something like 80% of the 5* players. Some got 3 and some got 2. I posted the exact data in another thread and I'm not interested enough to find it. The data is available on multiple sites. So if you are telling me that there are only about 10 good, honest salesmen who dominate the recruiting landscape, then I will have to say that they are so rare that there is little chance of luring them away from those schools and adding them to the Purdue staff. And the dishonest ones, we don't want.
But if you are in sales and you know specifically what the coaching staff should start doing and what they should stop doing, please share it.
Last edited:
Wrong Pickerington player. It was Manley. He was the Big that was injured the year prior and was really breaking out his senior year. North Carolina swooped in right before his decision and snagged him. Once that happened, Francis was practically a lock for UNC.
You guys seem to think our starting positions are worth the same as elite schools backups, there's no way that's the case. It's been proven time and time again that guys are looking for those 25-30 starting spots on elite teams and it's better to be right behind someone on an elite team than it is to be "the man" at Secondary U.
Besides, these guys have been the man their whole life, they think they'll take the job from the starter. We'll always get the 50+ guys cause that's who we are.
Besides, these guys have been the man their whole life, they think they'll take the job from the starter. We'll always get the 50+ guys cause that's who we are.
When is the last time Purdue got a top 40 out of state guy?.... history shows me this isn't likely happening.
If it does... CMP has taken recruiting to a new level...but I am not holding my breath on this one.
If it does... CMP has taken recruiting to a new level...but I am not holding my breath on this one.
Fair enough. Ironically Francis has been injured for over a year now and doesn’t look like he will play his senior season.
I don't know what Painter is or isn't saying when he's in front of a recruit. All i can do is form an opinion based on results and at this point, you absolutely cannot argue that his recruiting message/style is effective in landing Top 50 players.
How did places like Oregon, Baylor, Florida, Nova, suddenly become destinations for top 50 players? Pure luck? Nope....
When you consider Purdue, they've had 2 coaches in the last 39 years, and the second one was a disciple of the first. So, as far as culture, coaching philosophy and perception of the program, not a lot has changed, and interestingly, Painter has shown to struggle in the tourney much like Keady did.
Not true. Being a starter at PU, playing in a great arena, on TV, with great fan support and facilities is 100 times better than sitting on the bench at UNC, Duke or Kentucky. And if our coaching staff can't sell a starting position over a bench position, then we've really got problems in recruiting.
To those of us that are Purdue fans, that may be true, but you're not a recruit so there is no way you can know how Hall, as an example, viewed it. IMO Boilerscuz is probably closer to the truth about it all than not. I mean the evidence is in schools that are picked over us.
I think equating recruiting to sales is a bad analogy and it's more likely in line with selling your house. Assuming the "house" is the recruit, you take the best offer on the table. I would bet that every pitch he got told him he could play immediately for the school recruiting him. So basically everyone is giving the same "offer", from there it is up to the recruit to pick what he feels is the best one. Just like when you put your house up for sale.
I do have to ask, with as much certainty of the recruiting process that you seem to think you have, I ask have you ever gone through it? Or rather since going through it today I imagine is different than 30 years ago, have you had kids go through it? I'm not asking to be snarky, I am genuinely curious.
in another thread it talks about TV and the media effect in general. The evolution has already started and ALL the things that may affect a player's decision are evolving. Hope the progress continues and when the pieces go together...injuries don't!
You're right in that we as Purdue fans look at Purdue with rose colored glasses and can't understand why any recruit would turn us down. Valid point.
I personally haven't gone through the recruiting process. So, I can't speak from direct experience. And if I had, I agree, it's probably much different today than when I was that age. But, as you say, recruits have a list of criteria they're looking for in a coach/program. When it gets down to the final 3-5 schools they're considering, you have to assume those schools meet most of the criteria (otherwise they wouldn't make the final list). IMHO, it then becomes a battle of the sales pitch and official visits. I think this is where the great recruiters separate themselves and are really able to sell the player what he needs/wants.
What is Izzo doing to consistently beat Painter in head to head recruiting battles? You could argue that it's tourney success but if that's the case, how have programs like Vandy, Oregon, Baylor and other non-basketball schools started pulling in 5 star talent?
Thanks for the response. The only thing I will comment on is the last paragraph and I think it goes back to that whizzo is simply saying "you'll get starter minutes" or even giving the exact same message Painter does, but is coming from the bight and shiny MSU.
Plus lets also be honest, the recruit is going to have to take some harder classes than what MSU probably makes them do, which would be an interesting study, so that could be a factor.
Basically I don't think there is one answer for everything. Purdue is going to get 4 star recruits and have to develop 3 stars along the way. That really is just who we are and I don't even think a deep tourney run will change that image. But what I do know is that trying to figure out what a teenager is thinking will just drive you crazy.
Let's be a little realistic here. Purdue does have some real recruiting disadvantages if you take off the gold&black colored glasses.
- Tougher academic requirements for athletes. No general studies after sophomore year.
- Unattractive campus. No hills, streams, woods, etc.
- Location is not near an attractive large city. Cannot match some of the better small towns like Ann Arbor either.
- Location - North central Indiana is hot and humid in the summer, and can be cold and snowy in the winter. I personally dislike that Indiana weather myself.
- No final four in recent memory. No natty since 1932.
I disagree that there's anything bright and shiny about msu, other than izzo can talk about tourny runs and the lack there of under Painter. If I were him, that's certainly what I would highlight.
Comparing msu and Purdue, other than the coaches:
WL vs EL: even, slight ad to WL. EL is a crap hole.
Breslin vs Mackey: maybe a slight advantage to the BC, only because it's newer. But Mackey is always cited as a great arena by the national media.
Fan support: even
Recruiting base: Purdue; IN has been pumping out top talent
Recruiting competition: even
Academics: not applicable (I'll never buy into the argument that we lose a recruit, especially a 5 star, because they're afraid of the academics. Painter and MBob would make that a non-problem if it were. That's just the nature of big time college athletics).
Fair enough. I disagree with your points because we all have a Boilermaker view of things. That and I just don't think we are going to agree.
But was a good discussion and name calling free!
Jesus H Christ.....here was go again with "Why is it tough to recruit to Purdue?"
Everything other than the head coach and getting players to the next level is BS.
1) As it relates to general studies: How many 5 stars are still in school after their Soph year?
2) No hills, streams, woods? Are you serious? You think a 5 star recruit gives 2 shit$ about that crap. In that case, there's no beach either and it gets cold in the winter......
3) PU is 2 hours from Chicago and 1 hour from Indy. But, how is that relevant? You think the players are going to the opera and then the hot clubs when they aren't at practice or games? This isn't the Hurricane's football team of the late 80's.....
4) Weather: Here we go again....If weather mattered, why isn't the SEC dominating basketball and football? How do schools like MSU, UM, OSU, recruit well? They have the same weather as PU.
5) This is your only legitimate objection. All the others were fluff and BS.
That sounds good and we as fans want to believe that's the way we all think, but it really isn't. I mean, this is basketball message board. How many of your 5,000 combined posts on GBI was about something other than games, players, scores, recruiting, winning, losing, rivalries, etc.? I'm going to venture a guess it's under 10%. How many message boards do you post on related to university and/or community affairs? Do you have an equal number of posts and time spent there? This isn't a knock on you, just trying to make a point; we're all here for the same thing.
There's a reason Brian doesn't operate a pay site that recaps player's grades, their community service projects, how many old ladies they helped cross the street, etc. If he did, he'd be out of business by the time he finished writing his first article. It's ok to be transparent that winning - so long as it's done cleanly and without scandal - is one of the single most important things to a college basketball fans, Purdue included. I think it's a little silly to pretend that "all the other stuff" is really why we're here or what we find most important in the world of sports.
You realize we are talking about 17 year old high school kids, right? You talk like these 5 star kids are arrow straight and only focused on the game. They are not. Two coaches make almost equally attractive offers. So what then do they use to decide where to play?
Why would they not notice how the campus looks, or the urban decay in downtown Lafayette? You say they don't care. Well if all things are equal, you might find making a choice starts to hinge on the little things like how isolated and insular the Purdue campus is compared to some of these other schools.
You are right, Chicago is 2 hours away, and it takes an hour and a half to get to Indianapolis. That is not like Villanova in Philly, or UM actually in Ann Arbor. That is exactly what I mean. That disadvantage is real. It almost stopped me from going to the school. I happen to enjoy the urban environment, and there is damned little of it in west Lafayette. Your dismissive approach to this particular issue is a pretty weak argument.
I can also guarantee that Purdue kids must attend tougher classes than athletes at North Carolina or Ohio State. Look back some time on what Oden took at OSU. What a joke! Even if leaving after the first year, the classes are still tougher.
Like I said, other schools who apparently land these mighty 5 star recruits may share some of the disadvantages but none of them share all of them.
I tend to agree:
1. Even schools like Purdue have easier (not easy, easier) options for athletes. It's not a coincidence that nearly every member of the team is an Organizational Leadership major. Same for Sports Communications at IU.
2. I do think the lack of high-end green space, outdoor space, whatever has an impact from a first impressions standpoint. I don't think it's anything a kid actually considers, but maybe more of a subconscious thing when reflecting on their campus tours. It's a bonus point I guess.
3. Big City proximity is totally irrelevant. Sure, it's a nice added bonus to be able to talk about, but I bet the average Northwestern athlete doesn't venture into downtown Chicago but a few times a year, for example. They have practice, training, mandatory study times, etc. It's got to be practically impossible to get away from campus for more than a few hours for well over half the school year.
4. Nailed it.
5. Math is right. It hurts because it's seen by recruits as that a deep run or NCAA title can't be done (or that it would be extremely hard to accomplish). Which is not entirely true; Purdue's been capable of deeps run with a couple teams, just didn't make it happen.
I might add to your one statement. North Western kids generally hang out in Evanston, which is a beautiful city on the lake with lots of interesting stores in a vibrant downtown. However, we don't often compete with NW for 5 star recruits.
But, NU has everything a recruit should be looking for, right? But, tough academics (umm.....Duke is considered a good school). Why can't NU land 5 stars?
And having lived on the N side of Chicago for 19 years, I'm very familiar with Evanston. It's nothing special and I would say it lacks the college environment of a town like WL.
So I snagged this from the article on the front page, but I think it helps support that whatever goes on in the process, Painter is pitching things the right way and other factors are part of the decision:
From Zeke's dad:
"Some people were like, 'Purdue?' It was, 'Yeah, you have to watch their games. That guy can coach.'"
From Zeke's dad:
"Some people were like, 'Purdue?' It was, 'Yeah, you have to watch their games. That guy can coach.'"
Duke basketball players are clustered in the Sociology major, and take 1-2 classes per semester at another local college (NCCU.)
I agree.
All factors are relevant, and here's another one (disclaimer - I am in no way trying to judge) that absolutely matters to a 17 year old basketball recruit:
The perceived quality and quantity of smiling, attractive members of the opposite sex during a campus tour, night out with the team, and assessment thereof during private social media interactions with potential teammates and friends at a school is a real factor. Of course, in reality D1 basketball players can find incredibly attractive options at any school, but those 17 year old players minds are taking careful stock of the atmosphere during visits and judging accordingly.
IU is 49% male and 51% female, and with lots of liberal arts students.
Purdue is 57% male and 43% female.
In my opinion, that is a real, built in recruiting advantage.
(now - commence Louisville jokes!)
Last edited:
I try not to read too much into twitter accounts but Nnaji recently retweeted 2 things about UNC offer and nothing from Purdue visit. I don't have an account so I can't see what his likes are. He hasn't put anything about other visits either except for a retweet of him and Russell Westbrook.
Almost reminds me of when Bruce Brown had official to us and next day committed to Miami
Almost reminds me of when Bruce Brown had official to us and next day committed to Miami
Being an iu fan, and possibly an iu grad, I can understand your difficulty with translating those percentages into real world numbers.
For example, iu has 33,000 undergrads, Purdue 31,000
iu: 16,170 males/16,830 female
PU: 17,670 males/13,330 female
Put another way, in a large class with 100 students, do you think a recruit is going to notice there are 14 more males than females in the room?
Unless you're taking a recruit on a tour of the engineering departments, a recruit isn't going to notice the m/f ratios.
