It wouldn't shock me to see a close game through the first half with Purdue gaining/extending a lead in the later part of the 2nd half with Purdue winning by around 12 points. That is hardly a blowout.
I still marvel that Thieneman was a highly sought after portal guy. The games I watched him play this year, his tackling skills were abysmal and he had the speed of an 85 year old nursing home resident. The hype around him was unbelievable and he had some of the worst fundamentals I ever saw.
I don't care if Purdue shoots terrible I see now way we win this game. We have not beaten a winning big ten team yet and got destroyed by Illinois who is the only real good big ten team we have played so far . I will eat total crow if it is close but i see Woodson getting his clock cleaned by 20 plus.
Despite the fact that someone posted the list of double-digit seeds that beat RMK and Izzo (and were as many as Painter) in a thread that you posted in, you seem to be so obtuse that you remain ignorant of it. Or else you choose to intentionally and blatantly ignore the data. Here's the thing: respected coaches in the tourney get upset quite often. It happens. That's why they call it March Madness, long shots occur, especially in a one-shot situation.
lol, which is why you guys are all sobbing on the MSU board and about MSU on X?
It is very clear that he regressed substantially from his freshman year this past season. I attribute it to some combination of hubris and really bad coaching. I never got lining him, or anyone else, up regularly 25 yards from scrimmage. I attribute his portal attractiveness to a coach's belief that "...I can fix that guy."
It didn't take RMK or Izzo 25 years to make a FF. Painter isn't in their league. RMK and Izzo have done way more than shit the bed in March. RMK lost one friggin' game in 2 years. A blind squirrel finally found a nut: maybe Crean would have as well if he got 20 years. Good for Painter for finally busting his cherry, but let's not pretend that last year was the norm.
I would agree that the MSU game is bigger right now for standings, although a loss to IU would be harmful. I stated as much before.
On the other hand, RMK and Izzo didn't have to convince recruits to live in W Lafayette.
Making a final four requires some luck along the way but you still have to be a good coach to get your team to one. I can pretty much guarantee if woodson was here 20 years he would still never make a final four. Creean possibly could have he had done it once before.
Mike Davis, Steve Fisher, Bruce Weber were ok coaches. Blind squirrels do find nuts from time to time.
I note that you are now changing the discussion from the number of double-digit losses to the exact number of the double-digit. Izzo lost to a 15, Knight to a 14. To be honest, I really don't see that much of a difference. It's a big upset. I realize that you want to make a big deal of it but I honestly do not see significant difference between a 14, a 15 and a 16 seeded team. It is a large loss and the distinction is rather small in my opinion.
NIL makes that sale a bit easier, although they pay mid at best so the big boys won't be interested.
Who is nervous and triggered? Just read this thread. Many IU fans here are posting that the score difference in Purdue's favor will be large. Given that and who they are, you are now going to claim that it is the Purdue fans that are anxious? As a general rule, fans of a particular team are supporters and thus tend towards optimism. I have yet to read a Purdue fan expecting an IU win on Friday. That doesn't mean that it can't happen, but it is certainly not expected. You are simply kidding yourself if you think that is true.
Long winded. The difference is how long it took RMK and Izzo to reach Final Fours, how many Final Fours they went to, how many championships they have won, and how much they won. RMK lost one game in two years. Painter is not in RMK's or Izzo's league. Painter normally shits the bed in the NCAA's. You were the one that put Painter in the same sentence as RMK and Izzo, and I corrected you.
There is a logical inconsistency in your posts. You criticize Painter as a coach, citing it took him a long time to make a Final Four while simultaneously holding that making a Final Four is not a mark of coaching prowess. You missed a course in Logic somewhere in your education. Try reading up on the Aristotelian Law of the Excluded Middle.
1942??? WOW! All the plaques at Pearl are in error. Typical PUke. Dumber than a bag of hair. PUking Up!
Nobody is talking about what ifs because one can never be sure of what will happen in the future. But we can say that a certain event, e.g. an injury, can affect the probability of an outcome. In a one and done situation, the less favored outcome has a better chance of happening because the rule of larger numbers tells you that the a larger data set will reflect the initial probability distribution more closely.
I have always said that the blueprint for any program that’s rebuilding is you absolutely have to find a sitting coach somewhere who can bring his staff (or a good portion of them) with him and install their system and their “program.” Hiring a coordinator from some place or some guy that has to piece together a staff is hard to accomplish anything at programs that do not have 5-star talent. Looks like Purdue went for the right blueprint at least this time.
So, you put Larry Bird on the 1974-75 through 1977-78 teams with a healthy Scott May: is that 1-3 more championships IU wins? A healthy Landon Turner, Ted Kitchel, and Isiah Thomas: is that another 1-2 IU championships? How about a healthy Alan Henderson? What if George McGinnis sticks around? PU doesn't have the market cornered on injuries, and we aren't talking about a Scott May or Alan Henderson, are we? Your excuses are your own.
