I know a lot of you hate Archie...

[HoosierJimbo89]

I'm not arguing that we have higher standards here, of course we do (at least the fans, current administration...maybe not). And I would strongly disagree on the resume of Crean and Painter. Crean has a worse record overall, worse NCAAT record, fewer conference titles. The only difference his Crean had Dwyane Wade one year.

And I don't know what you mean by couldn't I say the same thing about Archie? Is he better here than at Purdue? Who knows? He could probably run Purdue's program more like Dayton's, I guess. Lower expectations/profile might benefit him. But he would still have to play B1G teams that have him figured out here.

You are saying Painter would be better at IU: this is the same reason we brought in Archie. IU thought he would be better here than he was at Dayton, and he had a better NCAA resume than Painter at the time: doesn't always work out that way. It is the same reason any bigger program gives a coach from the minors a shot: you are betting on them adapting, evolving, and doing just as well in the big leagues.

Give Crean credit for finding and landing a player like D Wade, or Oladipo and OG: Painter can't say the same. Crean has been to a FF: neither Keady nor Painter can say that. Crean went to Sweet 16's at IU and won Big Ten Titles, and maybe he goes to an Elite 8 or better if IU gives him 16 or 25 years. You don't get that long at IU, and Crean should have been let go sooner.

 

[Birnk403]

What's inaccurate? That in years 8-11 Painter had two losing records and zero tournament wins or that Painter isn't under any pressure to win because Purdue extended a guy who in years 8-11 had two losing records and zero tournament wins? Pick your poison.

That he’s not under pressure to win. That’s simply not the case for any P5 coach, and it’s crazy to try and spin his tenure at Purdue as being the result of some sort of cruise control standard that they have. It’s a cliche that no basketball person would ever subscribe to because it has zero validity.

 

[Birnk403]

You are saying Painter would be better at IU: this is the same reason we brought in Archie. IU thought he would be better here than he was at Dayton, and he had a better NCAA resume than Painter at the time: doesn't always work out that way. It is the same reason any bigger program gives a coach from the minors a shot: you are betting on them adapting, evolving, and doing just as well in the big leagues.

Give Crean credit for finding and landing a player like D Wade, or Oladipo and OG: Painter can't say the same. Crean has been to a FF: neither Keady nor Painter can say that. Crean went to Sweet 16's at IU and won Big Ten Titles, and maybe he goes to an Elite 8 or better if IU gives him 16 or 25 years. You don't get that long at IU, and Crean should have been let go sooner.

Again, you have zero basis for this, and it makes you look stupid every time you say it.

 

[Coach Geez]

That he’s not under pressure to win. That’s simply not the case for any P5 coach, and it’s crazy to try and spin his tenure at Purdue as being the result of some sort of cruise control standard that they have. It’s a cliche that no basketball person would ever subscribe to because it has zero validity.

He's not under any pressure to win big, clearly. What program with F4 and/or National Title aspirations is extending a coach who in years 8-11 had two losing seasons and zero tournament wins? Get back to me on that.

 

[Birnk403]

He's not under any pressure to win big, clearly. What program with F4 and/or National Title aspirations is extending a coach who in years 8-11 had two losing seasons and zero tournament wins? Get back to me on that.

Once again, you really have no clue. This is laughable as your assertion about an “industry standard” to recruit decommitments after a coaching change. It wasn’t close to reality, nor is your view of Painter and Purdue. Stop pretending that you understand this stuff. You don’t have a clue.

 

[Sir_Saucy]

You are saying Painter would be better at IU: this is the same reason we brought in Archie. IU thought he would be better here than he was at Dayton, and he had a better NCAA resume than Painter at the time: doesn't always work out that way. It is the same reason any bigger program gives a coach from the minors a shot: you are betting on them adapting, evolving, and doing just as well in the big leagues.

Give Crean credit for finding and landing a player like D Wade, or Oladipo and OG: Painter can't say the same. Crean has been to a FF: neither Keady nor Painter can say that. Crean went to Sweet 16's at IU and won Big Ten Titles, and maybe he goes to an Elite 8 or better if IU gives him 16 or 25 years. You don't get that long at IU, and Crean should have been let go sooner.

Good point on the Painter/Miller comparison there, maybe (probably) IU would be too big for Painter back in 06 or 07 when he started.

But Painter's biggest flaw is recruiting, which is much easier to do here. So easy even Crean/Miller get kids that weren't even considering Purdue, to bring my argument back full circle I will bring that up again.

 

[Coach Geez]

Good point on the Painter/Miller comparison there, maybe (probably) IU would be too big for Painter back in 06 or 07 when he started.

But Painter's biggest flaw is recruiting, which is much easier to do here. So easy even Crean/Miller get kids that weren't even considering Purdue, to bring my argument back full circle I will bring that up again.

Crean recruited well at Marquette well before he became IU's coach and has recruited well at Georgia. Spare me this bullshit narrative that Purdue is such a tough place to recruit at. Miller has landed some decent individual talent at Indiana (TJD/Romeo) but has whiffed on some prize recruits. This idea that Painter would walk into any big time basketball program and the 5* would flock is simply nonsense.

 

[Sir_Saucy]

Purdue blew a 7 point lead with less than a minute left against Cincinnati (year 10) and then the following year blew a 13 point lead with 3 minutes left to 12 seed UALR. If that's not choking massively, then I don't know what is. My reading comprehension is fine.

Blowing a 7 point lead with a minute left isn't good, but that happens all the time, especially when the teams playing each other are evenly matched. The loss to UALR was bad, but I believe Chris Beard coached that team, he seems to be doing alright.

But bringing those games up had nothing to do with my point, which is why your reading comprehension is poor.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Good point on the Painter/Miller comparison there, maybe (probably) IU would be too big for Painter back in 06 or 07 when he started.

But Painter's biggest flaw is recruiting, which is much easier to do here. So easy even Crean/Miller get kids that weren't even considering Purdue, to bring my argument back full circle I will bring that up again.

What do you say about a coach like Brad Stevens that can go to back to back FF's at Butler in years 3-4? Butler is a lot smaller school than PU. I don't know if Marquette is the same size or smaller than PU, and Crean went to a FF there. If Brad and Crean can get to a FF at similar or smaller schools within 4 years, why can't Keady or Painter at PU after 16 or never? Because they are good, not great, coaches.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

You are saying Painter would be better at IU: this is the same reason we brought in Archie. IU thought he would be better here than he was at Dayton, and he had a better NCAA resume than Painter at the time: doesn't always work out that way. It is the same reason any bigger program gives a coach from the minors a shot: you are betting on them adapting, evolving, and doing just as well in the big leagues.

Give Crean credit for finding and landing a player like D Wade, or Oladipo and OG: Painter can't say the same. Crean has been to a FF: neither Keady nor Painter can say that. Crean went to Sweet 16's at IU and won Big Ten Titles, and maybe he goes to an Elite 8 or better if IU gives him 16 or 25 years. You don't get that long at IU, and Crean should have been let go sooner.

Painter at pu and Painter at IU are apples and oranges.

Given the resource, exposure and support gap, Painter has done well and likely would have excelled in Btown.

 

[Sir_Saucy]

Crean recruited well at Marquette well before he became IU's coach and has recruited well at Georgia. Spare me this bullshit narrative that Purdue is such a tough place to recruit at. Miller has landed some decent individual talent at Indiana (TJD/Romeo) but has whiffed on some prize recruits. This idea that Painter would walk into any big time basketball program and the 5* would flock is simply nonsense.

So you are saying that any one coach would recruit exactly the same caliber of players at Purdue and that he would at IU?

 

[Birnk403]

Crean recruited well at Marquette well before he became IU's coach and has recruited well at Georgia. Spare me this bullshit narrative that Purdue is such a tough place to recruit at. Miller has landed some decent individual talent at Indiana (TJD/Romeo) but has whiffed on some prize recruits. This idea that Painter would walk into any big time basketball program and the 5* would flock is simply nonsense.

Not realizing how much tougher the recruiting sell is at Purdue only confirms that you don’t have any historical base of knowledge, as we all know.

 

[Coach Geez]

Blowing a 7 point lead with a minute left isn't good, but that happens all the time, especially when the teams playing each other are evenly matched. The loss to UALR was bad, but I believe Chris Beard coached that team, he seems to be doing alright.

But bringing those games up had nothing to do with my point, which is why your reading comprehension is poor.

It has everything to do with your point. I get your under the impression the only thing holding Painter back is recruiting and because he's at Purdue he's at a recruiting disadvantage. I call total bullshit. Painter doesn't recruit well because he doesn't put players in the NBA and the ones that do make it don't stick. There's a ton of coaches coaching at lesser prestige jobs that recruit tenfold better than Painter.

 

[Coach Geez]

So you are saying that any one coach would recruit exactly the same caliber of players at Purdue and that he would at IU?

Tom Crean recruited better at Marquette than Matt Painter ever did at Purdue. Acting like Tom Crean simply became a good recruiter because he became the IU coach shows your lack of knowledge to the situation. Crean has produced a top 5 pick a 3 different schools, only one of which I would consider to be a better basketball school than Purdue.

 

[Tasmanian Devil]

What's inaccurate? That in years 8-11 Painter had two losing records and zero tournament wins or that Painter isn't under any pressure to win because Purdue extended a guy who in years 8-11 had two losing records and zero tournament wins? Pick your poison.

Save yourself the time and trouble and don't engage. Ordfan will argue just to argue; you're better than that.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Painter at pu and Painter at IU are apples and oranges.

Given the resource, exposure and support gap, Painter has done well and likely would have excelled in Btown.

Is PU any bigger than Wisconsin, Ohio St., or Michigan? Beilein, Bo Ryan, and Matta are much better coaches than Painter and Keady under similar circumstances. I don't think Painter experiences any more success at IU than Crean did. I don't know if Sparty when Izzo started out was any better than PU at the time, and look what he has accomplished over a long career.

 

[Sir_Saucy]

Tom Crean recruited better at Marquette than Matt Painter ever did at Purdue. Acting like Tom Crean simply became a good recruiter because he became the IU coach shows your lack of knowledge to the situation. Crean has produced a top 5 pick a 3 different schools, only one of which I would consider to be a better basketball school than Purdue.

Avoiding my question, I see.

 

[Coach Geez]

I don't know if Sparty when Izzo started out was any better than PU at the time, and look what he has accomplished over a long career.

They weren't. Purdue historically was a much better basketball program than Michigan State pre-Izzo. You wouldn't know the difference if you were in West Lafayette or East Lansing other than its much colder in East Lansing in the winner. Recruiting is a reflection of the coach. Not the town or whatever nonsense Purdue fans or trolls want to say. Izzo recruits better than Painter despite coaching in very similar towns because Izzo puts players in the NBA. Painter doesn't do that.

 

[Coach Geez]

Avoiding my question, I see.

I already addressed your question. No I don't think Painter would come to Bloomington and recruiting would just come easy for him. He's a huge stiff, boring, dog shit personality and it doesn't resonate with recruits. It's a reason why Archie struggles at recruiting despite coaching at a school with a ton of perceived advantages. Tom Crean recruited well at Marquette (three NBA players on his F4 team, Wes Matthews, Jerel McNeil, Dominic James, laid the foundation with Jimmy Butler) well before he got to Bloomington. Crean was known as a developer of talent and someone who could get kids to the NBA and why he landed some fairly successful recruits while at Indiana and why it has continued at Goergia despite not being a "basketball school".

 

[Sir_Saucy]

They weren't. Purdue historically was a much better basketball program than Michigan State pre-Izzo. You wouldn't know the difference if you were in West Lafayette or East Lansing other than its much colder in East Lansing in the winner. Recruiting is a reflection of the coach. Not the town or whatever nonsense Purdue fans or trolls want to say. Izzo recruits better than Painter despite coaching in very similar towns because Izzo puts players in the NBA. Painter doesn't do that.

MSU wasn't as good of a program as Purdue pre-Izzo? Huh?

I already addressed your question. No I don't think Painter would come to Bloomington and recruiting would just come easy for him. He's a huge stiff, boring, dog shit personality and it doesn't resonate with recruits. It's a reason why Archie struggles at recruiting despite coaching at a school with a ton of perceived advantages. Tom Crean recruited well at Marquette (three NBA players on his F4 team, Wes Matthews, Jerel McNeil, Dominic James, laid the foundation with Jimmy Butler) well before he got to Bloomington. Crean was known as a developer of talent and someone who could get kids to the NBA and why he landed some fairly successful recruits while at Indiana and why it has continued at Goergia despite not being a "basketball school".

You have never talked to Matt Painter, is what you're saying.

Painter's best recruit ever, spent 2 years in college and got drafted in the 1st round, despite major shortcomings as an NBA prospect. Painter hasn't recruited NBA level guys, Dakota Mathias got some NBA run after being at Purdue. Read that slowly. DAKOTA MATHIAS. But sure, you are right.

At IU, Painter gets a Caleb Swanigan all the time, just by being the HC at IU. Crean was good, maybe even great, at finding under the radar guys and developing guards, but couldn't coach defense worth a dang.

You obviously have an ax to grind against Painter. Purdue sucks because they are Purdue, not because of Painter.

 

[Coach Geez]

MSU wasn't as good of a program as Purdue pre-Izzo? Huh?

Not anywhere in the vicinity, you serious? Sure the 79 Spartans are better than any one single Purdue team fueled by one of the best basket ball players ever, but Michigan State made the NCAA's just twice in the 80's and Purdue was on its last leg as 3Peat B10 champions when Izzo took over. Purdue historically is a much better basketball program than MSU, especially pre-Izzo. It's not even a comparison. Are you older than 30?

 

[Birnk403]

Tom Crean recruited better at Marquette than Matt Painter ever did at Purdue. Acting like Tom Crean simply became a good recruiter because he became the IU coach shows your lack of knowledge to the situation. Crean has produced a top 5 pick a 3 different schools, only one of which I would consider to be a better basketball school than Purdue.

Again, this absolute nonsense.

 

[Birnk403]

MSU wasn't as good of a program as Purdue pre-Izzo? Huh?


You have never talked to Matt Painter, is what you're saying.

Painter's best recruit ever, spent 2 years in college and got drafted in the 1st round, despite major shortcomings as an NBA prospect. Painter hasn't recruited NBA level guys, Dakota Mathias got some NBA run after being at Purdue. Read that slowly. DAKOTA MATHIAS. But sure, you are right.

At IU, Painter gets a Caleb Swanigan all the time, just by being the HC at IU. Crean was good, maybe even great, at finding under the radar guys and developing guards, but couldn't coach defense worth a dang.

You obviously have an ax to grind against Painter. Purdue sucks because they are Purdue, not because of Painter.

Save yourself the time. Geez is a troll, much like Tasmania. They aren’t IU people.

 

[choptalk]

Who gives a flying F? Last year, PU doesn't even make the Tourney if they have it.

You know they wouldn't do well in a tourney not played? They couldn't even beat Purdue. Iu's main focus in basketball these days is getting into the Big Dance.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Is PU any bigger than Wisconsin, Ohio St., or Michigan? Beilein, Bo Ryan, and Matta are much better coaches than Painter and Keady under similar circumstances. I don't think Painter experiences any more success at IU than Crean did. I don't know if Sparty when Izzo started out was any better than PU at the time, and look what he has accomplished over a long career.

Painter is a better coach than Crean by a factor of two and IMO would have been successful in Btown.

I keep hearing that "MP would be fired in Btown with his record" as some sort of a knock on MP. OK, that pu record probobly would have gotten him fired but again...apples and oranges.

If you are going to judge MP you have to judge him at IU and with the many advantages he would have had, IMO he would have been very successful.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Purdue sucks because they are Purdue, not because of Painter.

It can be both.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

You know they wouldn't do well in a tourney not played? They couldn't even beat Purdue. Iu's main focus in basketball these days is getting into the Big Dance.

PU wasn't making the NCAA's last year: not up for debate. Kind of hard to get to 3 "SS's" in a row when you don't make the Tourney.

IU's main focus is finding a coach that can meet the standards of IU. True, if IU's coach can't even beat PU, then he shouldn't be the coach. At least IU is trying to find a great coach instead of giving up like PU.

 

[choptalk]

If IU is good with Painter results, then they should have kept Crean. Crean has actually been to a final four, recruited a hell of a lot better, and put players of substance in the NBA. Painter's been to one fluke elite 8 in 16 years, who gives a s***?

The goal at IU is to consistently go to final fours and win national championships: this is not the goal at Purdue. This is why they kept Keady for 25 years and named the court after him and have kept Painter for 16 years and counting.

I think that goal is gone. Fluke? Hell they were a lucky play away from the FF. That play was the fluke.

 

[jsig]

I like Archie but he is not getting the job done.

 

[TrojanFan004]

I think that goal is gone. Fluke? Hell they were a lucky play away from the FF. That play was the fluke.

They were also a phantom foul away from losing in the Sweet 16.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

I think that goal is gone. Fluke? Hell they were a lucky play away from the FF. That play was the fluke.

Luck has nothing to do with it, and close doesn't count. Virginia made a winning play and closed out the game, PU choked like they always do in the NCAA's. PU is cursed.

1/16 is a fluke.

 

[Coach Geez]

Save yourself the time. Geez is a troll, much like Tasmania. They aren’t IU people.

I don't think it takes being an IU person to know that historically Purdue was a far better program than Michigan State prior to them hiring Izzo. Hell, the only pre-requisite is being born before 1990.

 

[Sir_Saucy]

Not anywhere in the vicinity, you serious? Sure the 79 Spartans are better than any one single Purdue team fueled by one of the best basket ball players ever, but Michigan State made the NCAA's just twice in the 80's and Purdue was on its last leg as 3Peat B10 champions when Izzo took over. Purdue historically is a much better basketball program than MSU, especially pre-Izzo. It's not even a comparison. Are you older than 30?

I only count NCs as making a program relevant, otherwise Purdue a great program.

 

[Birnk403]

I don't think it takes being an IU person to know that historically Purdue was a far better program than Michigan State prior to them hiring Izzo. Hell, the only pre-requisite is being born before 1990.

Historically, as in 1979?

 

[Coach Geez]

Historically, as in 1979?

As I clearly said, the 1979 Spartan team was better than any one Purdue team. But one team in one year doesn’t make a team historically. Even you are smarter than that. Purdue won more B1O titles in the 80’s than Michigan Stare had tournament appearances. Now Michigan State has left Purdue in the dust since Izzo was hired, but that’s not what was ascribed.

 

[Birnk403]

As I clearly said, the 1979 Spartan team was better than any one Purdue team. But one team in one year doesn’t make a team historically. Even you are smarter than that. Purdue won more B1O titles in the 80’s than Michigan Stare had tournament appearances. Now Michigan State has left Purdue in the dust since Izzo was hired, but that’s not what was ascribed.

MSU left everyone other than Wisconsin in the dust since Izzo arrived. What’s your point if, in fact, you have one?

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Sounds like agreement...move on

 

[choptalk]

I only count NCs as making a program relevant, otherwise Purdue a great program.

So IU hasn't been relevant in the last 34 years?

 

[Tasmanian Devil]

So IU hasn't been relevant in the last 34 years?

Then Purdue has NEVER been relevant, correct?

Helms Banners don’t count, junior.

 

[Coach Geez]

So IU hasn't been relevant in the last 34 years?

It’s been over 60 years since Purdue was retroactively awarded a national title for a season they played 25 years prior. What’s your point?