In five decades I can't ever remember talking football with an Indiana fan. It's always been basketball. For some reason it seems like most Indiana loyalists historically follow Notre Dame for the most part - and the conversation turns to the Irish.
Sampson owns Painter
- Thread starter HoosierJimbo89
- Start date
Sounds like somebody wants to talk about the dusty 1950's. Going to the college football playoffs is fun. Winning 11 games is fun. PU being the 4th best in state football program is fun.
No. I’m on GBI’s board. Just posted there earlier today. To confirm, you don’t have Link?
I'll say this slowly for you. GBI. HAS. A. FREE. BOARD
They’ve never been elite. They’ve had better teams than IU much of the past 10 years, but that ain’t saying much since we’re at a low point in program history. But PU & elite have never belonged in the same sentence, unless it’s in the context of playing second fiddle to an elite IU program for decades. It really chaps them that in spite of recent struggles, IU is listed as a better job/program in virtually any listing of such. One of the reasons they’re over here trolling all of the time, & the same reason some IU people troll over there, to try to make themselves feel better. IU about recent history& PU about forever….
What is their head to head record? Sampson has won 75% of the time against Painter.
That’s not GBI. Try again. That’s boiler upload. Says it right at the top.Boilermaker Men's Basketball
purdue.forums.rivals.com
Moron.
Nope. Everyone left and followed GBI. Writers are gone. The rivals brand is the same yea.
Correct me if I am wrong, but recently wasn't Purdue ranked #1 in the polls at some point for three consecutive seasons? And I recall reading that was the first time that happened to any B1G team. (This was pre-UCLA admission.) So just to understand: the nationwide voters in the polling, presumably knowledgeable about the sport, rate them the best team at some time over each year in a three-year period but that doesn't make them elite? And you are the only conference member ever to do it and you are not elite? Do you realize how silly it is to contend that? Be serious.
Last edited:
I would love the roster construction that Coach Sampson has consistently put on the floor. Everyone is long at their position and defends. There's always 3 big guards on the floor that can shoot. You still someone on the block to go to and get a bucket. In saying that, I don't expect to have a final 4 team in year one. There is a lot of coaching that goes into the Houston results and culture, that doesn't happen in a year.
Nobody remembers or cares who is #1 in November. Just like no one on this board cares what you think about PU. You’re on an IU board trying to convince people that your team is elite, & I’m being silly? So dumb….
It’s not GBI. Not the same writers. Not the same number of posters. Not the same people. But same website. But whatever you have to tell yourself. Not GBI
Ja for sure von Sveden.
Care to help me mit meine Knucksack?
But you're wearing...liederhosen?
They weren't #1 just in November as you presumably know so stating it that way is simply disingenuous. I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I was just pointing out the absurdity of your post.
No. It’s not the same board. GBI isn’t on rivals. Not sure how you can’t understand this. You haven’t linked GBI
Just as you presumably know they’ve never ended the season as #1, which is the only time that really matters, so you’re just being a disingenuous troll. But that’s a given, considering you’re on an IU board. Maybe you should show your fellow troll BoilerN how to get back to GBi…
If yours' is the only definition of elite, then there are very, very few elite teams. If limited to the last 40 years, Houston is not elite, Auburn is not elite, Texas Tech is not elite, etc. It would make CCNY elite with an extended time period. The same would also be true for Loyola of Chicago. UTEP is also in that group. Your definition had no time period. You can hold your definition as you like. But recognize that is not a generally held one. In fact, it is likely to be dismissed as silly.
I would think that being consistently ranked highly in the polls over an extended period of time would be a superior definition of the term and much more likely to be generally accepted.
Last edited:
You do realize that Purdue is 10th in NCAA history in wins, Indiana is 11th. Purdue has won 26 BT championships, IU 22. In this century IU has won 224 and lost 225 BT games(25 years). 25 years is not recent struggles. You are right about the last ten years Purdue has been a lot better than IU, Purdue has had 5 All Americans to IU's 1. IU has led Purdue in 5 star players 1 to IUs 12? It's hard not to be TOP 10 in NCAA history in wins and not be considered a pretty good program and also the most dominate team in BT history. IU this century does lead Purdue in coaches 7 to 2, we won't even begin to talk about the money you spent on buying out all those coaches, so yeah its a better job because the exit money is unmatchable. Better program, it's hard to be a better program when you can't even make the Dance half the time this CENTURY! Purdue should be pretty good again next year, IU is setting up to win their 20th straight summer championship. But you keep up with your ELITE status. But it's a lot of fun playing and winning like Purdue has! Who knows Purdue could have 2 All Americans next year.
IU has been to as many Final Fours as PU this century. Do you know how many schools have won an NCAA championship? 37. Do you know how many schools have won multiple championships? 15. Roughly half of PU's BT championships came before the NCAA era. I'll give it to Painter, he didn't shit the bed against double digit seeds this year: he normally does. Painter is a good coach, but he is way closer to Keady than RMK: took him 25 years to make a FF.
You left out the stat that matters most, a list PU won’t be found on. The ONLY one that makes a program elite…
Sampson is 13-8 in 21 meeting with Barnes. They apparently grew up in North Carolina, about the same age and are very good friends.
Last edited:
Using your criterion, CCNY, Loyola of Chicago and UTEP (aka Texas Western) are elite. They each won the NCAA. Are you really sure that you want to hold that position? Personally, I think that is a rather silly position, but it appears to be yours.
25 Years ago Painter was playing PG for Purdue, 9 more years he is on course to pass RMK in wins. How's your FDU team doing?
Painter hasn't even passed Mike Davis in FF's after 25 years. Bob Knight won over 900 games, Painter hasn't won 500. What the hell are you talking about?
That’s even more hilarious, that not once has your second tier program been able to achieve what these have. Your desperate need for validation is clouding your ability to think (or you’re just stupid). Winning a championship alone doesn’t make a program elite, but a program can’t be elite without one. And you forgot the San Francisco Dons, even they won two. 🤣🤣
It's a condition where people bond with their abusers( Purdue abuses iu on a yearly basis).
Your cheesy IU sucks chant doesn’t really bother us, it’s kind of funny & pathetic, honestly…
I assume that’s what your referring to, not the split in bball over Woody’s tenure or 66-0 curb stomping in football?
