The Purdues take on Franklin, Newman et al
- Thread starter mushroomgod_1
- Start date
I still can't believe that in my excitement over Archie's initial hiring (after bitching and whining about Crean for 7 of his 9 years) I went to their free board to chat.
After a couple of posts that I didn't think was anything but civil... I was banned for simply saying that I thought our arcs were going to completely flip flop. Basically it was enjoy your upcoming season because I expect us to pull even and pass you over the next three years (two now) as we finally have a coach who is an actual coach.
Yup... permanently banned for saying that on their damn free board.
Btw for any Piss and Black fans...you know I was right. Where I was wrong was on the timing...I figured this year would be a tie for fifth, both get a six seed. Didn't expect him to recruit as well as he has immediately like he did.
Good luck trying to keep up going forward for the next 20 years or so.
After a couple of posts that I didn't think was anything but civil... I was banned for simply saying that I thought our arcs were going to completely flip flop. Basically it was enjoy your upcoming season because I expect us to pull even and pass you over the next three years (two now) as we finally have a coach who is an actual coach.
Yup... permanently banned for saying that on their damn free board.
Btw for any Piss and Black fans...you know I was right. Where I was wrong was on the timing...I figured this year would be a tie for fifth, both get a six seed. Didn't expect him to recruit as well as he has immediately like he did.
Good luck trying to keep up going forward for the next 20 years or so.
Last edited:
IU has always out recruited Purdue, yet, somehow Purdue still owns the head to head lead as well as conference championships. Purdue has also won the BTT, whereas IU has not.
I am not sure how you think that will change. Purdue isn’t getting as many five star players, but they are still getting pretty good players and Painter has a pretty respectable record when compared to other bigten coaches.
If you can't see the difference between Miller and Crean/Sampson/Davis already, you will very shortly.
And if you haven't noticed how Miller's recruiting is effecting Painter, you will shortly.
Painter and Hummel grew up IU fans. Hummel would’ve come to IU had we offered. Painter would’ve as well. Heck, if we offered Painter the HC job he’d come to IU in a heartbeat.
These Boilers seem to be multiplying faster than a Haas spread STD...
They're just as annoying and twice as useless.
You mock our “dusty” banners but count all of your conference titles and head-to-head victories from before World War II. Can’t have it both ways, PUkes.
I don't mock your banners. IU should be very proud. My only beef is being told about our inferior program but since around the middle of Mike Davis' tenure we've been as good or maybe better.
IU did offer Hummel. The Sampson situation caused him (and his parents) some “concern”, so much so that he took a pass. Hard to blame him.
Not quite accurate. True about Painter, but Hummel was recruited by Sampson along with Scott Martin. Calls to both were a part of the then-illegal calls that got the ball rolling on KS. Too bad really as Hummel was a textbook Indiana kid. Both parties lost.
God dang it I knew I should’ve double checked that. Well, i’ll still say that wanting to commit to IU and not doing so due to ‘circumstances’ isn’t a whole lot better.
Look... I'm an IU guy and I'm calling BS on that. That's not all that matters. Purdue won 51 of the first 62 games through 1939. So what? Ancient history. IU is 5-0 in NCAA championships. So what? IU hasn't won a NCAA championship in forever. But let's face it... Over the past decade, Purdue has been better than us. Can we not at least admit that? Our record against them (if I added it up correctly) in the past decade is 5-11. That sucks. Yes, that's been with nine years of CTC and one of CAM... and I DO expect our fortunes to turn around soon - as early as this year. But let's not be stupid about it. Over the last decade, we've sucked more than we've been good. And Purdue has beaten us often. Like it or not, them's the cold, hard facts.
That’s good for them because beating IU is all they care about. I’d trade getting beat by Purdue in everything for a decade straight for a national title in basketball (or football, but let’s be real here). And to be honest I’d trade a loss to Purdue for a win against Kentucky every dang day and twice on Sundays.
That's all I've been saying. At least you won't get hammered for it. Thank you and let's hope we have great seasons.
It was the worst 10 year span in IU’s history and arguably the best 10 year span in Purdue’s history.....and what was really the difference?
A sweet 16 and One conference title? Oh, and one conference tourney title?
Just one S16 appearance and a conference tourney title. Both schools have won two regular season titles in the last decade, but one of Purdue’s was shared.
5-0 is not all that matters, but the rest of your post is dumb. IU may have just had the worst 10 year span in its history (i'm not looking that up, but you get the point), and it is very comparable to what Matt Painter has done at Purdue over the past ten years.
Painter is such an incredible coach that he's been able to manufacturer a whopping ONE more Sweet 16 appearance than Tom Crean, a feat that gets you fired at IU.
Ancient history is better than NO history. We were in the title game in the 2000's and IU is still considered a blue blood by sportswriters and "experts" as much as some on here want to disregard it.
Better than us? Using what metric? One that favors them? Head to head? Yep, they beat us. Conference titles and nationally? They have had a comparable decade to us. BFD, Let them go hang a freaking banner. We made a change and expect better.
Yes, I DO get your point... and you are correct. IU has gone through a very bad decade and that's why at the moment, Purdue's results should be considered comparable at best, and "they had our number as of late" at worst. I'm not saying that has always been the case. In the previous decade - even with Mike Davis and Kelvin Sampson - our record against them was 13-5. And I'm not saying that the last decade is acceptable at IU. It isn't. That's why Crean is gone and Archie is here. And it IS acceptable at Purdue as Painter looks to be there for quite awhile.
Still... as we like to say here when we win... scoreboard. The past decade has been theirs. I look forward to reversing that starting this season.
I know IU fans like to point to Creans accomplishments and compare them to Painter and point at those results and say IU demands more and Purdue is a settler. The fact of the matter is Crean wasn’t fired for only making it to the sweet 16 and only winning two conference championships. He was fired for missing the tournament 6 out of his 9 years. Painter doesn’t have that black mark on his resume.
How is the past decade "theirs"? Purdue hasn't won sh#t the past 10 years. Meaningless crap. Just like IU. Nobody won. The difference is that we arent okay with that.
Crean missed the NCAA 5 times, and 3 of those were under sanctions. His first 3 years at IU.
Crean made the NCAA 4 out of the last 6 years with 3 sweet 16s and 2 B10 conference titles. And then got fired......
During the EXACT SAME 6 years.....Painter made the NCAA 4 times (same as Crean) with 1 B10 conference title and 1 Sweet 16.
Try again.......
It's fairly obvious that the first three years of Crean's tenure had nothing to do with him getting fired. If the administration cared about the results those years, they would have fired him after year 3. It was what happened after those three years that got Crean fired...our peak was the S16. We missed the tournament twice in 4 years. The highs weren't high enough, and the lows were too low.
It was also fair to say that Crean didn't seem to emphasize defense, and his best results came when he recruited willing defenders...Vic, Sheehey, Cody...but he didn't duplicate that formula going forward--or the success that he had the year we were one of the best teams in the country.
The standard at IU, as I see it...is that, absent some peculiar circumstances, you can miss the tournament once or twice per decade...but certainly not twice in 5 years....and even then, only if your perceived or proven performance ceiling is national champion. That's why Knight was never fired for on-court performance, but Davis and Crean were. That's pretty much the line.
Is that Purdue's line? I doubt it. Seems obvious they have lower standards.
I agree but to me Purdue could beat us twice a year but if we do better in the conference and do better in the tournament I am fine with that. To me when comparing the two programs to me the most important stat is 5-0. If we beat Purdue in every game but don't do well in the conference or the tournament then the wins against Purdue means nothing.
If they are the better program then why in the ACC/Big Ten challenge do we get the elite matchups and they get the middle of the pack teams.
He didn't say they were the better program, he said they've had better results vs us for the last 10 years. Yes, we are a bigger more notable name nationally... is Dallas the best team in the NFL? Nope, but still one of the biggest draws. Our results have been sub-standard, but we're still a big draw relatively speaking.
Agreed. But we HAVEN'T been doing all that well in conference or in the tourney either. If we'd been hitting a few Final Fours during this time, who cares about Purdue? You state that conference championships matter, but also ignore the fact that Purdue has more B1G conference championships than IU as well. Personally, I don't care about that. Ancient history. But an objective look at the two programs over the past decade shows there is very little difference - aside from their record against us. Yes, it hurts to say it, but that is the truth. And again... the difference in the programs is that Purdue is good with the state of their program - they keep their coach. We are NOT good with the state of our program - we get a new coach. Our program will almost certainly rise back up - theirs will stay the same (at best). I'd wager that in 10 years from now, this discussion won't be taking place be we will obviously be doing better than Purdue in most every basketball metric.
And yes... I expected to get crap for stating the obvious.
Easy...follow the money. IU is the far more attractive draw from a national ratings standpoint. No comparison.
Similar threads
