Post-Dispatch Article Unfounded, Infuritating


The Boiling Point: Talk of Missouri and Purdue coach Matt Painter is one thing. Basing an argument that Painter would favor Mizzou over Purdue with no real facts or information is another.

It’s starting to become really, really old news at this point, but papers are still trying to paint Purdue coach Matt Painter as not only Missouri’s top candidate for its opening, but also someone who is very interested. The basis for this particular argument I came across in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch is absurd.

The lone legitimate reason for Painter wanting to listen, and this hasn’t changed as my 6-year-old niece knows this by now, is money. Missouri seems, at least at this point, more willing to throw $2 million at a coach than Purdue. I still think that remains to be seen. But fair enough, that’s a check on Missouri’s side. But the other reasons make zero sense.

The first being that Painter was wowed by Missouri’s facilities when the Boilers played there in 2007. OK. Sounds about right. But that Mizzou will STILL have a leg up even after Purdue’s renovation. No basis for the statement, just complete conjecture.

The second being that Purdue isn’t really that much better of a job when you talk about past successes. Huh? Oh, that’s right Purdue has reached just two Final Fours and the Boilers are just 26-22 in the NCAA Tournament compared to zero Final Fours and 17-21. But wait. Even those two random categories that the writer picked to showcase favored Purdue. Let’s just ignore the fact that Purdue has won the most Big Ten titles in league history or has the winningest record of any other conference school.

The next two points are so well examined that they were summed up in two sentences. The first that Missouri has “visibly better resources” and that the school cares more about basketball because it spent $5,345,179 while Purdue just $5,171,495. That’s a difference of $173,684. Wow. So, former coach Mike Anderson took a few more flights on charter jets. The other point was a nice slap in the face to Missouri saying that Painter has more academic hurdles for recruiting. Oh, and that Painter would be able to recruit a greater landscape because of Missouri’s resources. Again, no basis for these statements other than “sources.”

Then come the real low blows.

"Even so, he still coaches for a school whose basketball tradition forever will be in the shadow of Indiana University, where in fact Painter had wanted to go. With Notre Dame back to national prominence and nearby Butler emerging as a deep postseason regular, Purdue is easily lost in the shuffle. Mizzou is the only major basketball power in Missouri.All of which could be appealing enough to Painter, even if it looks like a reach at first blush."

I don’t mind fans or media talking about Painter being a top candidate, but if someone is going to try and paint the picture that Missouri is a more likely destination for Painter than Purdue I need some REAL facts. I need some REAL information. All this piece of garbage does is spew unfounded speculation and conjecture onto more incomplete opinion.

Original rumors surface
Commentary: Rumors aren’t a bad thing
Mark Montieth mentions Painter isn’t a lifer at Purdue
Painter, Mizzou situation still sticky
Painter to meet with Mizzou
Twitter account pokes fun at Purdue’s cheapness