I admit to being completely fascinated with the Missouri-Matt Painter-Purdue triangle. Not simply because it strikes me almost as eerily similar to the Arizona State pursuit of Jamie Dixon a few years back, but also because of what it reveals about how the best coaches look beyond a mere cash grab.
On its face, Matt Painter even considering the Missouri job made no sense. Painter is a Purdue alum. He played for Gene Keady. Keady hand-picked Painter to be his successor. Heck, Painter even left his successful head coaching job at Sothern Illinois to be an assistant at Purdue in Keady’s final year to get started recruiting. He’s loved by the fans and students for revitalizing the Purdue basketball program. The student section at the games are called “The Paint Crew.” Recruiting is fertile in Indiana, Illinois, Ohio and Kentucky — even if it is competitive. Plus it is the Big Ten. The conference awash in money and exposure.
Missouri on the other hand, is an inconsistent basketball program. It has aspirations/delusions that it is one of the big boys. Yet it keeps getting slapped. Whether it is seeing itself skipped over for Big 10/11/12 membership despite the geographic logic (dude, totally sympathize). Skipped over by bowls because of fan travel. Seeing it’s coach bolt for Arkansas. Stuck in the Big 12/10 and bending over to take it from Texas. In basketball, if Texas or Kansas aren’t playing the games rarely get much attention. How could they possibly be serious about snagging Painter?