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?

Money obviously played a role. Painter has had his contract re-done a couple times, and his base salary after six rather successful years is only $1.3 million. He has incentives that pushed it to about $1.9 million this year, but  the only coaches in the Big 10 earning less than Painter were DeChellis (PSU), Carmody (Northwestern) and McCaffery (Iowa).

Mizzou offered about $2 million (and was willing to go a little higher) for seven years. Purdue belatedly stepped up on that front — while creating a PR nightmare for itself by claiming to be proactive while blaming alumni for not giving enough.

The issue was that Painter was not be basing this decision solely based on the money for him. It was about something bigger. Hammer and Rails was already questioning the Purdue Athletic Department. About whether they want to do more than compete.

That seemed to be the major issue. There’s the money to pay and keep assistants — he lost one last year to Clemson (Clemson basketball?). And just how the athletic department and AD are willing to help the program achieve.

“Proactive means they gave him more money,” former Purdue coach Gene Keady said this morning. “But money’s not keeping him from thinking about Missouri.

“It’s about having the opportunity to win a national title with the backing of everyone. He wants to know if an assistant coach needs a car, he can get it. If something needs to be done, they’ll do it, so he doesn’t have to worry about all the nickel and dime stuff.

“It isn’t about money. I want him to stay and [athletic director] Morgan [Burke] wants him to stay.”

By all accounts, Purdue is a very cheap program. They are a self-sufficient athletic department. They operate in the black. They also offer the fewest number of varsity team sports in the Big 10 (yes, less than Northwestern). While they make less money from their home football games than many of their brethren, they don’t have to spread it around nearly as much. Comments made by Keady indicate that Painter has had enough of the tight restrictions and how it has limited his program. Missouri is willing to spend.

But, and this could be where Painter has one of his largest complaints, Purdue trails Missouri significantly in assistant coach spending. In an average of men’s sports assistants, Missouri spends on average $122,837 per coach and Purdue spends $99,490.

At Missouri, Painter would be coaching in the Mizzou Arena, built in 2004 for $75 million. At Purdue, he’s coaching in Mackey Arena, built in 1967 but went through significant renovations from 2000-05.

Maybe this is where Keady is right about that the school is not committed to winning: By time the $99.5 million Mackey Complex Project will have finished in November, more than four-and-a-half years will have passed since it was started.

That’s more than enough time for Painter to get a good look at how Purdue operates.

“As a coach, you want an administration that you know if they can do it for you, they will do it for you,” [Dan] Dakich said. “If they can’t, they wont. You don’t want to always hear ‘No, no, no, no, no.’

“You don’t want to bang your head against the wall, especially if you have options.”

That was before Anderson was courted by Arkansas. So you can imagine that there was an even bigger bump for that pool. Along with all other expenses. You can also see the comments from former Purdue football coach Joe Tiller and Purdue’s willingness to spend. And it hasn’t been a pretty picture for Purdue.

This was about having the support behind the scenes to advance the program. Knowing they have a relationship and trust with their superiors. Something we are seeing more of from the best young coaches out there. They are the ones not looking to make the immediate money grab. They are looking at the best fit, situation and long-term success.

Jobs like UCLA, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, Indiana, Duke and even Louisville are the exceptions. Those are hoop-centric schools that a coach knows the institution will do whatever is needed to advance the basketball program to the goal of winning. The AD’s job depends on it.

Coaches like Boeheim and Calhoun (boy the numbers are dwindling) are such institutions at their schools that they don’t need to worry about their relationship with the AD so much. They have such powers that they run their own program with little interference.

At just about every other program, it comes down to how the coach gets along with the AD and the powers in the athletic department and the school. Is there trust? Support?

Jamie Dixon, Brad Stevens, Anthony Grant, Sean Miller, Jay Wright, Chris Mack, Josh Pastner to name the recent ones. All have turned down much bigger money for jobs — or had to get commitments beyond their own payday to take a job. They have a comfort level where they are, and obviously make good money. But more importantly, they have trust in their bosses that they will have the support and resources to do what is necessary to assist them now and in the future.

That’s why schools that can throw money at coaches still struggle to make hires — Oklahoma, Georgia, Auburn, USC and Oregon come to mind. Coaches just don’t know how much support there will really be there in a 3 years, 5 years or further.

Painter stayed at Purdue, because he got the support issues resolved to a point that he does not have to fight for them every time a need arises. If he had chosen Mizzou, then it would have been because he felt that he could not trust the assurances or he just did not get them from Purdue.

Now, look back on the Arizona State pursuit of Jamie Dixon after the 2006 season ended. Arizona State could offer a bit more money, but the situation there was worse as far as winning right away. Dixon didn’t seem that enamored with Arizona State, but what was pushing him was the fact that he had a horrid relationship with AD Jeff Long.

They didn’t get along. Reports were that they did not speak directly to each other most times. Long came in after Dixon was hired. Dixon was frustrated by the lack of support for the program. Whether it was money for assistants,  travel costs. Or just the support system for the players and staff. It took Chancellor Nordenberg getting directly involved to keep Dixon — bypassing Long. In less than a year, Long left to become the AD at Arkansas.

That was where good luck came into play. If Nordenberg hadn’t been so active in the interviewing and hiring of Coach Dixon a few years earlier, he would not have developed the same personal relationship with Dixon. That relationship put him in a position to step-in and give Dixon the assurances and personal guaranty that the support and money needed for the program to advance would be there. Dixon felt he could trust Nordenberg. Dixon’s longstanding relationship with AD Pederson only strengthens the trust. That trust and the support of Pitt’s administration, along with the personal relationships with the powers at Pitt, has been a significant reason why Dixon has refused other offers.