Matt Painter is staying at Purdue; Missouri is embarrassed again

Matt Painter is staying at Purdue. So sayeth Jeff Goodman, Gary Parrish, and Andy Katz, which means that it is true. (They all made the same report within the span of no more than one or two minutes. I wonder who sent the mass text? Maybe Painter himself?)

Whew. Anyone else glad that's over?

Painter's statement: "I am extremely excited about continuing my career at Purdue. I believe we have built something very special. At the same time, I feel we have much more ahead of us to accomplish.

"There's a lot to be excited about right now with Purdue basketball. We are moving into our new offices and locker room complex over the next couple of weeks. Our program is built on hard work, and we are ready to get back to improving as a team and a staff."

"At the end of the day, my heart is at Purdue, and this is a place where I want to win a national championship."

According to Parrish, Painter decided to return because Purdue offered him more money. (UPDATE: He also got an eight year extension.) In his previous contract, Painter was making just $1.3 million a year (although Goodman's initial report says Painter made $1.9 million), which was the eighth highest for basketball coaches in the Big Ten. Painter has won at least 25 games the past four seasons, he's rebuilt the Boilermakers into a force in the Big Ten, and he's been named conference coach of the year three times in that span.

I'd say he was probably due for a pay bump.

And that is exactly what he used Missouri for. He forced Purdue's hand.

It wasn't just for his salary, however. Painter's staff all got raises. But more importantly, the school's budget for things like recruiting was increased. One of the biggest knocks on Purdue as a basketball program is that they are not willing to spend the money to make their program nationally competitive. That is what Painter was asking for. That's what he would have gotten at Missouri.

And that is what he was given by Purdue.

There is more to this story, however. For the second time in the span of two weeks, Missouri was completely fooled by a coach trying to decide where he would end up next season. At first, it was Mike Anderson, who eventually left for Arkansas but managed to convince everyone at Missouri -- and the reporters that cover Missouri -- that he would be staying. Painter did the same.

And before that, it was the Big Ten. If you remember, during expansionocalypse last summer, Missouri was convinced that they would be leaving the Big 12, but instead it was Nebraska that was scooped up by the Big Ten.

The folks in Columbia, MO, appear to be quite gullible.

So where does Missouri go from here?

Well, it won't be to Buzz Williams. As I was typing out this post, news came out that Buzz has inked a new deal with Marquette for around $2 million a year. Chris Mooney signed a 10 year deal with Richmond earlier in the week, which means that three very good coaches have leveraged the Missouri, NC State, and Oklahoma job openings into a raise and a longer contract.

It also means that all Shaka Smart or Brad Stevens has to do is right a number on a piece of paper, and they will probably get that much to fill one of those three voids.
Continue reading...

Matt Painter has an interesting clause in his contract

Early today we talked at length about Matt Brady, the current coach at James Madison, and how a clause in his contract has brought about a law suit.

Believe it or not, that's not the only contract clause that has made the rounds today.

Over the weekend, the West Lafayette Journal & Courier got a chance to take a look at the contract that Matt Painter signed back in April, giving him $1.3 million a year for eight years, retroactive to July of 2009. What they found could put a scare into Purdue fans.

Matt Painter is one of the brightest defensive minds in the collegiate ranks.
(photo credit: AnnArbor.com)

You see, most contracts signed by coaches in this day and age have a buyout clause. If the coach decides to leave before the contract is up, the school is owed a certain, usually large, amount of money. RichRod might know a thing or two about that.

Painter has a buyout in his contract, too. Had he left by July 1st of this season, he would have owed Purdue $1 million. If he leaves by July 1st of next year, he owes Purdue $750,000.

After July 1st, 2011?

Painter would owe Purdue nothing. Not a dime.

"Once you get into negotiations, there's going to be a hard line drawn in the sand somewhere by both parties. When those things happen, sometimes their side can't move any more financially and then you're going to look at other areas to try to put yourself in the best possible situation to give yourself a little bit of freedom," Painter told the Journal & Courier. "Maybe if you don't have quite the guaranteed money as some of your peers in your league, there's going to have to be some other things that are advantageous to you and that was one example of that."

"Some coaches have had astronomical buyouts and they go to another job and they're paying it off for three, four, five or six years and you don't want to be in that kind of position. Anytime you can put yourself in a position to have a lower buyout, that only makes sense."

It would be ideal for Painter to leave after next season. He's built Purdue into a national power, a preseason top five team for the second straight season with a core of three seniors that will make quite a few preseason all-america teams. But the Boilermakers are facing quite a drop-off next season with Robbie Hummel, E'Twaun Moore, and JaJuan Johnson graduating.

If an offer comes along at a better, higher-paying program -- which certainly could happen, he's done a fantastic job at Purdue -- what's to stop him from leaving?

Certainly not a buyout.

There are even quotes in the J&C article where Painter talks about doing what is best for him and his family. Purdue doesn't have the budget to pay him the money of some of the other schools in the Big Ten, which is why Painter took the lower salary. Purdue has to deal with the risk of losing their star.

To make matters worse, there is no where in the article where Painter mentions anything about staying at Purdue for the duration of the contract. Nothing about committing to the school or honoring the deal he signed. (For the record, I think this is the smart move. Never make any guarantees or promises that you don't intend on keeping. If he says he is a lifer, then bolts for a higher paying gig when there is no buyout, he looks like every other slick-talking, full-of-bullshit coach out there. If he says he will stay at Purdue so long as it is what is best for his family, then leaves to make more money, he looks like anyone in the world that gets offered a higher-paying job.)

If that puts a knot in your stomach as a resident of West Lafayette, no one would blame you.

Having said that, Painter was born in Indiana. He is a Purdue alum. He played with Glenn "Big Dog" Robinson. He was hand-picked by Purdue to replace Gene Keady. This could very well be his dream job, and its not like $1.3 million per year over eight years is chump change.

He's already proven he can win at Purdue. He has a roster for next season that, in addition to the Big Three, returns some decent young talent like Lewis Jackson, Kelsey Barlow, and Sandi Marcius. He landed a solid three man recruiting class with Terone Johnson, Anthony Johnson, and Travis Carroll.

Purdue may be "down" once the Big Three moves on, but given Painter's defensive philosophy and the fact that he brings in four year players, its tough to envision the Boilermakers ever really struggling. Wisconsin and Pitt have had a lot of success that same way.

Painter can clearly coach. Eventually, he is going to have options, and be faced with the decision of whether or not he wants to leave Purdue.

Me?

I'd like to see him stay at Purdue and try to hang some banners at his alma mater. It would be a great story.

I'm sure there are quite a few people out in West Lafayette that agree with me.

Continue reading...