If I'm Tim Weiser...

[plaincat]

I call Lon Kruger right now and I tell him:

"Lon,  it's time to come home.  Bob has left us with some of the best recruiters in the country.  You need to get on the next plane back to Manhattan and convince Delonte, Frank, and Erik that the next step in their careers is to be assistants for the best bench coach in the country.  Bob just took our team to the second round of the NIT, while you just took inferior talent to the Sweet 16.  A few years with you and they will have the full package.  This is your chance to get the number one recruiting class in the country.  This is your shot at the title.   This is the time to be the savior of your alma mater and cement your legacy.

We'll have a car at KCI tomorrow at 10:30 AM."

[pissclams]

And Lon would say, Hell No, if I came back I would bring my own recruits with me.

[F-BuckFiddy]

Let me say that long term I don't think Lon is the best hire for the long run.  BUT...I would be totally fine with having him back.  Not holding any grudges.

[catsfan20012002]

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

[mjrod]

And cheerleaders.

Have any of you seen those gals at UNLV?

 

[AzCat]

But could he bring his wife? 

[michigancat]

Just sell Dalonte.

[F-BuckFiddy]

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

Like who?  Knowing what you know right now, who could KSU possible hire for "loyalty?"  Dana Altman?  Jim Wooldridge?  Bob Huggins?  Loyalty is dead.

[plaincat]

These players we've recruited agreed to come because they thought Bob Huggins would get them to the NBA.  Lon, as a former NBA head coach with multiple final fours at the college level, is a viable alternative.

These coaches that recruited these players want to be head coaches.  Coaching for Lon builds their resumes as X and O's coaches as well as great recruiters.

Forget loyalty.  This is about giving people what they want.  Lon gets a title and everybody wins.

[GoldbrickGangBoss]

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

Like who?  Knowing what you know right now, who could KSU possible hire for "loyalty?"  Dana Altman?  Jim Wooldridge?  Bob Huggins?  Loyalty is dead.

[swish1]

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

Like who?  Knowing what you know right now, who could KSU possible hire for "loyalty?"  Dana Altman?  Jim Wooldridge?  Bob Huggins?  Loyalty is dead.

steve henson.

[doom]

I sit under my desk and cry.

[michigancat]

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

Like who?  Knowing what you know right now, who could KSU possible hire for "loyalty?"  Dana Altman?  Jim Wooldridge?  Bob Huggins?  Loyalty is dead.

steve henson.

 

[catsfan20012002]

I'd take Dana Altman in a heartbeat.

[chuckleberry]

if we hire steve hinson i will start watching womens basketball

[mjrod]

Never accept what Rusty tells you.

The only thing I agree with Rusty on is a home run hire, because it's that or Dalonte Hill/ Frank Martin and only because we can probably keep the talent.   The home run hire would have to be good enough to make that happen.

Unfortunately, I don't think the home run hire of RICK FATASS MAJERUS is a viable.. at all.   Rusty is a retard when it comes to picking coaches (see Bob Huggins) and neither is Montgomery a viable option.   We need a younger coach that will take the time to make the program respectable again.

[plaincat]

We need an older coach that will keep these assistants on for a few more years of seasoning before one of them is ready to take over.

The name "Lon Kruger" comes to mind.

[swish1]

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

Like who?  Knowing what you know right now, who could KSU possible hire for "loyalty?"  Dana Altman?  Jim Wooldridge?  Bob Huggins?  Loyalty is dead.

steve henson.

so he would be a bad hire based on loyalty?

 

[mjrod]

I'm in agreement with Kruger.

He's more of the younger type I'd like to see.

[michigancat]

Unfortunately, I don't think the home run hire of RICK FATASS MAJERUS is a viable.. at all.   Rusty is a retard when it comes to picking coaches (see Bob Huggins) and neither is Montgomery a viable option.   We need a younger coach that will take the time to make the program respectable again.

Young home runs don't exist.

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

Like who?  Knowing what you know right now, who could KSU possible hire for "loyalty?"  Dana Altman?  Jim Wooldridge?  Bob Huggins?  Loyalty is dead.

steve henson.

so he would be a bad hire based on loyalty?

 

He'd just be a bad hire.  Period.

[mjrod]

Unfortunately, I don't think the home run hire of RICK FATASS MAJERUS is a viable.. at all.   Rusty is a retard when it comes to picking coaches (see Bob Huggins) and neither is Montgomery a viable option.   We need a younger coach that will take the time to make the program respectable again.

Young home runs don't exist.

[swish1]

Unfortunately, I don't think the home run hire of RICK FATASS MAJERUS is a viable.. at all.   Rusty is a retard when it comes to picking coaches (see Bob Huggins) and neither is Montgomery a viable option.   We need a younger coach that will take the time to make the program respectable again.

Young home runs don't exist.

Um.....How about someone with an ounce of loyalty?

Like who?  Knowing what you know right now, who could KSU possible hire for "loyalty?"  Dana Altman?  Jim Wooldridge?  Bob Huggins?  Loyalty is dead.

steve henson.

so he would be a bad hire based on loyalty?

 

He'd just be a bad hire.  Period.

but 60 year old mike montgomery would be a good hire?  by the way i dont think that bob knight has worked out that well for texas tech.  i remember them being reasonably successful before knight got there with tony battie and some guy named carr.  knight certainly hasnt turned them into some kind of badass or even remotely scary team.

[michigancat]

but 60 year old mike montgomery would be a good hire?  by the way i dont think that bob knight has worked out that well for texas tech.  i remember them being reasonably successful before knight got there with tony battie and some guy named carr.  knight certainly hasnt turned them into some kind of badass or even remotely scary team.

Knight has had the best six year run in Texas Tech history.  It isn't even close.

[Dan Rydell]

Lon has to be #1 right now.  He would have a great chance of continuing the momentum that Huggs started.

[swish1]

but 60 year old mike montgomery would be a good hire?  by the way i dont think that bob knight has worked out that well for texas tech.  i remember them being reasonably successful before knight got there with tony battie and some guy named carr.  knight certainly hasnt turned them into some kind of badass or even remotely scary team.

Knight has had the best six year run in Texas Tech history.  It isn't even close.

thats great.  when have they ever been badass?   he turned them into a decent at best program.  i want more than that and i want more than &@#%ing mike montgomery.

[michigancat]

thats great.  when have they ever been badass?   he turned them into a decent at best program.  i want more than that and i want more than &*$@!ing mike montgomery.

Jesus, you're going to be pissed when you find out who our next coach is.

[plaincat]

I'm in agreement with Kruger.

He's more of the younger type I'd like to see.

I hate to be the one to break the news, but you're really old.

[michigancat]

Dude's won 70% of his games over 18 years.

Montana    8    154-77    .667
Stanford    18    393-167    .702
Career    26    547-244    .692


Finished his Stanford tenure with 10 straight 20 win seasons, and had three 30 win seasons.

Year     School      W- L      W/L Pct     
1978-79    Montana    14-13    .519    
1979-80    Montana    17-11    .607    
1980-81    Montana    19-9    .679    
1981-82    Montana    17-10    .630    
1982-83    Montana    21-8    .724    
1983-84    Montana    23-7    .767    
1984-85    Montana    22-8    .733    
1985-86    Montana    21-11    .656    
1986-87    Stanford    15-13    .536    
1987-88    Stanford    21-12    .636    
1988-89    Stanford    26-7    .788    
1989-90    Stanford    18-12    .600    
1990-91    Stanford    20-13    .606     NIT champ
1991-92    Stanford    18-11    .621    
1992-93    Stanford    7-23    .233    
1993-94    Stanford    17-11    .607    
1994-95    Stanford    20-9    .690    
1995-96    Stanford    21-8    .724     Forfeit win: California
1996-97    Stanford    22-8    .733    
1997-98    Stanford    30-5    .857    
1998-99    Stanford    26-7    .788    
1999-00    Stanford    27-4    .871    
2000-01    Stanford    31-3    .912    
2001-02    Stanford    20-10    .667    
2002-03    Stanford    24-9    .727    
2003-04    Stanford    30-2    .938    

[swish1]

thats great.  when have they ever been badass?   he turned them into a decent at best program.  i want more than that and i want more than &*$@!ing mike montgomery.

Jesus, you're going to be pissed when you find out who our next coach is.

not if its grant.

[swish1]

Dude's won 70% of his games over 18 years.

Montana    8    154-77    .667
Stanford    18    393-167    .702
Career    26    547-244    .692


Finished his Stanford tenure with 10 straight 20 win seasons, and had three 30 win seasons.

Year     School      W- L      W/L Pct     
1978-79    Montana    14-13    .519    
1979-80    Montana    17-11    .607    
1980-81    Montana    19-9    .679    
1981-82    Montana    17-10    .630    
1982-83    Montana    21-8    .724    
1983-84    Montana    23-7    .767    
1984-85    Montana    22-8    .733    
1985-86    Montana    21-11    .656    
1986-87    Stanford    15-13    .536    
1987-88    Stanford    21-12    .636    
1988-89    Stanford    26-7    .788    
1989-90    Stanford    18-12    .600    
1990-91    Stanford    20-13    .606     NIT champ
1991-92    Stanford    18-11    .621    
1992-93    Stanford    7-23    .233    
1993-94    Stanford    17-11    .607    
1994-95    Stanford    20-9    .690    
1995-96    Stanford    21-8    .724     Forfeit win: California
1996-97    Stanford    22-8    .733    
1997-98    Stanford    30-5    .857    
1998-99    Stanford    26-7    .788    
1999-00    Stanford    27-4    .871    
2000-01    Stanford    31-3    .912    
2001-02    Stanford    20-10    .667    
2002-03    Stanford    24-9    .727    
2003-04    Stanford    30-2    .938    

the dude is old as balls.  he wont have any kind of sustained success at kstate so why not take a chance on a guy like grant instead who would be much cheaper?