I don't normally listen to the GPC podcast, but I did last night. Fitz made the point that if Currie has something against you, he will basically make up a rule to prevent you from doing certain things. He pointed out that GPC used to be a pregame sponsor for football with a segment and that Fitz used to be the color commentator back up for basketball. A couple of years ago, Currie came to him with a rule that said because of his status as a media member and being part of rivals, he was not able to work for athletics any longer or be a sponsor. However, Fitz then pointed out many rivals colleagues that work for athletics at their institutions, including a guy at Texas Tech and the guy at Tennessee.
Granted, I get that some of that is Fitz being ticked at Currie, but when he pointed out others that do the exact same thing with no problems that Currie made up rules to prevent him from doing, he made his point IMO.
Normally I'd say this is tin-foil hat thinking, but my first thought when reading this is John knew about Fitz' rep on Twitter and didn't want that associated with KSU in case Fitz got drunk and tweeted something super creepy. John doesn't need the risk of that guy being financially tied to KSU. Which like or hate Fitz, is ridiculous.
I don't know if it's been said in this thread, but John once told a reporter "I am risk management". I think he takes that thinking into compliance, which is where it could hurt you on the field. With John there is no "I go 4 over the speed limit, if it accidentally go up to 8 over, I'll pay the ticket and move on" mentality.