Brad Underwood isn't coming to KState...

[Rage Against the McKee]

Brad was easily the best coach that we could have hired this season, and everyone wants oscar gone. Not getting him isn't the end of the world, but it's the end of next season. At least he went to a Big 12 school so there is a slight chance he does well and gets Currie fired. Everyone will freak out again next offseason when we fail to replace oscar with the obvious hire, too.

[michigancat]

1.  K-State's basketball program history has brought together two generations that experienced high achievement: Jack Hartman era and the Huggins/Martin era.  Brad Underwood is a bridge between those eras.

2.  K-State basketball fans that were excited by either era are disgusted with the current situation.

3.  People have personal connections to Brad.

4.  People hate Currie/oscar and are looking for ways to make them look bad.

it's all this (besides the fact that underwood's resume really is outstanding and he's a fantastic hire for osu and would have been for kstate).


but the reaction we saw when it became apparent that underwood would be leaving sfa this year was pure fear.  last year, when kstate kept weber, in the back of every fan's mind was the fact that we could always turn to underwood.  why not give weber another year?  what's there to lose?  if he doesn't work out, we just bring back brad.  so we lose a year or two, bfd, it just gives us more time to see what underwood can do.  underwood, the one man we knew would take the job.  the one hire so obvious we knew currie would have to make it.  and this year, while our ad was twiddling his thumbs, osu stole our safety net.  suddenly we're 1000 feet in the air wobbling between weber on one side and an unknown currie hire on the other.

I'll agree that his resume is unprecedented. The closest comparison I can come up with is Anthony Grant at VCU (who wasn't quite as dominant but was at a higher level).

[michigancat]

Brad was easily the best coach that we could have hired this season, and everyone wants oscar gone. Not getting him isn't the end of the world, but it's the end of next season. At least he went to a Big 12 school so there is a slight chance he does well and gets Currie fired. Everyone will freak out again next offseason when we fail to replace oscar with the obvious hire, too.

There is always an obvious hire.

[pissclams]

this board is way too over the top sometimes

[Dr Rick Daris]

this board is way too over the top sometimes

Obviously. But there are people way, way outside this board that suddenly also started to get pretty over the top angry within the last month. Like, it's not just us.

[kso_FAN]

1.  K-State's basketball program history has brought together two generations that experienced high achievement: Jack Hartman era and the Huggins/Martin era.  Brad Underwood is a bridge between those eras.

2.  K-State basketball fans that were excited by either era are disgusted with the current situation.

3.  People have personal connections to Brad.

4.  People hate Currie/oscar and are looking for ways to make them look bad.

it's all this (besides the fact that underwood's resume really is outstanding and he's a fantastic hire for osu and would have been for kstate).


but the reaction we saw when it became apparent that underwood would be leaving sfa this year was pure fear.  last year, when kstate kept weber, in the back of every fan's mind was the fact that we could always turn to underwood.  why not give weber another year?  what's there to lose?  if he doesn't work out, we just bring back brad.  so we lose a year or two, bfd, it just gives us more time to see what underwood can do.  underwood, the one man we knew would take the job.  the one hire so obvious we knew currie would have to make it.  and this year, while our ad was twiddling his thumbs, osu stole our safety net.  suddenly we're 1000 feet in the air wobbling between weber on one side and an unknown currie hire on the other.

I'll agree that his resume is unprecedented. The closest comparison I can come up with is Anthony Grant at VCU (who wasn't quite as dominant but was at a higher level).

Grant is a really good one. Pearl at Milwaukee was somewhat close, but he had really high D2 success before that. Prohm won a lot in a short time a Murray State, but didn't have the NCAA trips.

[MakeItRain]

Some desire for Underwood isn't what gets me. What baffles me is how people act like it's a given that he's a slam dunk hire that we'd be crazy to pass up.

yes

I was all over BBB, but I agree with this.

I'm stunned that you and rusty can be this obtuse. That's not what this was about and I'm surprised you guys don't recognize that.

What is it about?

Because I think it's about KSU fans being so small-timey that a large contingent of its fanbase has convinced itself that if we don't hire a low-major coach in his 50's who played on a shitty KSU team THIRTY YEARS AGO we are doomed to eternal failure. Like, this was the only opportunity we will ever have to be kinda good and the mean old AD shocked us by taking kinda goodness away from us with this news. Golly gee, guess the best we can hope for Steve Henson.

How do you not understand for most of the people you're degenerating that Brad is a secondary storyline? If we weren't stuck with Weber/Currie/Schulz and Brad became available there wouldn't have been this much uproar. If we heard that Buzz Williams was interested in K-State this same thing would have happened. The alumni piece of this is relevant because he was a bona fide hot coaching prospect that actually wants to be here. There isn't a fan base in the country that wouldn't be excited if they were struggling and they had a shot at the best candidate on the market.

Also I'd understand your point if of the narrative was about what Brad was going to do for us. The narrative never got beyond, "fire oscar, hire Brad." No one talked about the recruits he will bring or the conference titles he will win. Your "chill out rubes he isn't John Wooden or Coach K" tone is inappropriate and disingenuous.

[michigancat]

How do you not understand for most of the people you're degenerating that Brad is a secondary storyline? If we weren't stuck with Weber/Currie/Schulz and Brad became available there wouldn't have been this much uproar. If we heard that Buzz Williams was interested in K-State this same thing would have happened. The alumni piece of this is relevant because he was a bona fide hot coaching prospect that actually wants to be here. There isn't a fan base in the country that wouldn't be excited if they were struggling and they had a shot at the best candidate on the market.

I disagree that there would be a similar uproar if Buzz Williams had been interested and that Underwood is the best coaching candidate on the market. Hell, you yourself disagreed with that yesterday.

[michigancat]

1.  K-State's basketball program history has brought together two generations that experienced high achievement: Jack Hartman era and the Huggins/Martin era.  Brad Underwood is a bridge between those eras.

2.  K-State basketball fans that were excited by either era are disgusted with the current situation.

3.  People have personal connections to Brad.

4.  People hate Currie/oscar and are looking for ways to make them look bad.

it's all this (besides the fact that underwood's resume really is outstanding and he's a fantastic hire for osu and would have been for kstate).


but the reaction we saw when it became apparent that underwood would be leaving sfa this year was pure fear.  last year, when kstate kept weber, in the back of every fan's mind was the fact that we could always turn to underwood.  why not give weber another year?  what's there to lose?  if he doesn't work out, we just bring back brad.  so we lose a year or two, bfd, it just gives us more time to see what underwood can do.  underwood, the one man we knew would take the job.  the one hire so obvious we knew currie would have to make it.  and this year, while our ad was twiddling his thumbs, osu stole our safety net.  suddenly we're 1000 feet in the air wobbling between weber on one side and an unknown currie hire on the other.

I'll agree that his resume is unprecedented. The closest comparison I can come up with is Anthony Grant at VCU (who wasn't quite as dominant but was at a higher level).

Grant is a really good one. Pearl at Milwaukee was somewhat close, but he had really high D2 success before that. Prohm won a lot in a short time a Murray State, but didn't have the NCAA trips.

I didn't realize how well Prohm had done. Great hire by ISU, given the timing.

[MakeItRain]

How do you not understand for most of the people you're degenerating that Brad is a secondary storyline? If we weren't stuck with Weber/Currie/Schulz and Brad became available there wouldn't have been this much uproar. If we heard that Buzz Williams was interested in K-State this same thing would have happened. The alumni piece of this is relevant because he was a bona fide hot coaching prospect that actually wants to be here. There isn't a fan base in the country that wouldn't be excited if they were struggling and they had a shot at the best candidate on the market.

I disagree that there would be a similar uproar if Buzz Williams had been interested and that Underwood is the best coaching candidate on the market. Hell, you yourself disagreed with that yesterday.

I said I wouldn't hire him first and everyone who responded said the same thing. That strengths my point that this was more about oscar and less about Brad. Brad became the narrative because it seemed viable that Currie could can oscar because a highly sought after candidate would have taken the job. You're kidding yourself if you don't think that we wouldn't go through the same thing tomorrow Gary Parrish reported tomorrow that Archie Miller was interested in coaching K-State.

Sure there were some that this was all about Brad, but again none of those people were acting like he's new and improved Bill Self so I don't understand you being so high horse-y about this and drumming up a narrative to bash people over the head with.

[sys]

I'll agree that his resume is unprecedented. The closest comparison I can come up with is Anthony Grant at VCU (who wasn't quite as dominant but was at a higher level).

it's not exact, but gregg marshall's last three years at winthrop are pretty similar in terms of complete dominance of a low-major conference.

[michigancat]

I'll agree that his resume is unprecedented. The closest comparison I can come up with is Anthony Grant at VCU (who wasn't quite as dominant but was at a higher level).

it's not exact, but gregg marshall's last three years at winthrop are pretty similar in terms of complete dominance of a low-major conference.

Yes, also a good one.

[kso_FAN]

I'll agree that his resume is unprecedented. The closest comparison I can come up with is Anthony Grant at VCU (who wasn't quite as dominant but was at a higher level).

it's not exact, but gregg marshall's last three years at winthrop are pretty similar in terms of complete dominance of a low-major conference.

Yes, also a good one.

True. The big difference is that Marshall built that program and sustained it. 7 NCAAs in 9 years and winning 81% of your conference games is really impressive.

I was looking for Gregg Marshall posts from the past and found this thread: http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=9919.msg211313#msg211313

Sad to look back on given our current state.

And also found this! http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=1362.msg23150#msg23150

[Cire]

Where in the world are you getting that kstate fans thought he was some sort of savior?. The outcry for brad was pleading with the admin to take a shot.  Hiring oscar was not taking a shot at winning it was filling a vacancy.    John Currie lost his star player and had to grab some dude away from the chicken nuggets stand to fill a spot.  I think oscar's first year made shulz think curry really knew what he was doing.  I think curry can't hire anyone decent and I think that curry knows it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[michigancat]

I'll agree that his resume is unprecedented. The closest comparison I can come up with is Anthony Grant at VCU (who wasn't quite as dominant but was at a higher level).

it's not exact, but gregg marshall's last three years at winthrop are pretty similar in terms of complete dominance of a low-major conference.

Yes, also a good one.

True. The big difference is that Marshall built that program and sustained it. 7 NCAAs in 9 years and winning 81% of your conference games is really impressive.

I was looking for Gregg Marshall posts from the past and found this thread: http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=9919.msg211313#msg211313

Sad to look back on given our current state.

And also found this! http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=1362.msg23150#msg23150

man, a Tony Mitchell mention. Good times.

Also, ha! In my defense, Marshall was below .500 after three seasons at that time.

[pissclams]

Where in the world are you getting that kstate fans thought he was some sort of savior?. The outcry for brad was pleading with the admin to take a shot.  Hiring oscar was not taking a shot at winning it was filling a vacancy.    John Currie lost his star player and had to grab some dude away from the chicken nuggets stand to fill a spot.  I think oscar's first year made shulz think curry really knew what he was doing.  I think curry can't hire anyone decent and I think that curry knows it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hiring a good coach isn't that hard

[Cire]

It is if you are a known asshat that is hard to work for/with


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pissclams]

It is if you are a known asshat that is hard to work for/with


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

no, it really isn't
and no one knows that currie fits that description (outside of the narrative we've constructed here to make ourselves feel better for losing frank).

[chum1]

Thinking that Underwood could be the mechanism to force Currie's hand with regard to oscar is way crazier than thinking that Underwood is a slam dunk hire.

[MakeItRain]

Thinking that Underwood could be the mechanism to force Currie's hand with regard to oscar is way crazier than thinking that Underwood is a slam dunk hire.

Well no one really thought either but keep barking at your own shadow

[chum1]

Thinking that Underwood could be the mechanism to force Currie's hand with regard to oscar is way crazier than thinking that Underwood is a slam dunk hire.

Well no one really thought either but keep barking at your own shadow

Bullshit. Plenty of people thought each. But I was largely explaining why I would naturally assume that people were acting like Underwood was a slam dunk hire - because the alternatives are just way more crazy.

[MakeItRain]

Thinking that Underwood could be the mechanism to force Currie's hand with regard to oscar is way crazier than thinking that Underwood is a slam dunk hire.

Well no one really thought either but keep barking at your own shadow

Bullshit. Plenty of people thought each. But I was largely explaining why I would naturally assume that people were acting like Underwood was a slam dunk hire - because the alternatives are just way more crazy.

Nope. No one acted like Brad was a "slam dunk hire" they thought he was the right hire, slam dunk hire is a cute little malleable phase though that you can sculpt to fit your agenda. Also no one thought Brad would force Currie's hand, people did think Brad was the guy who would have had the Johnson's, the Ice's, and their ilk hold Currie's feet to the fire and he certainly was the guy to re-engage Garth Gardiner.

[chum1]

Thinking that Underwood could be the mechanism to force Currie's hand with regard to oscar is way crazier than thinking that Underwood is a slam dunk hire.

Well no one really thought either but keep barking at your own shadow

Bullshit. Plenty of people thought each. But I was largely explaining why I would naturally assume that people were acting like Underwood was a slam dunk hire - because the alternatives are just way more crazy.

Nope. No one acted like Brad was a "slam dunk hire" they thought he was the right hire, slam dunk hire is a cute little malleable phase though that you can sculpt to fit your agenda. Also no one thought Brad would force Currie's hand, people did think Brad was the guy who would have had the Johnson's, the Ice's, and their ilk hold Currie's feet to the fire and he certainly was the guy to re-engage Garth Gardiner.

I'm not into this sort of nitpicking. ("Right hire" is okay, but "slam dunk" isn't?)

So, please just substitute everything you said for everything I said. It's all very out of touch with reality.

[pissclams]

Thinking that Underwood could be the mechanism to force Currie's hand with regard to oscar is way crazier than thinking that Underwood is a slam dunk hire.

Well no one really thought either but keep barking at your own shadow

Bullshit. Plenty of people thought each. But I was largely explaining why I would naturally assume that people were acting like Underwood was a slam dunk hire - because the alternatives are just way more crazy.

Nope. No one acted like Brad was a "slam dunk hire" they thought he was the right hire, slam dunk hire is a cute little malleable phase though that you can sculpt to fit your agenda. Also no one thought Brad would force Currie's hand, people did think Brad was the guy who would have had the Johnson's, the Ice's, and their ilk hold Currie's feet to the fire and he certainly was the guy to re-engage Garth Gardiner.

I'm not into this sort of nitpicking. ("Right hire" is okay, but "slam dunk" isn't?)

So, please just substitute everything you said for everything I said. It's all very out of touch with reality.

he's not nitpicking, he's arguing.  nitpicking is just a cute little malleable phrase that you've sculpted to fit your agenda.  quit being so obtuse.

[Kat Kid]

looks like a lot of people didn't pay attention during speech freshman year.  pathos, logos, ad hom.  it has all made an appearance.  make sure to start with a hook and close with a killer finishing move and leave your audience on its feet.