Post by: Panjandrum on March 19, 2016, 10:45:14 PM
I took margins earlier today from the Equity in Athletics report. That wasn't really detailed info. I went further down the page (http://www.kstatesports.com/page/financial-info (http://www.kstatesports.com/page/financial-info)) and looked at the NCAA statements of revenue and expenses. While the numbers don't match up (no idea why; probably need Dax to weigh in), the more detailed breakdown illuminated a few things.
1) Ticket sales as a percentage of overall revenue is pretty damn static
For the five years of reports out there (2011-2015), here were ticket sale revenues and the percentage to overall revenue:
2011: $3,584,504 (34%)
2012: $3,844,944 (31%)
2013: $3,911,661 (33%)
2014: $3,541,239 (31%)
2015: $3,708,631 (31%)
We can fight about ticket sales and impacts to ticket sales, but in Jake's senior year, when we were preseason Top 5, we saw a 3% bump in percentage to overall revenue. To me, that speaks volumes.
2) Our average profit margin is relatively static
Average MBB profit every year, according to this report, is $5.9 million. Every single year, with the exception of 2012, saw a profit margin within a few hundred thousand dollars. The biggest deviation was 2012, where we saw an increase of ~$950k over average. That year had an unusually high distribution from the NCAA. I don't know why.
3) oscar's teams have exceeded average revenue 2/3 years.
Average revenue is $11.6 million a year. In 2013 and 2015, we've exceeded that margin twice. The year we missed, we were short about $375k. The years we were over? We were over about $250-350k.
All of this makes it easier to understand why we just gave oscar Frank's old contract. No matter what we do in this space, we're making the same amount of money. As long as oscar just keeps us in that ballpark, and keeps us out of trouble with the NCAA and doesn't give Currie headaches, I can see why Currie is hesitant to make a move. We don't want to pony up the $2.5 million because whatever we do doesn't seem to really move the meter one way or another, and that $2.5 million is basically a sunk cost because we just want to make a change.
Which, again, supports my narrative that the choice of oscar vs. Brad is going to have to be made by the big money donors that are providing a separate line item in the budget. I'm sure Currie would be open to it if someone is willing to write that check for $2.5 million and then add whatever it would cost to break Brad's contract. But he'd rather have someone write the same check to update the East Side club seats.
It's simplistic thinking, but looking at these numbers, I'm wondering if Currie looks at this like building a boathouse. It's just a big money expense that isn't really going to positively impact his revenues. Therefore, all he needs to do is put out some more videos about #Family, vilify the "youths" of today (and their devil weed), and he'll keep that core 11k season ticket holders shelling out the money to make his yearly plan.
Post by: HerrSonntag on March 19, 2016, 10:49:57 PM
Post by: DOD Take 2 on March 19, 2016, 11:09:42 PM
Post by: Trim on March 19, 2016, 11:19:40 PM
Post by: The Big Train on March 19, 2016, 11:21:05 PM
There is no other conclusion to what was said here. We can bitch and moan all we want, but until we impact his money model, nothing will be done. Maybe I need to step my game up, but I am willing to do that if it means we can get rid of oscar.
Post by: Ptolemy on March 20, 2016, 12:24:47 AM
I have two season tickets that are not being renewed. If he fired oscar and hired a coach that wasn't just fired from a p5 conference school, and had successful head coaching experience and/or a KState pedigree, I would buy 4 tickets tomorrow.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 01:02:23 AM
Are those ticket sales revenue figures just for the ticket price, i.e. they don't include the mandatory donation required to buy season tickets in many sections?
There was a line item for contributions, too, and it was pretty much around $3 million a year, give or take a few hundred thousand.
Aside from the NCAA line item, nothing really deviated all that much year over year.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 01:13:47 AM
End of the day, doesn't matter how much of a money nerd Currie is, you must let your feelings be measured by your dollars.
I have two season tickets that are not being renewed. If he fired oscar and hired a coach that wasn't just fired from a p5 conference school, and had successful head coaching experience and/or a KState pedigree, I would buy 4 tickets tomorrow.
We haven't seen 2015-2016 data yet, but your tickets will probably be taken by someone else if recent history is any indicator.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 01:18:07 AM
This is one of Panj long posts I normally don't read, but I read every word.
Jesus Christ; I gave you bullet points. How lazy are you?
Post by: nicname on March 20, 2016, 01:26:45 AM
Post by: sys on March 20, 2016, 04:27:33 AM
you'd be better served looking at the altman years.
Post by: The Big Train on March 20, 2016, 07:38:59 AM
This is one of Panj long posts I normally don't read, but I read every word.
Jesus Christ; I gave you bullet points. How lazy are you?
I read this one tho! I guess if not wanting to read 10 page essays on a KSU message board is lazy, I am pretty lazy.
Post by: Cire on March 20, 2016, 08:56:57 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 20, 2016, 09:55:45 AM
Post by: O-town Kat on March 20, 2016, 09:56:09 AM
you'd be better served looking at the altman years.
Or try applying % decreases from football 2006-2007-2008?
Feels a little like 2008 where the case could've been made for Ron to get a 4th year, but the fanbase was so miserable about the program it would've been hard to market him for another season.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 10:03:15 AM
jfc, panj. of course ticket revenue was nearly static during those years. paid attendance was nearly static. 2016 will be the first year of ticket sales following a down year. 2017 will be the first year of sales following two down years. until you can include those years, your analysis is meaningless.
you'd be better served looking at the altman years.
I don't have numbers for the Altman years, but did they do Ahearn donations back in those days like they do today?
I plan to look at this when they release in June/July for this year.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 10:31:21 AM
What I don't like is that when you read one, it includes that year and the previous. And when you read them side by side, old and new, the line times for the previous year don't always add up in terms of total revenue. The previous year's is usually adjusted down.
Regardless, I played with the numbers a little bit more to get a better feel for growth.
Major points:
* Year over year, MBB ticket sales make up 5-6% of overall revenue
* Year over year, Football ticket sales make up between 16-19% of overall revenue
* Year over year, MBB revenue distributions from the NCAA/Big 12 make up 6-7% of overall revenue
* In the past six years of data (2010-2015), Big 12/NCAA distributions of football revenue have gone from 12% of overall revenue in 2010 to 28% in 2015. This accounts for nearly $17 million additional dollars per year between 2010 and 2015
* Contributions (not sure what all of this entails) generally make up between 20-26% of revenue; recent years have seen 26% (2013-2015)
* Profits in MBB have been relatively static for the past six years. Only one year (2012) has it been outside of a $2.2-2.8(ish) million range.
* Profits in Football have seen drastic change, going from $6.7 million in 2010 to $18 million in 2015.
* Ticket sales in football have seen a $3 million increase between 2010-2015, Big 12 distributions have seen an annual $8 million a year increase
I get what sys is saying, and I agree that we've had a generally full Bramlage the last few years, therefore, revenue is going to remain static. However, my main point is that we know what the ceiling most likely looks like, and that's seeing, maybe, a 1-2% bump to total revenue if we were to completely sell out and up the price and get more Ahearn donations. But, again, that's not going to pay for oscar's buyout in less than 2-3 years.
Now, if you want to look at opportunity cost of having a less full stadium, I'll go with that. If we saw a 25% decrease in ticket sale revenue, you're looking at an impact of several hundred thousand dollars, which is probably about a 1% impact to the overall revenue. At 50%? That would be a $1.8 million hit to the budget. ~2.5% That's all. It takes two years of that to recover the oscar buyout, and we certainly won't see half of ticket sales decrease this quickly.
So, again, if we're looking at monetary impact to sway Currie, it's going to have to come at the Ice/Vanier/Edgerley level. They are the folks who can make Currie feel financial pain in the short term. A grassroots movement that could decrease attendance by 1500-2000 won't make a dent.
Post by: AndrewVonLintel on March 20, 2016, 11:33:43 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 11:50:09 AM
My assumption is Huggins and Michael Beasley returned our ticket sales to normal. Since then it has probably been flat. I would suspect that a lot of seats will open up this summer and more deals will emerge.
My contention is that it won't decrease that much. We return pretty much everyone, and we add a Top 100 recruit and a kid in Cartier Diarra that seems to look better every day.
My guess is that there will be a press release this summer about how Budke is a recipient of the Brian Roheleder/Chris Merriweather/Victor Ojeleye memorial senior scholarship. We will get a lot of videos of the guys working hard in the gym. There will be buddy interview/motivation videos with DJamer and Wes, Dean and Austin. oscar will rave to the TCJ about how much progress the guys made in Europe and during workouts. He will be radiant about the team culture during media day.
And come November 1, we won't see more than a 5-10% decrease in overall attendance.
Post by: captaincrap on March 20, 2016, 12:05:14 PM
It was a good post and gives you a good idea at what Currie cares about.
Confirmation bias does not provide any insight to what another person cares about.
Post by: Kat Kid on March 20, 2016, 12:09:31 PM
My assumption is Huggins and Michael Beasley returned our ticket sales to normal. Since then it has probably been flat. I would suspect that a lot of seats will open up this summer and more deals will emerge.
My contention is that it won't decrease that much. We return pretty much everyone, and we add a Top 100 recruit and a kid in Cartier Diarra that seems to look better every day.
My guess is that there will be a press release this summer about how Budke is a recipient of the Brian Roheleder/Chris Merriweather/Victor Ojeleye memorial senior scholarship. We will get a lot of videos of the guys working hard in the gym. There will be buddy interview/motivation videos with DJamer and Wes, Dean and Austin. oscar will rave to the TCJ about how much progress the guys made in Europe and during workouts. He will be radiant about the team culture during media day.
And come November 1, we won't see more than a 5-10% decrease in overall attendance.
this is all true.
Post by: Kat Kid on March 20, 2016, 12:12:54 PM
It was a good post and gives you a good idea at what Currie cares about.
Confirmation bias does not provide any insight to what another person cares about.
Let's dispel with the notion that Currie doesn't know what he is doing, Currie knows exactly what he is doing. Currie, wants to win and he can be ruthless in pursuit of that goal. I'm not just talking about tennis either. Currie fred Deb and held Leti and Angel hostage to win. I can't wait to see the beast unleashed to go get Brad. Will certainly make a lot of people look like fools here, that much is for sure.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 12:19:39 PM
It was a good post and gives you a good idea at what Currie cares about.
Confirmation bias does not provide any insight to what another person cares about.
I believe that Currie's main priority is the financial health of the department, and then it's the compliance. If we can win cleanly, and in a fiscally responsible manner, then he is happy.
I do not believe for one second that he doesn't do a cost analysis when making major decisions. He's too good of a money manager for that. I absolutely believe he has probably done the math on replacing oscar for Brad and has that argument in the quiver if need be.
My contention has been that it will take the big money to push for a change to make him move on oscar. And I don't believe that they've made that demand because none of them want to write a check for his buyout, and Currie doesn't want to take that money out of his budget because the cost/benefit isn't there.
Post by: DOD Take 2 on March 20, 2016, 12:42:10 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 20, 2016, 12:46:23 PM
Post by: captaincrap on March 20, 2016, 12:48:04 PM
It was a good post and gives you a good idea at what Currie cares about.
Confirmation bias does not provide any insight to what another person cares about.
I believe that Currie's main priority is the financial health of the department, and then it's the compliance. If we can win cleanly, and in a fiscally responsible manner, then he is happy.
I do not believe for one second that he doesn't do a cost analysis when making major decisions. He's too good of a money manager for that. I absolutely believe he has probably done the math on replacing oscar for Brad and has that argument in the quiver if need be.
My contention has been that it will take the big money to push for a change to make him move on oscar. And I don't believe that they've made that demand because none of them want to write a check for his buyout, and Currie doesn't want to take that money out of his budget because the cost/benefit isn't there.
People see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear.
Your belief that Currie is an accountant first and foremost influences the conclusions you are making out of basic budget numbers.
Post by: TheHamburglar on March 20, 2016, 12:54:33 PM
1. Rejuvenated basketball fan base
2. $3mm head start on East Side Club redo.
Post by: Trim on March 20, 2016, 12:59:30 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 20, 2016, 01:04:47 PM
Post by: captaincrap on March 20, 2016, 01:06:59 PM
Captain, what do you think Currie would rather have:
1. Rejuvenated basketball fan base
2. $3mm head start on East Side Club redo.
what do you mean by rejuvenated fan base
Post by: TheHamburglar on March 20, 2016, 01:19:42 PM
Captain, what do you think Currie would rather have:
1. Rejuvenated basketball fan base
2. $3mm head start on East Side Club redo.
what do you mean by rejuvenated fan base
One where this revolt isn't happening.
There's a pic of Currie they always use from the 2011 KU game where he's in front of the students. My brothers are 2 of the students in that pic. They did everything they could to get those seats. Both are now KSU alums where apathy has set in to the point they don't even watch anymore. Keeping the excitement in those types of fans.
Post by: CHONGS on March 20, 2016, 01:27:39 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 20, 2016, 01:28:58 PM
There is no revolt happening.
Most accurate thing posted in this thread
Post by: TheHamburglar on March 20, 2016, 01:30:39 PM
However, take someone like me. I always had season tickets so I knew I had an in to the 3-5 games per year I wanted to go to. I dropped them because I know I can now easily go to any games. So, a fan base where fans feel like if they want guaranteed seats to any game, they are better off buying season tickets than finding them elsewhere.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 01:50:44 PM
In your analysis of season tickets sales dropping you didnt take into account the increase of sales under the new coach - the difference between sales under oscar and sales under new coach is the real math. Also, did you consider the seat donations required in your math? Another factor includes concession sales, merchandise, etc. All of that could be declining under oscar but might increase under a new coach. More to it than just direct ticket sales. The amount to make up a buyout could be made up quicker than you think.
They didn't break our Ahearn donations out.
Concessions are nominal. I can go look again, but the fluctuation was in the tens of thousands. Parking was the same.
To overcome the buyout, we are talking years. At least two. Which brings us to the last year in his contract anyway.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 01:54:13 PM
I mean, I don't even feel like I have any basis for accepting the assumption that Currie's main priority is to maximize profits with regard to ticket sales, let alone go totally rough ridin' overboard on the idea like this. This shut is nuts.
Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
The contention is that he cares more about balancing the desire to win with fiscal responsibility. He's not going to make a move unless he's incentivized to do so, positively or negatively.
Post by: captaincrap on March 20, 2016, 02:02:55 PM
Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
There are many people on here who believe Currie's main goal is make himself look good. Others say it's having no NCAA infractions. Others say its to get another job. You say its to maximize profits. Others say its something else.
Whatever you think it is, you will find evidence to support it.
Post by: BrokenSky1113 on March 20, 2016, 02:08:58 PM
Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
There are many people on here who believe Currie's main goal is make himself look good. Others say it's having no NCAA infractions. Others say its to get another job. You say its to maximize profits. Others say its something else.
Whatever you think it is, you will find evidence to support it.
It's all four of those things. They aren't that different. They all link together to get a very complete picture of his priorities. He cares about finances and not having infractions, to make himself look good, in order to get another job. It's not that hard.
Post by: Boondock Poonhound on March 20, 2016, 02:09:45 PM
Was canary the last gE'r to spend money to go in the fOOD?
Nope.
Post by: captaincrap on March 20, 2016, 02:16:22 PM
Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
There are many people on here who believe Currie's main goal is make himself look good. Others say it's having no NCAA infractions. Others say its to get another job. You say its to maximize profits. Others say its something else.
Whatever you think it is, you will find evidence to support it.
It's all four of those things. They aren't that different. They all link together to get a very complete picture of his priorities. He cares about finances and not having infractions, to make himself look good, in order to get another job. It's not that hard.
The very best thing to make an AD look good is to win. That's it. Everything else, from profits to image to career advancement, will follow.
It is very confusing to me that people think Currie would rather be financially stable in basketball than win.
Post by: BrokenSky1113 on March 20, 2016, 02:22:22 PM
Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
There are many people on here who believe Currie's main goal is make himself look good. Others say it's having no NCAA infractions. Others say its to get another job. You say its to maximize profits. Others say its something else.
Whatever you think it is, you will find evidence to support it.
It's all four of those things. They aren't that different. They all link together to get a very complete picture of his priorities. He cares about finances and not having infractions, to make himself look good, in order to get another job. It's not that hard.
The very best thing to make an AD look good is to win. That's it. Everything else, from profits to image to career advancement, will follow.
It is very confusing to me that people think Currie would rather be financially stable in basketball than win.
It's confusing to me that you can look at the scope of his tenure as an AD and say the main focus has been winning. I think he is trying to achieve those aforementioned goals and then ride out when/if the winning comes.
Post by: O-town Kat on March 20, 2016, 02:32:51 PM
Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
There are many people on here who believe Currie's main goal is make himself look good. Others say it's having no NCAA infractions. Others say its to get another job. You say its to maximize profits. Others say its something else.
Whatever you think it is, you will find evidence to support it.
It's all four of those things. They aren't that different. They all link together to get a very complete picture of his priorities. He cares about finances and not having infractions, to make himself look good, in order to get another job. It's not that hard.
The very best thing to make an AD look good is to win. That's it. Everything else, from profits to image to career advancement, will follow.
It is very confusing to me that people think Currie would rather be financially stable in basketball than win.
I'm pissed off that we're going to burn up the first 3 months of next season confirming that our meatball coach will not be able to lead the team he assembled to a 5 game improvement in conference to get to postseason.
Post by: captaincrap on March 20, 2016, 02:39:51 PM
It's confusing to me that you can look at the scope of his tenure as an AD and say the main focus has been winning. I think he is trying to achieve those aforementioned goals and then ride out when/if the winning comes.
Like I said, you will see what you want to see. There has been a good deal of success with John here. We won big 12 conf titles in two sports that had never won them before. FB was in top 10 not even 15 months ago and has six straight bowls. Track has produced two of the greatest athletes ever to attend KState, and national champions. You can also say FB was down last year and MBB has been down even further the last two years. I think Frank leaving, oscar replacing him, and the last two seasons is a significant trend. I do not agree with you that it demonstrates a lack of focus on winning.
Post by: Teddy_Westside on March 20, 2016, 02:40:25 PM
I know you want quantifiable data, but I don't have access to it.
However, take someone like me. I always had season tickets so I knew I had an in to the 3-5 games per year I wanted to go to. I dropped them because I know I can now easily go to any games. So, a fan base where fans feel like if they want guaranteed seats to any game, they are better off buying season tickets than finding them elsewhere.
I'm one of said brothers in the pic. That was my freshman year. My junior and senior year's of high school I had season tickets and didn't miss a home game and drove an hour to each one. I went to every game my freshman and sophomore years of college, I went to most, if not all my junior year as well (Oscar's first year). Went to less my senior year. I went to literally ONE game my fifth year and really didn't make much of an effort to watch from home. Barley watched any games this year.
Post by: Trim on March 20, 2016, 02:41:17 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 20, 2016, 02:43:40 PM
There is no revolt happening.
K-State Basketball 2012-20??
The Revolution of Meh
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 03:13:38 PM
Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
There are many people on here who believe Currie's main goal is make himself look good. Others say it's having no NCAA infractions. Others say its to get another job. You say its to maximize profits. Others say its something else.
Whatever you think it is, you will find evidence to support it.
It's all four of those things. They aren't that different. They all link together to get a very complete picture of his priorities. He cares about finances and not having infractions, to make himself look good, in order to get another job. It's not that hard.
The very best thing to make an AD look good is to win. That's it. Everything else, from profits to image to career advancement, will follow.
It is very confusing to me that people think Currie would rather be financially stable in basketball than win.
Look, I'm sure Currie has a priority list sitting around somewhere with a list of things that he wants to accomplish in the next 1-3-5 years (or something like that). He knows what they are, what they're going to cost, how he plans on paying for it, and when he can address them.
Looking at the revenue, and what we've invested in the last several years, it's clear that football is the priority. And why wouldn't it be? It's pulling in almost $35 million a year, and it's profit margins are closing in on $20 million a year. Best case scenario, with basketball, we're looking at running a profit margin in the neighborhood of $3-4 million. That will cover the multi-million dollar losses we take in WBB and maybe one other non-revenue sport.
So, when faced with a choice of finding $3 million lying around to break oscar's contract and go get Brad, what on his priority list gets bumped? Who pays for it? Where does he make up for that $3 million hit? What is his break even date, and what are the potential financial benefits of making that move in relation to his 1-3-5 plan?
I'll give Currie the benefit of the doubt and say that if he could fire oscar and hire Brad tomorrow, he would. I'm sure it would make his life a hell of a lot easier on the donor circuit. But where does "Winning in Basketball" live on his priority list? Because he manages an athletic department with limited resources, and he's already pulled almost $200 million in bonds and private donations to get the BTF, rowing facility, WSC and Vanier, where is that $3 million ear marked? East Side club seats? South end zone? Snyder replacement?
Post by: wetwillie on March 20, 2016, 03:16:14 PM
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2016, 03:17:09 PM
Ok, show proof it is to win.Currie's goal is to always maximize profits.
There are many people on here who believe Currie's main goal is make himself look good. Others say it's having no NCAA infractions. Others say its to get another job. You say its to maximize profits. Others say its something else.
Whatever you think it is, you will find evidence to support it.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Kat Kid on March 20, 2016, 03:28:06 PM
Currie is some evil cartoon genius with a secret plan to maximize profits and build himself a nice new office while losing as much as possible
OR
He has a major blind spot with regards to head coaching experience and made a bad, panicked decision after whiffing on his first choice for basketball.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 03:32:05 PM
It's confusing to me that you can look at the scope of his tenure as an AD and say the main focus has been winning. I think he is trying to achieve those aforementioned goals and then ride out when/if the winning comes.
Like I said, you will see what you want to see. There has been a good deal of success with John here. We won big 12 conf titles in two sports that had never won them before. FB was in top 10 not even 15 months ago and has six straight bowls. Track has produced two of the greatest athletes ever to attend KState, and national champions. You can also say FB was down last year and MBB has been down even further the last two years. I think Frank leaving, oscar replacing him, and the last two seasons is a significant trend. I do not agree with you that it demonstrates a lack of focus on winning.
The puzzling choice of oscar Weber makes everything extremely gray. He wasn't hiring an ascending coach. He didn't pull a lateral hire. He took a guy off of the scrap heap, who was headed to the College of Charleston, and gave him Frank's contract. And now, when oscar's trajectory is starting to mirror what happened at Illinois before he got fired, the perception is that he wanted some intangible thing like compliance. Two seasons of missing the NIT erase the goodwill of that Big 12 title very quickly, especially when that's accompanied by a first round loss to a #13 seed in the same year.
The refusal to call a spade a spade, which is that Currie made a mistake in hiring oscar, if for nothing other than the fact that it was a divisive hire to begin with, is frustrating. You asked someone else what constitutes success. Well, what are peer institutions doing? What has Iowa State been able to do in the last five years? 5 NCAA tournament appearances, 2 Sweet 16's, 2 conference tournament championships, etc. Would I take that over our one shared Big 12 title? Yes. Is there something Iowa State inherently has that we don't that inspires basketball success? No. Why can't we have that? Why should we expect anything less than that?
Do I think a path to showing we're serious about those expectations includes firing oscar Weber and hiring Brad Underwood? Yes. Do I believe that finances are playing a part in preventing that? Yes. Do I believe that hiring Brad Underwood and having a basketball program on par with Iowa State is higher on Currie's list than completing BSFS renovations and building a war chest for the next football coach? No.
And you know what? If that's what Currie wants, and it's what he's prioritized, I'm fine with that. I agree that it all begins and ends with football. But what I don't want is some ruse put forward by the athletic department that oscar Weber's program is the best option we have on the table, and we believe that this is our best shot at winning, because that's complete and utter bullshit. If our primary objective was winning, we would have fired oscar's ass, and John would be in Brooklyn right now laying roses at the door of Brad Underwood's hotel room door.
Post by: Trim on March 20, 2016, 03:34:56 PM
If our primary objective was winning, we would have fired oscar's ass, and John would be in Brooklyn right now laying roses at the door of Brad Underwood's hotel room door.
What if john already knows he can't get brad?
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2016, 03:39:04 PM
If he wants to win, is risk adverse, the frank exit was actually equally or more on frank, then he should have no issue getting brad. If brad doesn't want to come, it's because he wouldn't work here given past experiences, imo.If our primary objective was winning, we would have fired oscar's ass, and John would be in Brooklyn right now laying roses at the door of Brad Underwood's hotel room door.
What if john already knows he can't get brad?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: MakeItRain on March 20, 2016, 03:43:24 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 20, 2016, 03:45:07 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 03:46:35 PM
Currie wants to win, he also doesn't want to work with Frank Martin and he legit thought oscar Weber could get the job done. Which is easier to believe:
Currie is some evil cartoon genius with a secret plan to maximize profits and build himself a nice new office while losing as much as possible
OR
He has a major blind spot with regards to head coaching experience and made a bad, panicked decision after whiffing on his first choice for basketball.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think the former is what is happening. However, as I said in another post in this thread, it's about where you prioritize basketball in the hierarchy of what it is you want to get done with limited resources.
And do I believe there is a little piece of Currie's ego in this process that's wanting oscar to ultimately succeed to prove himself right? Of course. If this class of freshmen develop together, and they go back to the tournament and somehow eventually get to the second weekend, a part of his ego is validated.
I 100% agree with you in that I think he's a ruthless guy. I also think ego is baked into that ruthlessness, and he's not willing at this point to call Weber a failure. And the fact that firing Weber to hire Underwood, and take a $3 million loss in the process, is a significant blow to said ego because he could have had Brad at a significant discount four years ago, and he didn't take him when he had the chance. Now that panicked decision may set back some of his other major goals, especially if he has to go beg Carl Ice, Paul Edgerley, or the Vanier family to help clean up the mess he made when he locked himself in a Dallas hotel room four years ago.
And does the lack of a real financial incentive give him some internal validation and justification to give oscar more time? Sure it does.
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2016, 03:49:29 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 03:50:56 PM
I feel like there are people outside of the athletic department that can influence Brad to come home.
LHC Bill Snyder proves that with the right support, you can survive and thrive in Currie's department.
And I also guess that whoever cuts the check to make that move would tell Currie to keep his goddamn hands out of trash cans and leave Brad the eff alone if he wants to build anything else.
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2016, 03:51:37 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Pete on March 20, 2016, 03:55:34 PM
I feel like there are people outside of the athletic department that can influence Brad to come home.
LHC Bill Snyder proves that with the right support, you can survive and thrive in Currie's department.
And I also guess that whoever cuts the check to make that move would tell Currie to keep his goddamn hands out of trash cans and leave Brad the eff alone if he wants to build anything else.
It helps when you are a HOF'er and besties with the largest donor, tho.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 03:57:54 PM
I feel like there are people outside of the athletic department that can influence Brad to come home.
LHC Bill Snyder proves that with the right support, you can survive and thrive in Currie's department.
And I also guess that whoever cuts the check to make that move would tell Currie to keep his goddamn hands out of trash cans and leave Brad the eff alone if he wants to build anything else.
It helps when you are a HOF'er and besties with the largest donor, tho.
Agreed, but you also lose some leverage when you go beg the big money to fix your WTF hire.
Post by: Boondock Poonhound on March 20, 2016, 04:12:04 PM
If our primary objective was winning, we would have fired oscar's ass, and John would be in Brooklyn right now laying roses at the door of Brad Underwood's hotel room door.
What if john already knows he can't get brad?
Save me a trip to the Seattle YMCA and tell me why. It might impact whether I renew the Ahearn and those good seats. I have already done my duty and fired off a letter to JC, but I'm not interested in paying to watch losery basketball.
Post by: Trim on March 20, 2016, 04:22:19 PM
If our primary objective was winning, we would have fired oscar's ass, and John would be in Brooklyn right now laying roses at the door of Brad Underwood's hotel room door.
What if john already knows he can't get brad?
Save me a trip to the Seattle YMCA and tell me why. It might impact whether I renew the Ahearn and those good seats. I have already done my duty and fired off a letter to JC, but I'm not interested in paying to watch losery basketball.
Go to FattyFest.
Post by: Shooter Jones on March 20, 2016, 05:00:55 PM
I agree that it all begins and ends with football. But what I don't want is some ruse put forward by the athletic department that oscar Weber's program is the best option we have on the table, and we believe that this is our best shot at winning, because that's complete and utter bullshit.
So much this.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 20, 2016, 07:57:51 PM
Post by: sys on March 20, 2016, 08:06:02 PM
it's not normal to fire someone who is performing adequately just to be able hire someone else who is better. sports (players, not coaches) is about the only arena i can think of where that would be normal.
he should do it. he risks being blamed if he fails to do it, but it's definitely asking him to do something unusual.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 08:16:40 PM
OMG Panjandrum is giving me a Migraine.
Help me understand this better then.
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2016, 08:36:23 PM
i don't think currie's decision will be about prioritizing the budget over wins, risk aversion, prioritizing football or anything like that. i think it will just be that he will not fire a coach that he (and many other objective observers) does not perceive as having performed below the standard of the job.
it's not normal to fire someone who is performing adequately just to be able hire someone else who is better. sports (players, not coaches) is about the only arena i can think of where that would be normal.
he should do it. he risks being blamed if he fails to do it, but it's definitely asking him to do something unusual.
well said
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 20, 2016, 08:56:38 PM
OMG Panjandrum is giving me a Migraine.
Help me understand this better then.
You got it pretty much, but I wouldn't use the EInA report.
Post by: TheHamburglar on March 20, 2016, 09:11:09 PM
There is no revolt happening.
Most accurate thing posted in this thread
What about now?
Post by: wetwillie on March 20, 2016, 09:15:00 PM
There is no revolt happening.
Most accurate thing posted in this thread
What about now?
A couple #'s on Twitter a revolt doth not make
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2016, 09:17:13 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 09:18:00 PM
OMG Panjandrum is giving me a Migraine.
Help me understand this better then.
You got it pretty much, but I wouldn't use the EInA report.
What report should I be using? I'm going to start a spreadsheet.
Post by: tdaver on March 20, 2016, 09:36:19 PM
If our primary objective was winning, we would have fired oscar's ass, and John would be in Brooklyn right now laying roses at the door of Brad Underwood's hotel room door.
What if john already knows he can't get brad?
Then take a shot on someone else
Post by: tdaver on March 20, 2016, 09:38:55 PM
i don't think currie's decision will be about prioritizing the budget over wins, risk aversion, prioritizing football or anything like that. i think it will just be that he will not fire a coach that he (and many other objective observers) does not perceive as having performed below the standard of the job.
Then he has the wrong standards and needs to go. His replacement can fire weber.
Post by: AndrewVonLintel on March 20, 2016, 10:14:45 PM
2. If Currie is such a great money manager, he shouldn't need to go to the Donors to buyout Weber. We should have plenty of money in the bank. As anybody knows, much of Currie's success is the result of significant financial gains achieved by the Big 12 and the LHC Bill Snyder/Collin Klein Title.
3. The only reason we overpaid Weber is because of John Currie. We could be paying him $800,000 to 1,000,000 less. Which program wanted him?
4. Currie should realize that he can get a great price for Underwood. I think $1,000,000 would be entirely appropriate ( I would have lots of bonus money in the deal for tournament participation). Oklahoma State would pay more but I bet Brad would come here anyway.
Post by: meow meow on March 20, 2016, 10:37:32 PM
I think $1,000,000 would be entirely appropriate ( I would have lots of bonus money in the deal for tournament participation). Oklahoma State would pay more but I bet Brad would come here anyway.
What the eff
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2016, 10:40:15 PM
I think $1,000,000 would be entirely appropriate ( I would have lots of bonus money in the deal for tournament participation). Oklahoma State would pay more but I bet Brad would come here anyway.
What the eff
Give him oscar's contract at a minimum. It seems to be what we do.
Post by: Kat Kid on March 20, 2016, 10:40:37 PM
Post by: Trim on March 20, 2016, 10:42:54 PM
sometimes I think we might not deserve anything good
:lol:
Post by: MakeItRain on March 20, 2016, 11:04:08 PM
i don't think currie's decision will be about prioritizing the budget over wins, risk aversion, prioritizing football or anything like that. i think it will just be that he will not fire a coach that he (and many other objective observers) does not perceive as having performed below the standard of the job.
it's not normal to fire someone who is performing adequately just to be able hire someone else who is better. sports (players, not coaches) is about the only arena i can think of where that would be normal.
he should do it. he risks being blamed if he fails to do it, but it's definitely asking him to do something unusual.
It's worth noting that a peer, who Currie has called a friend, did exactly this last April.
AndrewVL, stop posting, just read. My God.
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2016, 07:56:18 AM
i don't think currie's decision will be about prioritizing the budget over wins, risk aversion, prioritizing football or anything like that. i think it will just be that he will not fire a coach that he (and many other objective observers) does not perceive as having performed below the standard of the job.
it's not normal to fire someone who is performing adequately just to be able hire someone else who is better. sports (players, not coaches) is about the only arena i can think of where that would be normal.
he should do it. he risks being blamed if he fails to do it, but it's definitely asking him to do something unusual.
It's worth noting that a peer, who Currie has called a friend, did exactly this last April.
Who?
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2016, 08:24:36 AM
i don't think currie's decision will be about prioritizing the budget over wins, risk aversion, prioritizing football or anything like that. i think it will just be that he will not fire a coach that he (and many other objective observers) does not perceive as having performed below the standard of the job.
it's not normal to fire someone who is performing adequately just to be able hire someone else who is better. sports (players, not coaches) is about the only arena i can think of where that would be normal.
he should do it. he risks being blamed if he fails to do it, but it's definitely asking him to do something unusual.
It's worth noting that a peer, who Currie has called a friend, did exactly this last April.
Who?
AD at Mississippi State
Post by: ChiComCat on March 21, 2016, 08:41:16 AM
Whether oscar is getting paid 1 or 10 million should hardly be relevant to judging his performance.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 21, 2016, 08:43:39 AM
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2016, 09:16:20 AM
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 09:39:10 AM
You really need to go back to the Wooly years (and adjust for inflation probably) to get a good look at what we can expect in the future. That was the last time we had a basketball program as inept as it currently is.
Honestly, that's way in the future. From a fan support standpoint, we aren't even close to that. Even performance on the court isn't quite there yet, we had the last 2 years basically 7 years in a row to get to the point it was at the end of Wooly.
If Weber is back, I think we probably see attendance dip below 10K for the first time since Frank year 2.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2FgoEMAW.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2FBramlage-coaches-attedance-records.png&hash=173b9ff1e94c7d1e39ed8ed694fa3c24b34c3a7b)
Post by: Trim on March 21, 2016, 09:40:23 AM
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 09:41:41 AM
When did they change from fans actually in the OOD to tickets disbursed?
I think it just became an athletic department standard across the country because it looks better.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2016, 09:47:42 AM
Post by: Trim on March 21, 2016, 09:56:22 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2016, 10:03:42 AM
You really need to go back to the Wooly years (and adjust for inflation probably) to get a good look at what we can expect in the future. That was the last time we had a basketball program as inept as it currently is.
Honestly, that's way in the future. From a fan support standpoint, we aren't even close to that. Even performance on the court isn't quite there yet, we had the last 2 years basically 7 years in a row to get to the point it was at the end of Wooly.
If Weber is back, I think we probably see attendance dip below 10K for the first time since Frank year 2.
Where did you pull those numbers, if you don't mind me asking?
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2016, 10:22:43 AM
It could be argued that Ray was not performing adequately.i don't think currie's decision will be about prioritizing the budget over wins, risk aversion, prioritizing football or anything like that. i think it will just be that he will not fire a coach that he (and many other objective observers) does not perceive as having performed below the standard of the job.
it's not normal to fire someone who is performing adequately just to be able hire someone else who is better. sports (players, not coaches) is about the only arena i can think of where that would be normal.
he should do it. he risks being blamed if he fails to do it, but it's definitely asking him to do something unusual.
It's worth noting that a peer, who Currie has called a friend, did exactly this last April.
Who?
AD at Mississippi State
Post by: SdK on March 21, 2016, 10:23:14 AM
Currie wants to win, he also doesn't want to work with Frank Martin and he legit thought oscar Weber could get the job done. Which is easier to believe:KK like cc, another voice of reason. Keep up the fine work gentleman.
Currie is some evil cartoon genius with a secret plan to maximize profits and build himself a nice new office while losing as much as possible
OR
He has a major blind spot with regards to head coaching experience and made a bad, panicked decision after whiffing on his first choice for basketball.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 10:27:35 AM
You really need to go back to the Wooly years (and adjust for inflation probably) to get a good look at what we can expect in the future. That was the last time we had a basketball program as inept as it currently is.
Honestly, that's way in the future. From a fan support standpoint, we aren't even close to that. Even performance on the court isn't quite there yet, we had the last 2 years basically 7 years in a row to get to the point it was at the end of Wooly.
If Weber is back, I think we probably see attendance dip below 10K for the first time since Frank year 2.
Where did you pull those numbers, if you don't mind me asking?
The attendance is from the media guide.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 21, 2016, 11:24:07 AM
You really need to go back to the Wooly years (and adjust for inflation probably) to get a good look at what we can expect in the future. That was the last time we had a basketball program as inept as it currently is.
Honestly, that's way in the future. From a fan support standpoint, we aren't even close to that. Even performance on the court isn't quite there yet, we had the last 2 years basically 7 years in a row to get to the point it was at the end of Wooly.
If Weber is back, I think we probably see attendance dip below 10K for the first time since Frank year 2.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2FgoEMAW.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2FBramlage-coaches-attedance-records.png&hash=173b9ff1e94c7d1e39ed8ed694fa3c24b34c3a7b)
I don't think it's far into the future at all. We just finished our second consecutive year of not even competing for a spot in the NCAA tournament and the numbers you displayed show that the beginning of Wooly was just as bad attendance-wise as the end. In fact, the worst attendance year came during Wooly's second season, which was immediately after missing any postseason 2 years in a row for the first time in more than a decade.
Post by: doom on March 21, 2016, 11:32:17 AM
You really need to go back to the Wooly years (and adjust for inflation probably) to get a good look at what we can expect in the future. That was the last time we had a basketball program as inept as it currently is.
Honestly, that's way in the future. From a fan support standpoint, we aren't even close to that. Even performance on the court isn't quite there yet, we had the last 2 years basically 7 years in a row to get to the point it was at the end of Wooly.
If Weber is back, I think we probably see attendance dip below 10K for the first time since Frank year 2.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2FgoEMAW.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2FBramlage-coaches-attedance-records.png&hash=173b9ff1e94c7d1e39ed8ed694fa3c24b34c3a7b)
I don't think it's far into the future at all. We just finished our second consecutive year of not even competing for a spot in the NCAA tournament and the numbers you displayed show that the beginning of Wooly was just as bad attendance-wise as the end. In fact, the worst attendance year came during Wooly's second season, which was immediately after missing any postseason 2 years in a row for the first time in more than a decade.
Any other AD in the country would see where this is going and get ahead of it. eff you, Currie.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2016, 11:37:08 AM
It could be argued that Ray was not performing adequately.i don't think currie's decision will be about prioritizing the budget over wins, risk aversion, prioritizing football or anything like that. i think it will just be that he will not fire a coach that he (and many other objective observers) does not perceive as having performed below the standard of the job.
it's not normal to fire someone who is performing adequately just to be able hire someone else who is better. sports (players, not coaches) is about the only arena i can think of where that would be normal.
he should do it. he risks being blamed if he fails to do it, but it's definitely asking him to do something unusual.
It's worth noting that a peer, who Currie has called a friend, did exactly this last April.
Who?
AD at Mississippi State
Yeah neither is oscar. I don't ascribe to sys' line of thought. The more relevant point is that MSU fired Ray only after they got Howland secured.
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 11:39:54 AM
If Brad is hired Currie can probably sell out the arena while raising ticket prices.
Correct?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 21, 2016, 11:41:50 AM
I think its probably safe to say that at best next year's attendance will be 10K and probably somewhere between 9-10K if oscar stays.
If Brad is hired Currie can probably sell out the arena while raising ticket prices.
Correct?
With oscar, I'd expect actual attendance to be around 6k. Paid attendance might be around 9k.
Post by: DQ12 on March 21, 2016, 11:42:37 AM
I think its probably safe to say that at best next year's attendance will be 10K and probably somewhere between 9-10K if oscar stays.I think this is probably accurate (although those oscar numbers may be a little high, actually). I think people are dying to get back and have a basketball program worth emotionally investing in. I know I sure am.
If Brad is hired Currie can probably sell out the arena while raising ticket prices.
Correct?
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2016, 11:43:51 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 21, 2016, 11:44:50 AM
If the schedule makers do us favors, the attendance will be very similar (if not better) than this season.
They will do us no favors.
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 11:48:02 AM
I think its probably safe to say that at best next year's attendance will be 10K and probably somewhere between 9-10K if oscar stays.
If Brad is hired Currie can probably sell out the arena while raising ticket prices.
Correct?
With oscar, I'd expect actual attendance to be around 6k. Paid attendance might be around 9k.
I'm talking paid attendance, its the only thing we track.
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2016, 11:50:44 AM
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 21, 2016, 11:54:05 AM
KSU loves it a bubble team
i agree. it's what kstate fans think they deserve and it's what they expect.
bubble teams are so exciting! will we get those last few shots to fall and make the big dance?!?! better get to the game and find out!
Post by: Trim on March 21, 2016, 11:56:10 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2016, 11:56:22 AM
I realize people think there is magic in consecutive bad seasons, but I'd be shocked if paid attendance dips below 10.5k. Surprised if it dips below 11k. KSU loves it a bubble team and that's exactly what we'll have no matter who the coach is. (probably).
I think there are a lot of factors that will keep that core 10-11k coming back. Claws is probably in the top 2 factors for at least 9k of them.
Post by: doom on March 21, 2016, 11:58:36 AM
I realize people think there is magic in consecutive bad seasons, but I'd be shocked if paid attendance dips below 10.5k. Surprised if it dips below 11k. KSU loves it a bubble team and that's exactly what we'll have no matter who the coach is. (probably).
I think there are a lot of factors that will keep that core 10-11k coming back. Claws is probably in the top 2 factors for at least 9k of them.
don't forget free bacon!
Post by: DQ12 on March 21, 2016, 11:59:45 AM
I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?KSU loves it a bubble team
i agree. it's what kstate fans think they deserve and it's what they expect.
bubble teams are so exciting! will we get those last few shots to fall and make the big dance?!?! better get to the game and find out!
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2016, 12:02:16 PM
I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?KSU loves it a bubble team
i agree. it's what kstate fans think they deserve and it's what they expect.
bubble teams are so exciting! will we get those last few shots to fall and make the big dance?!?! better get to the game and find out!
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
I was one of the 42k or whatever that was there during his last game against ISU.
I love going to KSU football games. :dunno:
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 21, 2016, 12:02:50 PM
I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?KSU loves it a bubble team
i agree. it's what kstate fans think they deserve and it's what they expect.
bubble teams are so exciting! will we get those last few shots to fall and make the big dance?!?! better get to the game and find out!
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
i really wasn't meaning to comment on people buying tickets or not buying tickets. do whatever you want as far as that goes and i'm certainly not going to fault a kstate fan for going to a kstate game. i really do think though that most ksu fans are pretty comfortable being on the bubble and honestly kind of enjoy/think that's where we should be. it's interesting and every game matters if simply making the tournament is your goal.
Post by: DQ12 on March 21, 2016, 12:06:29 PM
I know you weren't, but the sentiment that it's other KSU people's faults or they're somehow blameworthy for not caring enough or not caring properly like we do just gets a little weird.I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?KSU loves it a bubble team
i agree. it's what kstate fans think they deserve and it's what they expect.
bubble teams are so exciting! will we get those last few shots to fall and make the big dance?!?! better get to the game and find out!
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
i really wasn't meaning to comment on people buying tickets or not buying tickets. do whatever you want as far as that goes. i really do think though that most ksu fans are pretty comfortable being on the bubble and honestly kind of enjoy/think that's where we should be. it's interesting and every game matters if simply making the tournament is your goal.
Even assuming that's the case, it doesn't excuse inaction on Currie's part, because they'll like whoever is in charge disirregardlessly. And God bless'em, they're going to games.
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2016, 12:09:12 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on March 21, 2016, 12:09:35 PM
https://twitter.com/jdagg2003/status/711949616321667073
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2016, 12:09:51 PM
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 12:22:16 PM
I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
This is where I fall too. I don't feel any need to get personal with coaches/admin.
Post by: DQ12 on March 21, 2016, 12:28:07 PM
also thanks for that lecture DaDlew12:cyclist: just trying to remind everyone where the blame lies.
also, just another LOL at the artist formerly known as "the animal."
Vote with your feet? Really? That's the only kind of bellweather you, as the most social media obsessed president in the country, can recognize?
Post by: chuckjames on March 21, 2016, 12:32:38 PM
I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
This is where I fall too. I don't feel any need to get personal with coaches/admin.
The Artist Formily known as The Animal sure makes it hard to not hate him with his shut up and take the athletics we give you stance.
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 01:06:43 PM
I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
This is where I fall too. I don't feel any need to get personal with coaches/admin.
The Artist Formily known as The Animal sure makes it hard to not hate him with his shut up and take the athletics we give you stance.
Meh.
I agree that he made some poor choices in responding to people on twitter and the block announcements are unnecessary. The latest screenshot on twitter is just an administrative response to a fan and doesn't bother me in the least. Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him, I've been around educational administrators long enough to see this is just what they do. He's still better than most IMO.
Post by: DQ12 on March 21, 2016, 01:30:50 PM
Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 01:33:43 PM
Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
Post by: DQ12 on March 21, 2016, 01:35:29 PM
not to derail the thread, but wefald wouldn't have done that.Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
Post by: cfbandyman on March 21, 2016, 01:36:09 PM
I think it's a little unfair to fault people or thumb your nose at people for buying tickets and going to the games. After the Fitz article and the apparent sentiment on GPC, it's pretty clear that many tucks have turned (enough) on oscar too. That said, if they still like k-state basketball and it's a fun part of their life, who are we to blame them for going to games?
I went to plenty of Ron Prince games after deciding that he needed to go.
This is where I fall too. I don't feel any need to get personal with coaches/admin.
The Artist Formily known as The Animal sure makes it hard to not hate him with his shut up and take the athletics we give you stance.
Meh.
I agree that he made some poor choices in responding to people on twitter and the block announcements are unnecessary. The latest screenshot on twitter is just an administrative response to a fan and doesn't bother me in the least. Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him, I've been around educational administrators long enough to see this is just what they do. He's still better than most IMO.
He is better than most, and I agree with that, he and his admin is very organized, but almost too much so that he's kinda inflexible when anything don't go "according to plan." I think the difference I am seeing now (other than general rabble rabble from the plebs that email and tweet at him which is something Wefald didn't have to deal with) is that Kirk didn't learn a Wefald lesson, and that is athletics are the gateway to the university, and instead of at least tacitly acknowledging that things are not ideal (in this email) and not where we'd like to be (which he can do without making oscar his employee look like a dumbass, even if he is) he would rather burns bridges and comes off as holier than thou. I'm sure in his mind he's seems himself as a braking mechanism to the inevitable meltdowns of fickle and vocal fans, (hence the line in the email about voting with feet and wallets, he knows the hands that feed him), but that's not what he looks like at all.
Overall, it's incredibly short sighted of him (and ADJC) to not see the opportunity in front of them. K-Staters love k-staters, especially successful ones who have played and continued to spend time here. Wasting that to support a coach that has little support going into next year, and having even the mouthpiece fitz turn to Brad shows PKS and ADJC are increasingly tone deaf to the needs and wants of the fans, and likewise @k-stateathletics.
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on March 21, 2016, 01:37:41 PM
Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
Kirk and John haven't done anything make me endear them. Running a college town university building a great sense of community should be a top priority.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2016, 01:38:52 PM
Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
It's like he and Wefald are the exact opposite. One was endearing but probably somewhat inadequate (Wefald), and one is doing a killer job but tone deaf with his PR moves (Animal).
The job Schulz has done at KSU in the last several years has been nothing short of amazing on the academic side. I don't want him to go anywhere. However, he's probably not the most likable guy. That's fine as long as he gets the job done.
Contrast that with Currie, who is just a complete jerk, who needs to be flawless at his job lest the fans want to hang him by the belt loops in his Dockers from a coat rack.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2016, 01:40:08 PM
not to derail the thread, but wefald wouldn't have done that.Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
Wefald knew what made us tick. He was amazing at that.
He never would have gotten us to the point where Schulz has, though. At least not at the late stages of his career.
Post by: ChiComCat on March 21, 2016, 01:42:33 PM
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 01:43:30 PM
Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
It's like he and Wefald are the exact opposite. One was endearing but probably somewhat inadequate (Wefald), and one is doing a killer job but tone deaf with his PR moves (Animal).
The job Schulz has done at KSU in the last several years has been nothing short of amazing on the academic side. I don't want him to go anywhere. However, he's probably not the most likable guy. That's fine as long as he gets the job done.
Contrast that with Currie, who is just a complete jerk, who needs to be flawless at his job lest the fans want to hang him by the belt loops in his Dockers from a coat rack.
I think its hard to do both academics and athletics well all the time. I think Kirk tries, probably too hard, and that gets him into trouble.
I'm thinking if Wefald had been around with the heat of social media that something dumb would've happened with him too, so I'm pretty meh with that comparison.
I agree that Currie is often weird and not likable, not unlike oscar. But really the main thing that makes anyone not like him right now is Frank/oscar. Yeah, there is other stuff, but his mismanagement of this one thing is the biggest thing. Granted, right now it is a really big thing and eventually may be big enough that he is forced to move on.
Post by: CNS on March 21, 2016, 01:44:29 PM
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2016, 01:45:25 PM
Kirk would do himself a huge favor if he ended his twitter acct but made it someone's job to keep up on twitter at some level for presence/marketing. Someone who isn't really really bad at it.
Yep.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2016, 01:48:58 PM
Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
It's like he and Wefald are the exact opposite. One was endearing but probably somewhat inadequate (Wefald), and one is doing a killer job but tone deaf with his PR moves (Animal).
The job Schulz has done at KSU in the last several years has been nothing short of amazing on the academic side. I don't want him to go anywhere. However, he's probably not the most likable guy. That's fine as long as he gets the job done.
Contrast that with Currie, who is just a complete jerk, who needs to be flawless at his job lest the fans want to hang him by the belt loops in his Dockers from a coat rack.
I think its hard to do both academics and athletics well all the time. I think Kirk tries, probably too hard, and that gets him into trouble.
I'm thinking if Wefald had been around with the heat of social media that something dumb would've happened with him too, so I'm pretty meh with that comparison.
I agree that Currie is often weird and not likable, not unlike oscar. But really the main thing that makes anyone not like him right now is Frank/oscar. Yeah, there is other stuff, but his mismanagement of this one thing is the biggest thing. Granted, right now it is a really big thing and eventually may be big enough that he is forced to move on.
The Texas thing was an empirical example that he would have been horribly bad at social media.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 21, 2016, 01:51:49 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2016, 02:00:55 PM
Wefald was embarrassing enough without the help of social media. I can only imagine how terrible he would have been on twitter.
Is there any doubt?
Post by: CNS on March 21, 2016, 02:01:20 PM
Wefald was embarrassing enough without the help of social media. I can only imagine how terrible he would have been on twitter.
The post Huggs time would have been amazing, though.
Post by: chuckjames on March 21, 2016, 02:08:00 PM
Wefald was embarrassing enough without the help of social media. I can only imagine how terrible he would have been on twitter.
The post Huggs time would have been amazing, though.
Remember when Wefald cried in the press conference when Huggs left. Now imagine him on Twitter. AMAZING I TELL YOU.
Post by: cfbandyman on March 21, 2016, 05:49:41 PM
not to derail the thread, but wefald wouldn't have done that.Kirk hasn't done anything to make me hate him...the EMAW business is indefensible in my eyes. there's nothing he could do that could ever make me forgive him for that.
It was dumb. I don't like it. But educational admin gonna educationally admin.
Wefald knew what made us tick. He was amazing at that.
He never would have gotten us to the point where Schulz has, though. At least not at the late stages of his career.
That's what I was getting at in my post earlier ITT. Schulz knows the love k-state people have of k-state, but doesn't understand it. I think he thinks in his mind he is some sort of moderator or regulator of the whims of k-state, when in reality he should be a facilitator of the desire of k-state, something as you mentioned, Wefald was really, really good at, (and consequently LHCBS is too) they "get it." Wefald could read the pulse of the university and know exactly what is going on, and push it to the forefront and do something about it. UPKS feels the pulse, and wonders why it's not doing what he wants it to do, and tries to correct it, instead of listening to it.
Completely agree that Wefald and Schulz are like opposites in each respect, and interesting how much further being a "people" person gets you. I do wish UPKS would learn some Wefald lessons, cause if he does he will be kicking ass at the job for a long, long time with a lot of very, very happy people.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 21, 2016, 06:03:48 PM
KU is a great example, unlike almost everyone else, KU used capital contributions in their DOE EinA disclosure as that was the only way they were going to submit a report that didn't show a substantial operating loss in FY 2015. K-State OTOH only used operating revenues on its DOE EinA report, so KU people actually believe their athletic department had operational revenue of over $100 million last year, when in fact on an operational level it was only about $90 million and on an operational level, they were well into the red. In fact, had they not counted more forgiven debt as revenue, they would have been hemorrhaging on an operational basis. But I digress.
Post by: Trim on March 21, 2016, 06:11:22 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2016, 06:11:55 PM
Post by: DQ12 on March 21, 2016, 06:15:58 PM
I couldn't care less about the EMAW thing. I don't need the administration's stamp of approval on how I fan.I understand that sentiment. But I viewed it as a slap in the face to the community he was leading. We - us - here - the members of goEMAW, personally worked real hard to resurrect that phrase, and when the AD started adopting it and the band was doing it, it was COOL. It allowed us to really share EMAW with the rest of the fanbase. And then Mendenhall wrote her ridiculous article and then Kirk stepped in.
"Yes, I know I'm new and I know this thing has sort of been a part of your tradition for decades, but apparently you people are too stupid to understand that it's actually sexist so we won't be doing that anymore."
So condescending. Who the hell is Kirk Schulz and why did he try and take away our thing?
Post by: wetwillie on March 21, 2016, 06:18:39 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2016, 06:33:32 PM
I couldn't care less about the EMAW thing. I don't need the administration's stamp of approval on how I fan.I understand that sentiment. But I viewed it as a slap in the face to the community he was leading. We - us - here - the members of goEMAW, personally worked real hard to resurrect that phrase, and when the AD started adopting it and the band was doing it, it was COOL. It allowed us to really share EMAW with the rest of the fanbase. And then Mendenhall wrote her ridiculous article and then Kirk stepped in.
"Yes, I know I'm new and I know this thing has sort of been a part of your tradition for decades, but apparently you people are too stupid to understand that it's actually sexist so we won't be doing that anymore."
So condescending. Who the hell is Kirk Schulz and why did he try and take away our thing?
good grief
Post by: nicname on March 21, 2016, 09:49:35 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 21, 2016, 09:53:09 PM
At this point, if you're still going to games next season. You're basically saying you hate K-State basketball.
I think that's unfair and quite frankly way out of line.
Where did you do your undergrad btw?
Post by: nicname on March 21, 2016, 09:54:19 PM
At this point, if you're still going to games next season. You're basically saying you hate K-State basketball.
I think that's unfair and quite frankly way out of line.
Where did you do your undergrad btw?
Cats, man.
Post by: nicname on March 21, 2016, 09:55:31 PM
Post by: Ptolemy on March 22, 2016, 12:36:14 AM
The same goes for KState basketball. If the product on the court is not entertaining enough to earn your attendance dollar, don't pay and don't attend. This is how capitalism works. This is how KState basketball was great once and will be great again!
Post by: RickRampus on March 22, 2016, 06:53:42 AM
I bet Rick Rampus could get it done.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on March 22, 2016, 07:03:20 AM
If you pay for and attend KState basketball games you are operating counter to capitalism. If an apple vendor sells you worm-laden apples you stop buying apples from him.
The same goes for KState basketball. If the product on the court is not entertaining enough to earn your attendance dollar, don't pay and don't attend. This is how capitalism works. This is how KState basketball was great once and will be great again!
Vote with your feets!
Post by: ChiComCat on March 22, 2016, 07:15:31 AM
Post by: Trim on March 22, 2016, 08:13:32 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on March 22, 2016, 08:22:13 AM
AIN'T NO FEETS
As much as I liked to think that I could go to games and still support change, I don't know how much more explicitly Kirk can call me a dumbass to my face. As per usual, you were right.
Post by: slobber on March 22, 2016, 09:41:51 AM
Gonna win 'em all! (using Tapatalk)
Post by: CNS on March 22, 2016, 10:59:19 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 22, 2016, 11:01:03 AM
Post by: CNS on March 22, 2016, 11:09:17 AM
How do ppl not get the best way to show dissatisfaction and force change is not consuming a product? You want change, don't buy the product, product experiences losses, and product has to react. It's a pretty simplistic concept. Doing otherwise is hoping that our AD holds the same ideas dear that you do, and I am pretty sure it had been demonstrated that this isn't the case.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Stupid Fitz on March 22, 2016, 11:12:03 AM
The idea that the only way to get through to the admin is by not giving or going is crap. Elite programs change the coach as soon as they begin to lose, and don't wait for rock bottom.
This. Currie will wait until he absolutely has to and by then the job will be so garbage that he will have to hire another loser that is just happy to be here.
Post by: ChiComCat on March 22, 2016, 11:15:16 AM
The idea that the only way to get through to the admin is by not giving or going is crap. Elite programs change the coach as soon as they begin to lose, and don't wait for rock bottom.
The only way to get through to this administration is by not giving or going. The day they hired oscar, they demonstrated that they do not think we are an elite program.
A good company may respond to customer outrage and make changes before it can effect the bottom line. Our administration chooses the flawed philosophy of focusing on the results (attendance) and not the process. The only thing that ensures is that the results will change.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 22, 2016, 11:26:05 AM
The idea that the only way to get through to the admin is by not giving or going is crap. Elite programs change the coach as soon as they begin to lose, and don't wait for rock bottom.
The only way to get through to this administration is by not giving or going. The day they hired oscar, they demonstrated that they do not think we are an elite program.
A good company may respond to customer outrage and make changes before it can effect the bottom line. Our administration chooses the flawed philosophy of focusing on the results (attendance) and not the process. The only thing that ensures is that the results will change.
we are iowa freaking state.
Post by: michigancat on March 22, 2016, 11:26:48 AM
The idea that the only way to get through to the admin is by not giving or going is crap. Elite programs change the coach as soon as they begin to lose, and don't wait for rock bottom.
The only way to get through to this administration is by not giving or going. The day they hired oscar, they demonstrated that they do not think we are an elite program.
A good company may respond to customer outrage and make changes before it can effect the bottom line. Our administration chooses the flawed philosophy of focusing on the results (attendance) and not the process. The only thing that ensures is that the results will change.
we are iowa freaking state.
I wish
Post by: DQ12 on March 22, 2016, 11:41:16 AM
i'll never stop being butthurt about that. that was all I needed to see of "the animal."I couldn't care less about the EMAW thing. I don't need the administration's stamp of approval on how I fan.I understand that sentiment. But I viewed it as a slap in the face to the community he was leading. We - us - here - the members of goEMAW, personally worked real hard to resurrect that phrase, and when the AD started adopting it and the band was doing it, it was COOL. It allowed us to really share EMAW with the rest of the fanbase. And then Mendenhall wrote her ridiculous article and then Kirk stepped in.
"Yes, I know I'm new and I know this thing has sort of been a part of your tradition for decades, but apparently you people are too stupid to understand that it's actually sexist so we won't be doing that anymore."
So condescending. Who the hell is Kirk Schulz and why did he try and take away our thing?
good grief
:don'tcare:
Post by: michigancat on March 22, 2016, 11:52:08 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 22, 2016, 11:58:42 AM
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2016, 12:01:49 PM
Elite programs change the coach as soon as they begin to lose
Elite programs tend to keep their great coaches forever and don't really ever begin to lose. When they do, though, there are counterexamples to this like Crean at Indiana and Howland at UCLA.
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 12:09:49 PM
I seriously can't tell if you're joking
why would you think he's joking?
good account, dlew.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 22, 2016, 12:40:02 PM
The idea that the only way to get through to the admin is by not giving or going is crap. Elite programs change the coach as soon as they begin to lose, and don't wait for rock bottom.
The only way to get through to this administration is by not giving or going. The day they hired oscar, they demonstrated that they do not think we are an elite program.
A good company may respond to customer outrage and make changes before it can effect the bottom line. Our administration chooses the flawed philosophy of focusing on the results (attendance) and not the process. The only thing that ensures is that the results will change.
we are iowa freaking state.
Our bball team is Iowa state fball. Weber is rhoads. He'll eventually lose his job but it will take twice as long as it should have because our fans continue to show up and support. Meanwhile, every other school is just looking at us, shaking their head and laughing amongst each other.
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 12:59:37 PM
Kirk agrees with daris.
https://twitter.com/jdagg2003/status/711949616321667073
that tweet is amazing. it's gotten a lot of attention, but it hasn't gotten enough attention, imo.
and didn't someone claim that schulz had given over his twitter account to someone to tweet for him? wtf?
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2016, 01:04:32 PM
Post by: DQ12 on March 22, 2016, 01:06:21 PM
"needed or necessary" is my favorite partHe's very eloquent and he also has a way with words.
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 01:10:15 PM
Post by: TheHamburglar on March 22, 2016, 01:11:45 PM
Kirk agrees with daris.
https://twitter.com/jdagg2003/status/711949616321667073
that tweet is amazing. it's gotten a lot of attention, but it hasn't gotten enough attention, imo.
and didn't someone claim that schulz had given over his twitter account to someone to tweet for him? wtf?
He's effectively saying "we're going to wait until our customers prove to us our expired milk is bad by waiting until they buy a couple bad jugs and decide not to return before we change the jugs on the shelf."
This is failing at business 101 stuff here.
Post by: Cire on March 22, 2016, 01:12:42 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 22, 2016, 01:23:08 PM
I seriously can't tell if you're joking
why would you think he's joking?
good account, dlew.
Because the drama and self-righteousness is so over the top.
Post by: kso_FAN on March 22, 2016, 01:24:50 PM
I seriously can't tell if you're joking
why would you think he's joking?
good account, dlew.
Because the drama and self-righteousness is so over the top.
This thing is a mess and disappointing.
But I agree that the current drama, etc. from many of us is over the top as well. Me included.
Post by: michigancat on March 22, 2016, 01:27:33 PM
This thing is a mess and disappointing.
But I agree that the current drama, etc. from many of us is over the top as well. Me included.
Everyone should have seen this coming for 4 years. This is the most predictable outcome imaginable. (At least, us not hiring Brad. I'm mildly surprised he got the OSU job).
Post by: DQ12 on March 22, 2016, 01:33:51 PM
Honestly, I don't think my sentiment is weird at all. In fact I'm a little confused why that didn't and doesn't outrage more people.I seriously can't tell if you're joking
why would you think he's joking?
good account, dlew.
Because the drama and self-righteousness is so over the top.
Post by: kso_FAN on March 22, 2016, 01:35:15 PM
This thing is a mess and disappointing.
But I agree that the current drama, etc. from many of us is over the top as well. Me included.
Everyone should have seen this coming for 4 years. This is the most predictable outcome imaginable. (At least, us not hiring Brad. I'm mildly surprised he got the OSU job).
True.
Some of us are just really optimistic and stupid.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 22, 2016, 01:38:41 PM
Everyone should have seen this coming for 4 years. This is the most predictable outcome imaginable.
yes. that's why the time to get mad was 4 years ago. now it's like "yeah, and?"
Post by: wetwillie on March 22, 2016, 01:40:29 PM
Post by: pissclams on March 22, 2016, 01:53:46 PM
"needed or necessary" is my favorite partHe's very eloquent and he also has a way with words.
yes, his way with words is a testamentary to his dedication to rigorous scholastic endeavors
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 02:20:34 PM
Because the drama and self-righteousness is so over the top.
good grief.