Confirmed that MA loser leaving Missouri for Ark.

[swish1]

Why confused, they will either get another decent coach ala MA or screw up royally.  50/50 on this.

I'm kind of out of the loop on this one.  Is there anybody available or being talked about that would even be considered a home run hire if they got him?

what people currently consider a home run hire doesnt matter.

[Havs]

ISU bled players like dylan at the bottom of a cliff.

Loyal Sons Forever True!

:IStateo:

[Cire]

MA was kinda like Leach in fb.  glad to have him gone.  next to impossible to beat them at home.

[Fuktard]

Don't expect MU to hire a big name coach.  A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.  I look for it to be Cuonzo Martin or similar.

[Dugout DickStone]

Don't expect MU to hire a big name coach.  A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.  I look for it to be Cuonzo Martin or similar.

he certainly seems to be the main name right now.

[Havs]

Don't expect MU to hire a big name coach.  A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.  I look for it to be Cuonzo Martin or similar.

Shaka Smart

[OK_Cat]

Don't expect MU to hire a big name coach.  A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.  I look for it to be Cuonzo Martin or similar.

Shaka Smart

haverhill making up names again

[Havs]

Don't expect MU to hire a big name coach.  A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.  I look for it to be Cuonzo Martin or similar.

Shaka Smart

haverhill making up names again

I just want Mizzou to fail!! 

[sys]

A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.

wouldn't an mo be something you've done more than never (more than once, if you consider anderson young&cheap)?

[MakeItRain]

I love Frank. Love him. But if he flirted with other schools three years in a row, then I couldn't care less if he left.

This line of thought is so basic.  If he happens to be so good at his job that competitors want to bid for his services every year, good for him.  If you were good enough at your job you'd do the same.  If he can keep getting Alden to give him cash then good for him.  If Mizzou was getting jerked around then Mike Alden is to blame.

It's a basic line of thought if you actually think your coach is worth what he is asking. MA isn't worth 2 million a year. Neither is Frank. At some point you want your coach to be satisfied with his pay. How many times do you think you could go to your boss, tell him you have another offer that you would like him to match, before he shakes your hand and says "good luck with your future endeavors".

Like anyone else with a job, they are worth what someone is willing to pay them.  If this is a bidding war, there are at least two schools who feel he is worth it, so that makes him worth it.  If Mizzou doesn't want to pay him that, no one is forcing them to.  Mizzou is begging Anderson to shop his services & push up his price by playing into this game.

So it's impossible to overpay for something as long as there are two parties willing to do so? 

Pretty much textbook supply and demand here. There's only one Mike Anderson and there's more than one buyer interested in purchasing Mike Anderson's services. This equals profit for Mike Anderson. More power to him.

The only instance where I think they could be accused of "paying too much" is if they don't actually have the money to pay Mike Anderson. I don't think this is the case... but perhaps Mike Anderson should check in to this before signing a contract.

Absolutely not true.  Just because some idiot (or idiots) are willing to pay $X for a good or service does not necessarily mean that said good or service has a value of $X.

I should have added that "supply and demand" and more generally the study of economics relies on "rational decision making"...history is full of instances where this isn't the case (in fact often times it isn't the case).   To think that because someone (or even more than one person) is willing to pay $X for something means that is the value and so therefore they are not "overpaying" for that something is absurd.

Until you become a big time athletic department booster or an AD, your opinion over who is overpaid and who isn't doesn't mean dick.  I think iPhones are rough ridin' stupid and wouldn't pay $50 for one, who gives a eff what I think, I have no ability to move the market.  You have no ability to determine how much a coach is worth.  Stay out of peoples pocket, meat peeper.  Just because you think Frank Martin is a better basketball coach and gets paid less, doesn't mean that Anderson is overpaid, don't be so simple.

Athletic Directors pay him, they dictate the market.  Coaches are not a good or service.  One goddamn iPad doesn't make crap for Apple.  One Mike Anderson helped Mizzou gross $9.5 million & net over $4 million last year.  Obviously Mike Alden thinks Anderson has great value to the men's basketball program and to the University of Missouri. 

You have such a simplistic view of this it's mind numbing. Yes there is one Mike Anderson. Yes there are two schools that want him. You know what else, there are like hundreds of coaches (which is also what Mike Anderson is). Only about 10 of them are paid $2M plus. You think Anderson is one of the top 10 coaches in the country? GMAFB. For less than $2M, he could be replaced. He had one good year at MU, that is NOT worth $2M.

If he gets to the final four next year, then I'll rearange my opinion on the topic.

Again you are interjecting your opinion where it isn't relevant.  I didn't say that Mike Anderson is a "top ten coach," whatever the hell that means, because clearly that has little to no relevance to his perceived value to a basketball program.  There are at least three major college athletic directors who think Mike Anderson is worth $2 million dollars.  It doesn't matter what your criteria is for a $2 million dollar coach is or whether or not you think he is a top 10 coach.  The people who are decide these things have made it quite clear that Mike Anderson is a $2 million dollar coach.  It has nothing to do with scarcity, goods, supply/demand, or any other entry level macroeconomic term you want to throw out.  The people who decide what a coaches worth is has decided that he is a $2 million dollar coach, its black and white, I have facts on my side and you have your opinion on yours.  Why don't you tell us how much oil should be per barrel based on the gas you put in your smart car or how much gold is per ounce based on the gold ring you got from your nana?  Your opinion on these matters are certainly just as informed and relevant.

First, I need to get this out of the way: You're Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

2 retards fighting over a hotdog like it was gold does not make the hotdog gold. You're saying he's worth what he's going to get ($2.2M) because there's an idiot willing to pay him that. It's a ridiculous view. From your perspective, it's impossible to overpay for ANYTHING as long as there are 2 people that agree that it's worth that value.

You have two desparate ADs on your side. You know what I have on my side? Every other AD in the country, minus 6, that are not willing to pay their coach that much money. You know why? Because their coaches aren't worth it unless they get to Final Fours or are at least regulars to the Elite 8. They know that, I know that, everybody in the country know that..... I guess besides you, Alden, and whoever the water head at Arkansas AD that's lusting over the Richardson days.

Using every D1 AD as a barometer is stupid.  The AD at St. Peters is just as relevant as you in the conversation.  The measuring stick isn't every AD its every AD willing and able to pay a basketball coach $2 million.  That number is about 20 and of that 20 two of them are looking for a coach, both want Mike Anderson.  So 100% of the teams able to pay $2 mil to Anderson wanted to do so, how does that equal overvalued?  Your issue shouldn't be Anderson's value, it should be with other coaches being possibly undervalued.

[Fuktard]

A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.

wouldn't an mo be something you've done more than never (more than once, if you consider anderson young&cheap)?

Anderson was young and relatively cheap. 

MU put together a search committee consisting of 3 well respected white basketball guys, Alden and a black assistant ad.  When the 3 white guys suggested Huggins (and wouldn't budge off their recommendation) Alden cut them loose and he and the assistant ad decided on Anderson. 

[The Whale]

Confirmed garbage human being didn't even bother to tell his players before accepting the job.

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2011/03/23/missouri-mens-basketball-players-were-just-uninformed-fans-leading-announcement-mike-andersons-departure-arkansas/

[sys]

Anderson was young and relatively cheap.

was 46 when hired and his first contract paid 850k plus performance bonuses.  huggins got 1 million the same year.  coaches made a lot less back then.

[Fuktard]

Anderson was young and relatively cheap.

was 46 when hired and his first contract paid 850k plus performance bonuses.  huggins got 1 million the same year.  coaches made a lot less back then.

dammit....you got me

[mcmwcat]

A young black coach that they can hire cheap is Alden's m.o.

wouldn't an mo be something you've done more than never (more than once, if you consider anderson young&cheap)?

heh

[CNS]

ArkRazorbacks ArkRazorbacks
by RazorBloggers
Special event introducing Razorback men's basketball coach Mike Anderson set for Saturday morning at 1030a at Walton Arena, open to public

Heads up vid guys.

I would like a vid with sound of Mike doing that Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) pig call. 

Bet he doesn't do it.

[KITNfury]

I love Frank. Love him. But if he flirted with other schools three years in a row, then I couldn't care less if he left.

This line of thought is so basic.  If he happens to be so good at his job that competitors want to bid for his services every year, good for him.  If you were good enough at your job you'd do the same.  If he can keep getting Alden to give him cash then good for him.  If Mizzou was getting jerked around then Mike Alden is to blame.

It's a basic line of thought if you actually think your coach is worth what he is asking. MA isn't worth 2 million a year. Neither is Frank. At some point you want your coach to be satisfied with his pay. How many times do you think you could go to your boss, tell him you have another offer that you would like him to match, before he shakes your hand and says "good luck with your future endeavors".

Like anyone else with a job, they are worth what someone is willing to pay them.  If this is a bidding war, there are at least two schools who feel he is worth it, so that makes him worth it.  If Mizzou doesn't want to pay him that, no one is forcing them to.  Mizzou is begging Anderson to shop his services & push up his price by playing into this game.

So it's impossible to overpay for something as long as there are two parties willing to do so? 

Pretty much textbook supply and demand here. There's only one Mike Anderson and there's more than one buyer interested in purchasing Mike Anderson's services. This equals profit for Mike Anderson. More power to him.

The only instance where I think they could be accused of "paying too much" is if they don't actually have the money to pay Mike Anderson. I don't think this is the case... but perhaps Mike Anderson should check in to this before signing a contract.

Absolutely not true.  Just because some idiot (or idiots) are willing to pay $X for a good or service does not necessarily mean that said good or service has a value of $X.

I should have added that "supply and demand" and more generally the study of economics relies on "rational decision making"...history is full of instances where this isn't the case (in fact often times it isn't the case).   To think that because someone (or even more than one person) is willing to pay $X for something means that is the value and so therefore they are not "overpaying" for that something is absurd.

Until you become a big time athletic department booster or an AD, your opinion over who is overpaid and who isn't doesn't mean dick.  I think iPhones are rough ridin' stupid and wouldn't pay $50 for one, who gives a eff what I think, I have no ability to move the market.  You have no ability to determine how much a coach is worth.  Stay out of peoples pocket, meat peeper.  Just because you think Frank Martin is a better basketball coach and gets paid less, doesn't mean that Anderson is overpaid, don't be so simple.

Athletic Directors pay him, they dictate the market.  Coaches are not a good or service.  One goddamn iPad doesn't make crap for Apple.  One Mike Anderson helped Mizzou gross $9.5 million & net over $4 million last year.  Obviously Mike Alden thinks Anderson has great value to the men's basketball program and to the University of Missouri. 

You have such a simplistic view of this it's mind numbing. Yes there is one Mike Anderson. Yes there are two schools that want him. You know what else, there are like hundreds of coaches (which is also what Mike Anderson is). Only about 10 of them are paid $2M plus. You think Anderson is one of the top 10 coaches in the country? GMAFB. For less than $2M, he could be replaced. He had one good year at MU, that is NOT worth $2M.

If he gets to the final four next year, then I'll rearange my opinion on the topic.

Again you are interjecting your opinion where it isn't relevant.  I didn't say that Mike Anderson is a "top ten coach," whatever the hell that means, because clearly that has little to no relevance to his perceived value to a basketball program.  There are at least three major college athletic directors who think Mike Anderson is worth $2 million dollars.  It doesn't matter what your criteria is for a $2 million dollar coach is or whether or not you think he is a top 10 coach.  The people who are decide these things have made it quite clear that Mike Anderson is a $2 million dollar coach.  It has nothing to do with scarcity, goods, supply/demand, or any other entry level macroeconomic term you want to throw out.  The people who decide what a coaches worth is has decided that he is a $2 million dollar coach, its black and white, I have facts on my side and you have your opinion on yours.  Why don't you tell us how much oil should be per barrel based on the gas you put in your smart car or how much gold is per ounce based on the gold ring you got from your nana?  Your opinion on these matters are certainly just as informed and relevant.

First, I need to get this out of the way: You're Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

2 retards fighting over a hotdog like it was gold does not make the hotdog gold. You're saying he's worth what he's going to get ($2.2M) because there's an idiot willing to pay him that. It's a ridiculous view. From your perspective, it's impossible to overpay for ANYTHING as long as there are 2 people that agree that it's worth that value.

You have two desparate ADs on your side. You know what I have on my side? Every other AD in the country, minus 6, that are not willing to pay their coach that much money. You know why? Because their coaches aren't worth it unless they get to Final Fours or are at least regulars to the Elite 8. They know that, I know that, everybody in the country know that..... I guess besides you, Alden, and whoever the water head at Arkansas AD that's lusting over the Richardson days.

Using every D1 AD as a barometer is stupid.  The AD at St. Peters is just as relevant as you in the conversation.  The measuring stick isn't every AD its every AD willing and able to pay a basketball coach $2 million.  That number is about 20 and of that 20 two of them are looking for a coach, both want Mike Anderson.  So 100% of the teams able to pay $2 mil to Anderson wanted to do so, how does that equal overvalued?  Your issue shouldn't be Anderson's value, it should be with other coaches being possibly undervalued.

Only 20 schools, that if they really thought they were getting real deal, could pony up $2M/year? Really? Gimme a break. There are 10 in our conference alone. If you want to use 2 schools as the barometer instead of the majority, go ahead and knock yourself out. If you're too dense to understand that, then there's nothing left for me to say.

[mcmwcat]

i guess we'll see which one of you is right when they release the details of the contract.

[MakeItRain]

I love Frank. Love him. But if he flirted with other schools three years in a row, then I couldn't care less if he left.

This line of thought is so basic.  If he happens to be so good at his job that competitors want to bid for his services every year, good for him.  If you were good enough at your job you'd do the same.  If he can keep getting Alden to give him cash then good for him.  If Mizzou was getting jerked around then Mike Alden is to blame.

It's a basic line of thought if you actually think your coach is worth what he is asking. MA isn't worth 2 million a year. Neither is Frank. At some point you want your coach to be satisfied with his pay. How many times do you think you could go to your boss, tell him you have another offer that you would like him to match, before he shakes your hand and says "good luck with your future endeavors".

Like anyone else with a job, they are worth what someone is willing to pay them.  If this is a bidding war, there are at least two schools who feel he is worth it, so that makes him worth it.  If Mizzou doesn't want to pay him that, no one is forcing them to.  Mizzou is begging Anderson to shop his services & push up his price by playing into this game.

So it's impossible to overpay for something as long as there are two parties willing to do so? 

Pretty much textbook supply and demand here. There's only one Mike Anderson and there's more than one buyer interested in purchasing Mike Anderson's services. This equals profit for Mike Anderson. More power to him.

The only instance where I think they could be accused of "paying too much" is if they don't actually have the money to pay Mike Anderson. I don't think this is the case... but perhaps Mike Anderson should check in to this before signing a contract.

Absolutely not true.  Just because some idiot (or idiots) are willing to pay $X for a good or service does not necessarily mean that said good or service has a value of $X.

I should have added that "supply and demand" and more generally the study of economics relies on "rational decision making"...history is full of instances where this isn't the case (in fact often times it isn't the case).   To think that because someone (or even more than one person) is willing to pay $X for something means that is the value and so therefore they are not "overpaying" for that something is absurd.

Until you become a big time athletic department booster or an AD, your opinion over who is overpaid and who isn't doesn't mean dick.  I think iPhones are rough ridin' stupid and wouldn't pay $50 for one, who gives a eff what I think, I have no ability to move the market.  You have no ability to determine how much a coach is worth.  Stay out of peoples pocket, meat peeper.  Just because you think Frank Martin is a better basketball coach and gets paid less, doesn't mean that Anderson is overpaid, don't be so simple.

Athletic Directors pay him, they dictate the market.  Coaches are not a good or service.  One goddamn iPad doesn't make crap for Apple.  One Mike Anderson helped Mizzou gross $9.5 million & net over $4 million last year.  Obviously Mike Alden thinks Anderson has great value to the men's basketball program and to the University of Missouri. 

You have such a simplistic view of this it's mind numbing. Yes there is one Mike Anderson. Yes there are two schools that want him. You know what else, there are like hundreds of coaches (which is also what Mike Anderson is). Only about 10 of them are paid $2M plus. You think Anderson is one of the top 10 coaches in the country? GMAFB. For less than $2M, he could be replaced. He had one good year at MU, that is NOT worth $2M.

If he gets to the final four next year, then I'll rearange my opinion on the topic.

Again you are interjecting your opinion where it isn't relevant.  I didn't say that Mike Anderson is a "top ten coach," whatever the hell that means, because clearly that has little to no relevance to his perceived value to a basketball program.  There are at least three major college athletic directors who think Mike Anderson is worth $2 million dollars.  It doesn't matter what your criteria is for a $2 million dollar coach is or whether or not you think he is a top 10 coach.  The people who are decide these things have made it quite clear that Mike Anderson is a $2 million dollar coach.  It has nothing to do with scarcity, goods, supply/demand, or any other entry level macroeconomic term you want to throw out.  The people who decide what a coaches worth is has decided that he is a $2 million dollar coach, its black and white, I have facts on my side and you have your opinion on yours.  Why don't you tell us how much oil should be per barrel based on the gas you put in your smart car or how much gold is per ounce based on the gold ring you got from your nana?  Your opinion on these matters are certainly just as informed and relevant.

First, I need to get this out of the way: You're Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

2 retards fighting over a hotdog like it was gold does not make the hotdog gold. You're saying he's worth what he's going to get ($2.2M) because there's an idiot willing to pay him that. It's a ridiculous view. From your perspective, it's impossible to overpay for ANYTHING as long as there are 2 people that agree that it's worth that value.

You have two desparate ADs on your side. You know what I have on my side? Every other AD in the country, minus 6, that are not willing to pay their coach that much money. You know why? Because their coaches aren't worth it unless they get to Final Fours or are at least regulars to the Elite 8. They know that, I know that, everybody in the country know that..... I guess besides you, Alden, and whoever the water head at Arkansas AD that's lusting over the Richardson days.

Using every D1 AD as a barometer is stupid.  The AD at St. Peters is just as relevant as you in the conversation.  The measuring stick isn't every AD its every AD willing and able to pay a basketball coach $2 million.  That number is about 20 and of that 20 two of them are looking for a coach, both want Mike Anderson.  So 100% of the teams able to pay $2 mil to Anderson wanted to do so, how does that equal overvalued?  Your issue shouldn't be Anderson's value, it should be with other coaches being possibly undervalued.

Only 20 schools, that if they really thought they were getting real deal, could pony up $2M/year? Really? Gimme a break. There are 10 in our conference alone. If you want to use 2 schools as the barometer instead of the majority, go ahead and knock yourself out. If you're too dense to understand that, then there's nothing left for me to say.

I said could and would, there's no where close to 10 schools in this conference that have demonstrated that they'd pay that much for a basketball coach.  Texas, Kansas, and Mizzou, thats it.  OU isn't paying that much for a coach, A&M, or KSU haven't either.  Frank was reportedly offered $2 mil from DePaul, KSU didn't try to match that.

The past 4 years Mike Anderson's program made more money for his school than Frank did for KSU.

You can keep saying that I'm a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and I don't understand, yet I keep presenting facts and you keep stating your opinion coupled with a sig pic of a football player.  Present a fact of any relevance that supports your strong & simple opinions or just, let me have the last word to save you from further embarrassment.

[KITNfury]

I said could and would, there's no where close to 10 schools in this conference that have demonstrated that they'd pay that much for a basketball coach.  Texas, Kansas, and Mizzou, thats it.  OU isn't paying that much for a coach, A&M, or KSU haven't either.  Frank was reportedly offered $2 mil from DePaul, KSU didn't try to match that.

The past 4 years Mike Anderson's program made more money for his school than Frank did for KSU.

You can keep saying that I'm a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and I don't understand, yet I keep presenting facts and you keep stating your opinion coupled with a sig pic of a football player.  Present a fact of any relevance that supports your strong & simple opinions or just, let me have the last word to save you from further embarrassment.

You really shouldn't call me out for stating opinions when you're doing the same. As far as I can tell, the only relevant fact you've thrown out is that there are people willing to pay Anderson $2M. That doesn't mean he's being paid well above market value for an above average coach. You assume that because schools in this conference have not spent $2M for a coach, that means they wouldn't. That's opinion. You know what I think (there you go buddy)? I think there would be ten schools in this conference that would pay $2M to get Coach K, Bill Self, etc to come to their school. You and I both know that almost every BCS school would. Of course, nobody will pay that much because those guys aren't walking through the door.

Fact: there are 6 coaches paid more than Mike Anderson. Fact: There are well over 20 schools that have the budget to pay $2M year. Fact: Nobody pays that unless they are getting an elite level coach because it's a waste of money. Fact: Mike Anderson has not shown himself to be an elite level coach.

Like I said earlier in this thread, if he becomes an elite level coach, then fine, it's worth it. At this moment in time, it is not.

[CNS]

Don’t bank on that up-and-coming coach (duh)

Mike Miller

Mar 25, 2011, 12:20 PM EDT
Leave a comment

That mid-major coach everyone’s eager to hire? He may not be a sure thing.

Richmond’s Chris Mooney just got added to Tennessee’s coaching search. Shaka Smart’s trying to get VCU ready for Florida State, but has to deal with non-stop questions about coaching other teams.

Yet if they do end up at a bigger school, you can see courtesy of Luke Winn’s power rankings that of the 11 coaches hired immediately after a Sweet 16 run, only five did it with their new school.

No one say anything to MU about this...

[Fuktard]

I heard Sunvold was on 810 discussing his being fired from the last search committee....hmmmmmmmm

[wetwillie]

St. John claimed this morning on the BP that current Atlanta Hawks coach Larry Drew was interested in the Missouri job when MA got it and is currently interested in the opening.

[Skipper44]

I heard Sunvold was on 810 discussing his being fired from the last search committee....hmmmmmmmm

I missed this, did it sound like he was still upset they did not go after Huggs like he suggested? 

[Emo EMAW]

I heard Sunvold was on 810 discussing his being fired from the last search committee....hmmmmmmmm

I missed this, did it sound like he was still upset they did not go after Huggs like he suggested? 

I don't think he was upset, it seemed it was over it.  But his biggest point was that he was staunchly against hiring Quin.