First of all I can't spin what happened tonight. WCB is now where MCB was in the 60s and 70s. The talent pool isn't deep the best programs get the best players and there simply aren't enough good players right now for there to be any real parity. Again that's no defense for a terrible performance.
As for Deb, she took a program that was a national embarrassment. Deb and I started at KSU at the same time. The first time I heard about K-State Women's Basketball was the season before she took over. The program made Sportscenter, and this was sportscenter in its heyday. The program was on because a coach named Brian Agler put the program on probation, he was crap canned and Jack Hartman had to take over. Agler cheated and still didn't win. Deb made the tournament that first season, while on probation. She has made the postseason 13 out of 16 seasons. She has won 63% of her games and two conference championships. She doesn't and shouldn't get paid based on what some randos think she should make, she like every other college athletics coach, gets based on her industry standard. Using the industry standard she is giving K-State a hometown discount, she should be praised.
She has accomplished more and makes more money for the school than Brad Hill. No one watches college baseball, why aren't we subjected to college baseball ridicule and calls for him to make $30,000? Cliff Rovelto hasn't made 26 cents for KSU, should he volunteer?
I agree that both Brad Hill and Deb Patterson should make a salary that is in line with what they produce (which is jack crap). They each coach sports that lose (collectively) millions of dollars. I do not give them "credit" for taking less at KSU, but that's mostly because I could give a crap whether their sports even existed.
I only care about the sports that make KSU money. I dislike all the others, because they do not make KSU money (they do the opposite).
Also, I do not want to date Brad Hill.
So you base your level of like based on revenues and expenses? Weird. So you like the job LHC Bill Snyder is doing much more so than that of Frank Martin? The raw numbers and the percentages indicate that football does a lot more for the school than basketball. If that's how you feel there isn't much I can say as a defense. I'm constantly baffled why so many smart people are perfectly content with having such a ridiculously moronic viewpoint about this. No contracted employee in this country gets paid based on the system you propose and you know it, but you don't care because women's basketball is boring.
You are correct, I do not care about any other sport besides mbb and football, and I do find the others to be boring.
However, I do not think it is a coincidence that the two that I enjoy are the only ones that are profitable.
That's not why I like them, but it does make me feel good to know that they are.
I disagree that other contract jobs aren't paid on the system I propose. In fact, that's exactly how I see the world working. Like, rough ridin' exactly. I'm pretty darn liberal, so forgive me if I muck this conservative speech up, but if you do something that has economic value, then you get paid. The only argument you have in support of women's coaching salaries is that they produce some sort of non-economic value...but you'll never convince me that it's even close to equaling the economic cost we incur to create that non-economic value. Wecker and Ohlde, notwithstanding.
