Look, the reality of it is that most of the general public will not find out the details of certain events, namely the Jamar situation... With Jamar, a lot of that is coming from FERPA. That is the main reason for the FOIA refusals, because discussion of Jamar's financial situation and personal details falls under FERPA.
Fine, that is a reasonable answer. Doesn't explain his poor handling of the questions, or situation in general, but I can accept that. Are the media dudes lying/exaggerating when they say that EVERY FOIA request they have put in has been denied (or price tagged way over industry standard)?
With Frank, I don't think K-State gains anything publicly by detailing everything. It could harm everyone involved. So I think they are just going to keep quiet, wish him well, and move on. Unfortunately, Frank was digging a grave that no AD was going to be able to dig him out of. Trust me, it's best for both sides.
The consequence of that is you guys are left to speculate, read reports from "sources" that are probably only telling one side of the story, and then have to form opinions on incomplete information. That sucks, no question. And it's not fair to you guys, no question.
Explain to me how K-State has nothing to gain with being forthright about Frank? Right now we have a large segment of our fan base disenfranchised, and a significant segment in full out revolt. What are the potential negative consequences (short and/or long term) that are overriding the current situation?
It is my opinion this is being caused in large part because we DON'T believe what our athletic director (and athletic department sources) is telling us. The reason that many of us don't believe John Currie is that we see a pattern of lying (or stretching the truth, whatever) that causes us to question everything he says.
John Currie says "there are no predetermined parameters". You come on a few days later and say "he really wanted someone with prior head coaching experience". Well rough ridin' say that John, why wouldn't you? Why not say "we're going to look at all the qualified candidates, but there are certain things that I feel are important for this hire and will be used in comparing them", then tell us what you're looking for and explain why those things are important. Is that asking too much? That assumes though, that there really was a thought process before hand. That we didn't end up at oscar Weber and then make up the rational for the hire.
John Currie says "we wanted to do this quickly for our student athletes". Come on, really? You don't think that's insulting to the fan base CC? We all know that is not the case. If the truth is we realized oscar Weber is the best we were going to get and the process was over, fine. "After vetting our candidates and interviewing those we wanted to meet we came to the decision that oscar Weber was our coach. At that point there was no reason to prolong the appearance of a search." But: "We did this for the kids."?
John Currie says "I looked hard for anyone who would tell me oscar Weber wasn't a good coach and couldn't get the job done and couldn't find one person or shred of evidence that was the case." You can try to pass that off as press conference fluff, but that is not the way it comes off.
But then, when we talk about Frank we get:
"Dude it was bad and getting worse."
"What do you mean?"
"Everybody was going to leave, no one could work with him, it was going to be BAD if something wasn't done."
"Like how bad? NCAA bad?"
"Can't say, maybe some day, but BAD."
"Cause we were still doing pretty well on the court.."
"Are you listening, BAD. Poisoned well, no more players, no more recruits."
"But we had a top 50 commit and were in on some other top 150 guys.."
"I don't think you're listening to me, off a cliff, program over, had to be done."
"Well what about the staff?"
"No they were ok, just Frank. Frank was off the deep end."
"But they're all going with Frank."
"? No they were part of the problem too."
Can you see how when people associated with the athletic department tell us things about how bad Frank had become, it's hard for us to take them at face value? When the leader of the athletic department is fairly frequently telling us things we KNOW are not true (some understandable and excusable, many just unexplainable).