*tucks in shirt*
First of all, I think "Burn it down" is a terrible way to describe people who opposed the hire. It's been referenced by oscar supporters far more than his detractors. I referenced "burning it down" exactly once, the afternoon oscar was hired and never referenced it again, (you can check my posts):
I support this idea, kougar. burn the rough rider down and fire Currie before he leaves next year after Weber courageously leads us to an 11 seed and Jeff Goodman says he was right all along.
But keep in mind that a day later, _FAN posted this:
I've decided that if you took Asbury and combined him with Wooly pretty much what you get is oscar Weber.
so I think I look pretty reasonable.
Still ,I think hiring oscar was the wrong move (even now). I give him full credit for sticking with Foster and leading to a great season, but I honestly had more fun (overall) when Frank was our coach.
Why? I don't know. I'm sure part of the reason I don't enjoy watching games under oscar as much is because I don't like the fact that he was hired, but I didn't like rehiring Bill and I definitely have loved the crap out of the last 3 seasons. Part of it's that I never go to games any more.
But I also liked the style of play more under Frank - taking advantage of transition and penetration, taking risks on defense, I honestly thought we played harder than everyone, and there wasn't a team tougher. I enjoyed watching players develop under Greenawaldt and seeing the team struggle through random benchings and tough wins against teams like FHSU. Also even at his peak a lot of KSU folks didn't like him (obviously), which made it seem like every game mattered more. Everything just seemed more intense, which made the seasons more fun to me. I mean, even though we won the conference last season, the games were pretty boring outside of 2 or 3 and I had more fun during Frank's run in 2012 to seal the tourney appearance.
So it isn't JUST about wins for me. Who really gives a eff?
