Spirited debate inspired by Dax.

[yoga-like_abana]

Weber was going to the College of Charleston before Currie called.  just sayin'

If you had a chance to go live in Charleston and make a nice chunk of cash coaching basketball, you'd go to zacker.

seems like a top 40 coach would have a lot of oppys to coach at actual basketball schools/conferences imo

[star seed 7]

i like that dax rails against snyder for wasting recruiting after a title, but he gives weber a free pass and calls everyone squawk tucks if they don't agree.

[sonofdaxjones]

i like that dax rails against snyder for wasting recruiting after a title, but he gives weber a free pass and calls everyone squawk tucks if they don't agree.

IMO oscar had a pretty decent second recruiting class and he has a commitment from a kid who had legit offers from Indiana, Arizona, Miami, and Ole' Miss as well as many others.

In terms of Snyder he has a much longer track record at K-State, the football stadium is named after him and he's been given over $100 million dollars in new facilities.    His recruiting could be better, but I've never said he had to land 4 and 5 star guys across the board (but one or two here and there isn't out of the question).

But where am I giving anyone a free pass, I never give a completely free pass and I am not calling anyone a squawk tuck. 

Sad post bro, sad.

[quietstorm5]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

[Belvis Noland]

If we’re going to be specific on what oscar did with Frank’s players, let also take into account the Big 12 that Frank coached in compared to the Big 12 that oscar coached in.  WVUx2 < MUx2,   TCU< NUx2,  Techx2 < CUx2,  A&M was good when Frank was here, hell, UT wasn’t the wreck it is now.

The BigXII Conference RPI has basically remained the same since Huggins got here in 2006.  The one outlier is 09-10, when the BigXII had the best Conference RPI in America.  The other 6 seasons have all been about the same.  http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/conference/rpi

Frank was a good coach.  no question.  just find it hard to muster the energy to get so excercised about Weber at this point.  If he sucks in the next few years, fire him and move on. 

[star seed 7]

If we’re going to be specific on what oscar did with Frank’s players, let also take into account the Big 12 that Frank coached in compared to the Big 12 that oscar coached in.  WVUx2 < MUx2,   TCU< NUx2,  Techx2 < CUx2,  A&M was good when Frank was here, hell, UT wasn’t the wreck it is now.

The BigXII Conference RPI has basically remained the same since Huggins got here in 2006.  The one outlier is 09-10, when the BigXII had the best Conference RPI in America.  The other 6 seasons have all been about the same.  http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/conference/rpi

Frank was a good coach.  no question.  just find it hard to muster the energy to get so excercised about Weber at this point.  If he sucks in the next few years, fire him and move on.

the ol' ku football strategy, i like your thinking!

[Dr Rick Daris]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

i mean there are a million ways that you can bullet point out stuff like this on a resume and that was my whole point. congrats for just proving it. you made weber look good. good job. let me know if you want me to exercise this out for you and do the opposite. hopefully i won't need to though.

[catzacker]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

jfc.  During their Big 10 careers:
Overall / Conf
oscar   .675 / .578
Mike     .592 / .572

Both made Finals - Mike missed the post season 1/6 seasons, oscar 2/9.  Mike won big 10 once, oscar won twice - (his first two years with Bill Self's players).

Both were fired for performance.  this is so stupid.  oscar sucking is independent of anyone else sucking.  it doesn't matter if some other coach sucked just like oscar, what matters is that oscar sucked and got fired for it.  He was going to get hired by the College of Charleston until Currie called. 

[sonofdaxjones]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

jfc.  During their Big 10 careers:
Overall / Conf
oscar   .675 / .578
Mike     .592 / .572

Both made Finals - Mike missed the post season 1/6 seasons, oscar 2/9.  Mike won big 10 once, oscar won twice - (his first two years with Bill Self's players).

Both were fired for performance.  this is so stupid.  oscar sucking is independent of anyone else sucking.  it doesn't matter if some other coach sucked just like oscar, what matters is that oscar sucked and got fired for it.  He was going to get hired by the College of Charleston until Currie called.

The biggest problem with your misplaced anger is that it's highly unlikely anyone that you would have spewed about being the K-State coach wasn't likely going to come coach at K-State.

Here's a little newflash since you don't seem to get it.   Our last 3 coaches have been:  Damaged goods with a bad rep that few if any would have taken a chance on, the promotion of his assistant, oscar Weber.

There's absolutely nothing in that track record that says that anyone on the too cool for schoolers coaching fap list would have dropped everything and run to coach at K-State.   Oh and before you roll out some mid major type who you think would be the proverbial "can't miss" there's plenty of peril in that as well. 

[Cartierfor3]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

jfc.  During their Big 10 careers:
Overall / Conf
oscar   .675 / .578
Mike     .592 / .572

Both made Finals - Mike missed the post season 1/6 seasons, oscar 2/9.  Mike won big 10 once, oscar won twice - (his first two years with Bill Self's players).

Both were fired for performance.  this is so stupid.  oscar sucking is independent of anyone else sucking.  it doesn't matter if some other coach sucked just like oscar, what matters is that oscar sucked and got fired for it.  He was going to get hired by the College of Charleston until Currie called.

The biggest problem with your misplaced anger is that it's highly unlikely anyone that you would have spewed about being the K-State coach wasn't likely going to come coach at K-State.

Here's a little newflash since you don't seem to get it.   Our last 3 coaches have been:  Damaged goods with a bad rep that few if any would have taken a chance on, the promotion of his assistant, oscar Weber.

There's absolutely nothing in that track record that says that anyone on the too cool for schoolers coaching fap list would have dropped everything and run to coach at K-State.   Oh and before you roll out some mid major type who you think would be the proverbial "can't miss" there's plenty of peril in that as well.

In fairness Dax, the 2012 coaching search should've been able to offer a better job, with better fan support, and better talent and facilities than the 2006 one did.

[yoga-like_abana]

well thank god we got the recently fired guy with a good resume who was otherwise headed to charleston

[sonofdaxjones]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

jfc.  During their Big 10 careers:
Overall / Conf
oscar   .675 / .578
Mike     .592 / .572

Both made Finals - Mike missed the post season 1/6 seasons, oscar 2/9.  Mike won big 10 once, oscar won twice - (his first two years with Bill Self's players).

Both were fired for performance.  this is so stupid.  oscar sucking is independent of anyone else sucking.  it doesn't matter if some other coach sucked just like oscar, what matters is that oscar sucked and got fired for it.  He was going to get hired by the College of Charleston until Currie called.

The biggest problem with your misplaced anger is that it's highly unlikely anyone that you would have spewed about being the K-State coach wasn't likely going to come coach at K-State.

Here's a little newflash since you don't seem to get it.   Our last 3 coaches have been:  Damaged goods with a bad rep that few if any would have taken a chance on, the promotion of his assistant, oscar Weber.

There's absolutely nothing in that track record that says that anyone on the too cool for schoolers coaching fap list would have dropped everything and run to coach at K-State.   Oh and before you roll out some mid major type who you think would be the proverbial "can't miss" there's plenty of peril in that as well.

In fairness Dax, the 2012 coaching search should've been able to offer a better job, with better fan support, and better talent and facilities than the 2006 one did.

At K-State, that gets great interest from a really good mid-major coach.

Nobody that's good is leaving a major conference D1 program for K-State in '12.

[Cartierfor3]

At K-State, that gets great interest from a really good mid-major coach.

Nobody that's good is leaving a major conference D1 program for K-State in '12.

would've taken

[sonofdaxjones]

At K-State, that gets great interest from a really good mid-major coach.

Nobody that's good is leaving a major conference D1 program for K-State in '12.

would've taken

Name names and why.

[yoga-like_abana]

gregg marshall

[quietstorm5]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

jfc.  During their Big 10 careers:
Overall / Conf
oscar   .675 / .578
Mike     .592 / .572

Both made Finals - Mike missed the post season 1/6 seasons, oscar 2/9.  Mike won big 10 once, oscar won twice - (his first two years with Bill Self's players).

Both were fired for performance.  this is so stupid.  oscar sucking is independent of anyone else sucking.  it doesn't matter if some other coach sucked just like oscar, what matters is that oscar sucked and got fired for it.  He was going to get hired by the College of Charleston until Currie called.

It is stupid to compare them since their overall records are nothing a like! Weber has an extremely solid record pre- Illinois Davis as no record before IU.  Davis has an overall conference record of 63% Weber 68%. despite Weber spending his in far more highly regarded conferences. Weber's over record .676, Davis .606.  Weber has made the NCAA tourney 9 of 16 years, Davis 5 of 13. Weber has a S16 and 3 NCAA tourney wins outised of his BigTen tour. Mike Davis has all of 1 NCAA tourney appearance and no wins! Weber placed 2nd twice in the BigTen with rosters made mostly of his players, Davis never did better than 4th. There is no comparison! There are many things to bash oscar for so the weak sauce of trying to equate him and Davis was pretty sad. So why was that attempt made in the first place? 

[felix rex]

Yeah. I would have much more preferred rolling the dice on someone who may have turned out a loser than settling for someone who was a proven loser.

But we got our reg season title so we can retire basketball for another 20 years!

[Belvis Noland]

But we got our reg season title so we can retire basketball for another 20 years!

I don't think anybody is saying this. 

[yoga-like_abana]

But we got our reg season title so we can retire basketball for another 20 years!

I don't think anybody is saying this.

yes, oscar did.

[CNS]

Weber was going to the College of Charleston before Currie called.  just sayin'

If you had a chance to go live in Charleston and make a nice chunk of cash coaching basketball, you'd go to zacker.

seems like a top 40 coach would have a lot of oppys to coach at actual basketball schools/conferences imo

Rumor at the time was that his Charleston salary was being discussed in the $750,000 range.  Seems low for a top guy.   

[sonofdaxjones]

Let's take someone like Lon Kruger.  Lon has been pretty damn smart, because he's about a half an eyelash away from being "proven loser".   He managed to parlay his current gig(s) into bigger gig(s) despite taking every situation from pretty damn good, to pretty damn mediocre (of course he was a total bomb with the Hawks).   He managed to jettison every sinking ship just in time at every collegiate stop, and arguably you could even include K-State in that mix.  Yet, pretty much across the board he's considered a very good (if not great) basketball coach by many.


$750K is a lot of money for a school like CofC.

[quietstorm5]

Daris:  Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play.   You have to look long and rough ridin' hard to find much negative in there, the negativity is purely subjective at that juncture.

gosh darnit dax, no one (especially me) is arguing with your nameless oscar weber resume talking points so you can stop posting them. the argument (at least from me) is that they are simply that and nothing more.

Then there's massive swaths of the so called "Top 40" coaches who have nothing more than nameless talking points on their resume.

everything you listed above and then some could be applied to mike davis. their nameless bulletpoint resumes are virtually identical. that is why your "Nearly a .700 winning percentage in 15 years as a head coach, over .500 in the NCAA tourney, only one losing season overall, and only 2 losing seasons in conference play" talking points are discounted and juvenile. i mean, just in case you were wondering.

also, if one factors in that oscar was fired from his previous job for losing too often then you really don't have to look that far to see a great big neon flashing negative.

Well except for the fact that Davis doesn't even have an overall winning % of 61%, not near 70% and the fact that he has never won more than 1 NCAA game before or after his Final 4 appearance and Weber has 2 S16s along with 3 times as many NCAA wins outside of his final 4 seasons, Weber has almost twice as many conference titles and has a better overall conference winning % despite coaching the majority of the time in high major conferences, their resumes are exactly a like 

i mean there are a million ways that you can bullet point out stuff like this on a resume and that was my whole point. congrats for just proving it. you made weber look good. good job. let me know if you want me to exercise this out for you and do the opposite. hopefully i won't need to though.

So you're saying Mike Davis and Weber do have similar resumes? Yes you can simply remove data at your pleasing to attempt to make Davis look better but I didn't attempt to make a blind comparison of partial data. I did a complete comparison of all data points for 2 known entities. This isn't bullet pointing things to make Weber look good this was pointing out all the data points to show that 2 different wholes weren't comparable, the absolute opposite of what you want to do. You want to parse out data points that fit your desired end result to make the 2 appear equal. I used all data to show there isn't anything equal about them.

[CNS]

Let's take someone like Lon Kruger.  Lon has been pretty damn smart, because he's about a half an eyelash away from being "proven loser".   He managed to parlay his current gig(s) into bigger gig(s) despite taking every situation from pretty damn good, to pretty damn mediocre (of course he was a total bomb with the Hawks).   He managed to jettison every sinking ship just in time at every collegiate stop, and arguably you could even include K-State in that mix.  Yet, pretty much across the board he's considered a very good (if not great) basketball coach by many.


$750K is a lot of money for a school like CofC.

Irrelevant.  The point is that if he was a top guy, he would be mushing these offers rather than having no other alternative other than retirement or staying out of the game.

[yoga-like_abana]

Let's take someone like Lon Kruger.  Lon has been pretty damn smart, because he's about a half an eyelash away from being "proven loser".   He managed to parlay his current gig(s) into bigger gig(s) despite taking every situation from pretty damn good, to pretty damn mediocre (of course he was a total bomb with the Hawks).   He managed to jettison every sinking ship just in time at every collegiate stop, and arguably you could even include K-State in that mix.  Yet, pretty much across the board he's considered a very good (if not great) basketball coach by many.


$750K is a lot of money for a school like CofC.

cool story bro
 

[Trim]

T-Y mods for splitting out this exciting topic.  I'd have never read it it stuck in a recruiting thread.

2 things I'd point out in response to Dax's strikes against Joe Cool.

Nobody thinks Weber sucks because they hate him.  They hate him because he suck and now that affects K-State.  Aside from big-time Illini fan Daris, I believe all EMAWs* were completely indifferent to Weber until he ruined a hot dog rally and was getting his hand mangled by Ernie Barnett.

You love to bring up Shane as this guy who was crap under Frank and blossomed under Weber.  Shane was deeper in the hole (shoutout D.Scott) with Weber than he ever was with Frank until Nino got injured for the 29th time right in front of a bunch of Joe Cools' faces in Seattle (fanningbrag).  Weber was forced to play Shane out of position and Shane took advantage of mismatches.

*Keady's lost his right to be called an EMAW