Fire John Currie

[ChiComCat]

My concern wasn't keeping oscar around to retain the talent.  My concern was retaining the talent for the next coach.  There is no one player that would we couldn't afford to lose, but keeping them together could be a factor in attracting a better coach, as well as contributing to the short term success of the program.

[Skipper44]

the last thing we want is another Dallas hotel room coaching search with the program at it's lowest point in over a decade and a possibly lame duck AD.  We need to let UP Bosco bring in his own stud AD and then get after this thing a year from now.  Best case is oscar rides next years NIT bid momentum into a mid major job in a warm place and saves us the buyout. 

Currie probably needs to start applying to UNC's with hyphens

[wetwillie]

I would be ok with firing Currie today and letting Laird be the interim AD after Bosco fires oscar and hires Gottlieb. 

[DOD Take 2]

Currie's quotes told us all he really cares about: People coming to the games and buying tickets and having a couple blue-collar/Kansas kids on the team that Tucks can be proud of. That seems to be an acceptable level of success for him.

[Cartierfor3]

Do you think John would say I'm a K-State guy? 

[Panjandrum]

i don't think any of the returning players or incoming freshmen are good enough that they are relevant to if or when to make a coaching change.

They aren't now or probably even next year but there's a good chance they would be if they are all around as seniors.

that's ridiculous.  this is panj?  good lord, panj.

I think my overall point was twofold:

1) Money
2) Lowered risk of roster turnover

If you have the nucleus of Stokes/Brown/Wade that have played 90+ games, the odds of them leaving are low if you make a change their senior year.  I think that does probably make the situation more appealing, especially if you have a good wing in Sneed to build around and feature.  An experienced, stable roster, even if it's C+/B- talent, is going to be more appealing than a complete gut job.

I'm not saying much about their overall ability/ceiling.  I think their experience + physical maturity will make them somewhat better, and having a decent sized class, but not too big, will allow the coach to start bringing in "their guys" without having to start with 7 or 8 new guys.

[kso_FAN]

i don't think any of the returning players or incoming freshmen are good enough that they are relevant to if or when to make a coaching change.

They aren't now or probably even next year but there's a good chance they would be if they are all around as seniors.

that's ridiculous.  this is panj?  good lord, panj.

I think my overall point was twofold:

1) Money
2) Lowered risk of roster turnover

If you have the nucleus of Stokes/Brown/Wade that have played 90+ games, the odds of them leaving are low if you make a change their senior year.  I think that does probably make the situation more appealing, especially if you have a good wing in Sneed to build around and feature.  An experienced, stable roster, even if it's C+/B- talent, is going to be more appealing than a complete gut job.

I'm not saying much about their overall ability/ceiling.  I think their experience + physical maturity will make them somewhat better, and having a decent sized class, but not too big, will allow the coach to start bringing in "their guys" without having to start with 7 or 8 new guys.

See Huggins, Bob.

[renocat]

Curdog for president of US.

[sys]

1) Money
2) Lowered risk of roster turnover

If you have the nucleus of Stokes/Brown/Wade that have played 90+ games, the odds of them leaving are low if you make a change their senior year.

ok.  i'm not sure about the money point, afaik, his buyout remains constant (or nearly so) for the life of his contract, so there would be no savings in waiting until the current freshmen's junior year.

you'd be foregoing two years with your preferred coach in order to age three players to the point at which they'd be less likely to transfer.  during that time span, your less preferred coach will recruit a minimum of seven players.  not only do those seven roster spots have value, but those years have value.


jfc, if you value those three freshmen that highly, and value the marginal difference between two years with your preferred coach and two years with your less preferred coach so little, why are you even considering changing coaches?

[Trim]

1) Money
2) Lowered risk of roster turnover

If you have the nucleus of Stokes/Brown/Wade that have played 90+ games, the odds of them leaving are low if you make a change their senior year.

ok.  i'm not sure about the money point, afaik, his buyout remains constant (or nearly so) for the life of his contract, so there would be no savings in waiting until the current freshmen's junior year.

Pretty much.  It's always the lesser of 2.5 million or the remaining base salary on the contract.  It wouldn't be until just before the final year of his current deal '18-19 that KSU could save $250K.

https://ksu-platform-secure-prod.silverchalice.co/v3/files/5583cd5be4b06b726e660350

https://ksu-platform-secure-prod.silverchalice.co/v3/files/5583c3abe4b06b726e65b9bd

https://ksu-platform-secure-prod.silverchalice.co/v3/files/5583b6cee4b06b726e655681

[michigancat]

1) Money
2) Lowered risk of roster turnover

If you have the nucleus of Stokes/Brown/Wade that have played 90+ games, the odds of them leaving are low if you make a change their senior year.

ok.  i'm not sure about the money point, afaik, his buyout remains constant (or nearly so) for the life of his contract, so there would be no savings in waiting until the current freshmen's junior year.

you'd be foregoing two years with your preferred coach in order to age three players to the point at which they'd be less likely to transfer.  during that time span, your less preferred coach will recruit a minimum of seven players.  not only do those seven roster spots have value, but those years have value.


jfc, if you value those three freshmen that highly, and value the marginal difference between two years with your preferred coach and two years with your less preferred coach so little, why are you even considering changing coaches?

I didn't know the info on the buyout Trim just shared, which I'll admit changes things.

I'm thinking you might have better candidates available with a good returning roster that is unlikely to transfer. And it would only be one extra year. So like, if you can't get someone decent to coach after next season, let him stick around another. And of course, if he makes the NCAA tourney next year it's extension time.

[sys]

I'm thinking you might have better candidates available with a good returning roster that is unlikely to transfer. And it would only be one extra year. So like, if you can't get someone decent to coach after next season, let him stick around another. And of course, if he makes the NCAA tourney next year it's extension time.

two extra years from this year.

there's no reason to speculate on attracting better candidates in one year or another (which likely will depend much more on who is available and looking for kstateish jobs than on whether three average players are freshmen, sophs or juniors).  there's no reason to fire weber until you've secured your preferred candidate.  if you fail, then keep him because you couldn't hire who you wanted, not because you think coaches will be salivating at the thought of being able to coach Deathbite for a year.

[kso_FAN]

I'm thinking you might have better candidates available with a good returning roster that is unlikely to transfer. And it would only be one extra year. So like, if you can't get someone decent to coach after next season, let him stick around another. And of course, if he makes the NCAA tourney next year it's extension time.

two extra years from this year.

there's no reason to speculate on attracting better candidates in one year or another (which likely will depend much more on who is available and looking for kstateish jobs than on whether three average players are freshmen, sophs or juniors).  there's no reason to fire weber until you've secured your preferred candidate.  if you fail, then keep him because you couldn't hire who you wanted, not because you think coaches will be salivating at the thought of being able to coach Deathbite for a year.

Maybe Tod Kowalczyk?

[michigancat]

I'm thinking you might have better candidates available with a good returning roster that is unlikely to transfer. And it would only be one extra year. So like, if you can't get someone decent to coach after next season, let him stick around another. And of course, if he makes the NCAA tourney next year it's extension time.

two extra years from this year.

there's no reason to speculate on attracting better candidates in one year or another (which likely will depend much more on who is available and looking for kstateish jobs than on whether three average players are freshmen, sophs or juniors).  there's no reason to fire weber until you've secured your preferred candidate.  if you fail, then keep him because you couldn't hire who you wanted, not because you think coaches will be salivating at the thought of being able to coach Deathbite for a year.

He's coming back next year regardless. Other than that I pretty much agree with what you said. Especially since the buyout isn't a factor.

[pissclams]

are there really a lot of coaches that won't come to k-state if we show them the money?  and i'm not talking about extreme $.   i guess that once you establish a commitment to facilities, which we have, a willing fan base, which we have, the rest is just how much we're willing to pay.  a big 12 job, regardless of which of the 10 schools,  is a very good one.

the relevancy of the roster that you 'gloids are debating is minimal, at best.  the type of coach we have to hire is going to need to have strong aau ties and will want his own players in his program, none of this inherited crap.

[michigancat]

are there really a lot of coaches that won't come to k-state if we show them the money?  and i'm not talking about extreme $.   i guess that once you establish a commitment to facilities, which we have, a willing fan base, which we have, the rest is just how much we're willing to pay.  a big 12 job, regardless of which of the 10 schools,  is a very good one.

the relevancy of the roster that you 'gloids are debating is minimal, at best.  the type of coach we have to hire is going to need to have strong aau ties and will want his own players in his program, none of this inherited crap.

You're probably right. Although I think what a coach is inheriting has an impact on which job he takes. If you're a coach choosing between Iowa State and Missouri, for example, you're probably going to choose the one with a significantly better roster.

As long as we aren't Kim Anderson terrible it probably doesn't make much of a difference though.

[420seriouscat69]

why I would've been OK with Brad Underwood coming to K-State. I understand what John is doing, and will support it. I let him know in an email and encourage others to do the same, if they believe that. GO CATS!!!

[wetwillie]

eff, this bad person hasn't been fired yet?

[sonofdaxjones]

Can you get another AD job by boring people to death?   I think it's being attempted at K-State.

[ksupamplemousse]

Can you get another AD job by boring people to death?   I think it's being attempted at K-State.

John Currie is an accountant, and the last few years have been like tax time, a very thrilling experience for all. Marveling at what shiny new things can be bought with your freshly harvested interest-free loan back from the government. It's truly an experience without peer. But now it's April 16th, and K-State fans are still hanging out with their accountant, wondering to themselves, "How did I not realize how much of a boring, insufferable rat this guy is before now? Why is he still here? Maybe we should have met at this office, I didn't realize how awkward it was going to be to ask him to leave. Doesn't he get the hint? I've checked my watch like 25 times in the last 10 minutes. Does he really have that little self-awareness?"

[wetwillie]

It's nothing like that

[Woogy]

Can you get another AD job by boring people to death?   I think it's being attempted at K-State.

John Currie is an accountant, and the last few years have been like tax time, a very thrilling experience for all. Marveling at what shiny new things can be bought with your freshly harvested interest-free loan back from the government. It's truly an experience without peer. But now it's April 16th, and K-State fans are still hanging out with their accountant, wondering to themselves, "How did I not realize how much of a boring, insufferable rat this guy is before now? Why is he still here? Maybe we should have met at this office, I didn't realize how awkward it was going to be to ask him to leave. Doesn't he get the hint? I've checked my watch like 25 times in the last 10 minutes. Does he really have that little self-awareness?"

GhostbustersCatbusters:

Woman at Party: [coming up to Louis John Currie during party] Do you have any Excedrin or extra-strength Tylenol?
Louis John Currie: [opening cabinet] Gee, I think all I got is acetylsalicylic acid, generic. See, I can get six hundred tablets of that for the same price as three hundred of a name brand. That makes good financial sense, good advice...
 [takes platter back into living room]
Louis John Currie: Hey, this is real smoked salmon from Nova Scotia, Canada, $24.95 a pound! It only cost me $14.12 after tax, though.
 [walks up to a hapless guest, speaking confidentially]
Louis John Currie: I'm givin' this whole thing as a promotional expense, that's why I invited clients instead of friends. You havin' a good time, Mark?
 [heads across the room, greeting other guests]
Louis John Currie: How you doing? Why don't you have some of the brie, it's at room temperature!
 [to the Tall Woman]
Louis John Currie: You think it's too warm in here for the brie?
Tall Woman at Party: [standing] Louis, I'm going home.
Louis John Currie: Aw, don't leave yet. Well, listen, maybe if we start dancing other people will join in!
Tall Woman at Party: [pauses] Okay!
 [Louis John Currie and the Tall Woman begin disco dancing. Suddenly the doorbell rings]
Louis John Currie: Oh, don't move, I just gotta get the door.
 [opens door, greeting guests]
Louis John Currie: Ted! Annette! I'm glad you could come, how you doin', give me your coats. Everybody, this is Ted and Annette Fleming! Ted has a small carpet cleaning business in receivership; Annette's drawing a salary from a deferred bonus from two years ago! They got fifteen thousand left on the house at eight percent.
 [throws the guests' coats in the closet, oblivious that they hit the Terror Dog hiding there]
Louis John Currie: So they're okay! So, does anybody wanna play Parcheesi?
 [the Terror Dog growls from inside the bedroom]
Louis John Currie: [grinning] Okay, who brought the dog?

[420seriouscat69]

Happy Birthday to ?#?KState? Athletics Director John Currie!

[420seriouscat69]

That was from K-Statesports on facebook. Here are the comments....

wackycat08 Get lost, Currie!
Like · Reply · 5 · 57 mins
Wackycat08

Write a reply...

Choose File
Roger Gibbs
Roger Gibbs In the interest of being a "stand up guy" and "the type of player we want" I'll say happy birthday instead of I really really really wish we would unload this guy and bring in someone who, I don't know, enjoys winning and not running off talent?
Like · Reply · 6 · 17 mins
Nick Friesen
Nick Friesen APRIL FOOLS! Not sure anyone cares about this
Like · Reply · 7 · 34 mins
Dan Morgan
Dan Morgan Please resign like Lon Kruger did in 1990. Take oscar Weber with you.
Like · Reply · 5 · 24 mins
Clint Hamblin
Clint Hamblin Andy Reed shares a birthday with John Currie? Are you going to have a party together?
Unlike · Reply · 3 · 1 hr
1 Reply
Eric Buyle
Eric Buyle Well this didn't backfire or anything!
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 25 mins
Zach Steger
Zach Steger Fire this SOB.
Unlike · Reply · 9 · 54 mins
Scott Bradley
Scott Bradley #FireCurrie
Unlike · Reply · 6 · 53 mins
Robin Sellens
Robin Sellens Happy birthday
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Nick Friesen
Nick Friesen
Nick Friesen's photo.
Unlike · Reply · 2 · 13 mins
Rob Nagely
Rob Nagely Trenton Cox Jacob Nagely check out theses comments

[420seriouscat69]

Robin!