It's all the school he's coached at most recently. I haven't spent a ton of time on KSU social, but I'd venture to say most fanbases that are passionate have gotten more, not less toxic, on social media over the last 6-10 years.Ouch...nice little dig toward KSU fans:
"The negativity that surrounds K-State times is really sad to me," Weber said. "This is the only school I've been associated with that I tell our recruits to avoid our social media. I'm afraid of what they'll see. Hopefully that can change, maybe with the new coach, and everybody can be positive about K-State and K-State athletics."
LOL he's an idiot. It's the only school he's been associated with since social media was really popular.It's all the school he's coached at most recently. I haven't spent a ton of time on KSU social, but I'd venture to say most fanbases that are passionate have gotten more, not less toxic, on social media over the last 6-10 years.
I would say jobs are about equal. KSU has done more recently.Or in other words, in our lifetimes, they have had equal success.
K-State has always been better than Missouri hoops. Yes, MIZ had some good years, but their historical records are not alike. And it's certainly not a "recent" thing.I would say jobs are about equal. KSU has done more recently.
MU is struggling after two hires that really didn't pan out.
Better success in the 50' and 60's does not make it a better job for a coach looking today. KSU has had little to no success in my lifetime. Also, your 2013 championship was shared with KU who beat you 3 times that season by a combined 42 points, so that's really just a technicality.K-State has always been better than Missouri hoops. Yes, MIZ had some good years, but their historical records are not alike. And it's certainly not a "recent" thing.
Conference championships since WW2
Missouri: 1976, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1990, 1994
K-State: 1948, 1950, 1951, 1956, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1973, 1977, 2013, 2019
Surly, I'm on your side here. MU had greater success, although modest, and was a better gig from 80s-early 00s.K-State has always been better than Missouri hoops. Yes, MIZ had some good years, but their historical records are not alike. And it's certainly not a "recent" thing.
Conference championships since WW2
Missouri: 1976, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1990, 1994
K-State: 1948, 1950, 1951, 1956, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1973, 1977, 2013, 2019
Stop it.K-State has always been better than Missouri hoops. Yes, MIZ had some good years, but their historical records are not alike. And it's certainly not a "recent" thing.
Conference championships since WW2
Missouri: 1976, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1990, 1994
K-State: 1948, 1950, 1951, 1956, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1973, 1977, 2013, 2019
No one is disputing historical records Surly. I really don’t think that matters much to recruits, especially what happened before their grandparents could have been born.K-State has always been better than Missouri hoops. Yes, MIZ had some good years, but their historical records are not alike. And it's certainly not a "recent" thing.
Conference championships since WW2
Missouri: 1976, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1990, 1994
K-State: 1948, 1950, 1951, 1956, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1973, 1977, 2013, 2019
Both jobs are average among P6 conferences. K States more attractive due to being in a better basketball conference, Mizzou is more attractive due to being easier in terms of schedule. If you had 10 aspiring head coaches in a room it would be 50/50 as to their preference.K-State has always been better than Missouri hoops. Yes, MIZ had some good years, but their historical records are not alike. And it's certainly not a "recent" thing.
Conference championships since WW2
Missouri: 1976, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1990, 1994
K-State: 1948, 1950, 1951, 1956, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1973, 1977, 2013, 2019
Well, that's probably true. After all, I wrote earlier that these are equal gigs. What matters is who is coaching.No one is disputing historical records Surly. I really don’t think that matters much to recruits, especially what happened before their grandparents could have been born.
K-State has consistently outperformed Missouri's financials, albeit Missouri spends a lot more.I wonder if Mizzou could afford to pay more than K-State given the financial uncertainty in the Big 12 and the ocean of cash being distributed to SEC ADs.
Not by any measure.Well, that's probably true. After all, I wrote earlier that these are equal gigs. What matters is who is coaching.
But don't write that Missouri is a better basketball program than K-State's because that's patently false by any measure.
Measures that come to mind where Mizzou is in a better position.Well, that's probably true. After all, I wrote earlier that these are equal gigs. What matters is who is coaching.
But don't write that Missouri is a better basketball program than K-State's because that's patently false by any measure.
Last 10 years:
Missouri 151-168 47% 2 NCAAs
K-State 184-147 56% 4 NCAAs 1 Conference championship
By those measures, watch out for the return of Harvard and Yale.Measures that come to mind where Mizzou is in a better position.
Fanbase size
Donor size/resources
More $$$ in annual contributions from donors
Location to major metro areas
Columbia, MO > Manhattan, KS
More stable conference financially
They most certainly could. They just had a record year in athletic donations (somewhere north of $50 Million), with some large one-time donations.I wonder if Mizzou could afford to pay more than K-State given the financial uncertainty in the Big 12 and the ocean of cash being distributed to SEC ADs.