Stephen Hurt '14 c 6-10 offered to KSU

[MesoCat]

The only thing KSU offers over us in conference affiliation. That there tells you what's important to Hurt. It's more important than actually developing or winning for him. Sad to be sure, but we'll be just fine and KSU will continue to fall.

Continuing to fall would seem odd considering the won a part of the Big XII last season. As far as KSU is concerned.....the school's total revenue totaled around $9 Million around 2010. With realignment and equal revenue sharing now in place, KSU is now making at least $26 per.....not to mention having a spanking new practice facility that now matches anyone in the Big XII. I'm afraid, especially considering the likes of only moderate to poor programs like TCU, Tech, and OU for starters, KSU won't have a problem staying viable in the top half of the Big XII.

[Cdizzle]

Continuing to fall would seem odd considering the won a part of the Big XII last season. As far as KSU is concerned.....the school's total revenue totaled around $9 Million around 2010. With realignment and equal revenue sharing now in place, KSU is now making at least $26 per.....not to mention having a spanking new practice facility that now matches anyone in the Big XII. I'm afraid, especially considering the likes of only moderate to poor programs like TCU, Tech, and OU for starters, KSU won't have a problem staying viable in the top half of the Big XII.

It doesn't take $26 mil to have a good basketball team. Having $26 mil doesn't make a good basketball team. A player is not getting any of that $26 mil (for most teams, anyway).

[SubGod22]

Continuing to fall would seem odd considering the won a part of the Big XII last season. As far as KSU is concerned.....the school's total revenue totaled around $9 Million around 2010. With realignment and equal revenue sharing now in place, KSU is now making at least $26 per.....not to mention having a spanking new practice facility that now matches anyone in the Big XII. I'm afraid, especially considering the likes of only moderate to poor programs like TCU, Tech, and OU for starters, KSU won't have a problem staying viable in the top half of the Big XII.

You forget that you still have Weber as a coach. You could finish as high as 5th considering how bad the XII is at the bottom, but nothing special is going to happen with Weber leading things. Wait until you're full of his recruits and not Martin's, things will change. And I think 0U has a hell of a lot better coach than you guys do and will be just fine. And I'm pretty sure they have a hell of a lot more money than you, since you seem to think that matters...

[newshock1234]

They are coming off a Big 12 championship. It’s a great situation. What more could you ask for?”

How about coming off a final 4 appearance

[jocoshock]

You forget that you still have Weber as a coach. You could finish as high as 5th considering how bad the XII is at the bottom, but nothing special is going to happen with Weber leading things. Wait until you're full of his recruits and not Martin's, things will change. And I think 0U has a hell of a lot better coach than you guys do and will be just fine. And I'm pretty sure they have a hell of a lot more money than you, since you seem to think that matters...

Not arguing for KState or Weber but:
Coaches absolutely matter. So does money. Weber may not be the long term coach, but their AD is doing a lot of things that might help them attract a better coach and upgrade the class of athletes they get - to an extent. Having said that KSU ironically faces many of the same challenges that WSU does - geographically undesirable (Manhattan) being one of them. Will they ever attract the same athletes that KU and Texas attract - probably not unless they get an extremely dynamic and successful coach, and even then...

We have an extremely dynamic and successful coach and we are spending a lot of money to be competitive; enough to have gone to a Final Four - yet we still aren't (yet) reaping the benefits of that as much as we think we should. If we continue to perform, we will likely see recruiting continue to improve. The good thing for us is that we have a coaching staff who has cracked to code on finding the right players early in the process before others do, or seeing talent that others don't. Time will tell if K-State can find an equally successful formula under Bruce W.

[SubGod22]

Not arguing for KState or Weber but:
Coaches absolutely matter. So does money. Weber may not be the long term coach, but their AD is doing a lot of things that might help them attract a better coach and upgrade the class of athletes they get - to an extent. Having said that KSU ironically faces many of the same challenges that WSU does - geographically undesirable (Manhattan) being one of them. Will they ever attract the same athletes that KU and Texas attract - probably not unless they get an extremely dynamic and successful coach, and even then...

We have an extremely dynamic and successful coach and we are spending a lot of money to be competitive; enough to have gone to a Final Four - yet we still aren't (yet) reaping the benefits of that as much as we think we should. If we continue to perform, we will likely see recruiting continue to improve. The good thing for us is that we have a coaching staff who has cracked to code on finding the right players early in the process before others do, or seeing talent that others don't. Time will tell if K-State can find an equally successful formula under Bruce W.

I'm not saying money doesn't matter at all, but not to the degree that it was presented. It's how you use the money you have. Frank Martin was a hell of a recruiter and a fairly good coach as well. He had flaws in my mind, but he was successful. Weber is not that. So they can spend all the money they want, I don't see Weber improving anything up north and KSU will struggle. As I said, they're lucky they have the likes of TCU and Tech in the conference. Although Tubby could possibly give Tech enough of a boost to pass KSU. Time will tell if he can be successful in Lubbock. Not the easiest place to work.

[pinstripers]

I don't see how the present KState program is a step down from ours.

[jocoshock]

I'm not saying money doesn't matter at all, but not to the degree that it was presented. It's how you use the money you have. Frank Martin was a hell of a recruiter and a fairly good coach as well. He had flaws in my mind, but he was successful. Weber is not that. So they can spend all the money they want, I don't see Weber improving anything up north and KSU will struggle. As I said, they're lucky they have the likes of TCU and Tech in the conference. Although Tubby could possibly give Tech enough of a boost to pass KSU. Time will tell if he can be successful in Lubbock. Not the easiest place to work.

No disagreement. I think WSU's and KSU's level of recruiting right now is remarkably close in terms of talent levels and we spend and will continue to spend far less than they do, and unless they get another Bob Huggins or a John Calipari as their coach, that is not likely to change much. B12 conference affiliation will help them to an extent, but ultimately players play for coaches first and schools are a secondary consideration. In fact, based on what we have seen in the past few weeks, I would say that coaches rank first, location second, and the actual institution/mascot third.

p.s. Mark Turgeon was on a podcast last week where he indicated that recruits (in most cases) are paying very little attention to conference affiliation (they can't keep up with all of the realignment). Obviously, he was talking about BCS conferences... it obviously mattered to Mr. Hurt.

[_kai_]

Hurt has said he felt at home with their staff, and hit it off with their players. The man has opinions and preferences, and sometimes guys just don't mesh well with other people. We all aren't friends or even like certain people in our lives, so let's not hold Hurt against his decision. I really do wish him the best of luck, just not against one team if we ever play them. I think people are getting too bent out of shape about missing on Hurt and the few other Bigs we have targeted. Would we have loved to get any of those guys? Hell yeah we would have. Does it mean we are going to be up a creek without a paddle in a year or two? I'll put my money on no. I trust this coaching staff, and their ability. We replaced Ford and Turner, 2 guys who have little experience in coaching and recruiting with Forbes who strikes fear in most college recruiters in the country when he steps in a gym. The guy recruited hard at Tennessee, and I watched a lot of UT basketball during the Pearl era, and those guys they got can straight ball. Things will fall into place, I guarantee it. I'll be the first to eat some crow if Forbes and company don't get us a solid Center in the next year or two.

[Bluzrover]

What we've got for the post next year is Carter and Morris - and then a whole bunch of 6'6" and 6'7" guys. That's pretty much what took us to a S16 in 2006. We probably need a JuCo post for '14-'15. There's an entire JuCo season to evaluate.

We've learned long ago that post players are the slowest to develop coming out of HS. I have no doubt that there will be some JuCo posts who have breakout years and that the Shox will be in a good position with those players. Gee, the coaching staff might even know of some of those guys and might be wanting to wait until this season is over before going real deep on their recruitment of the remaining JuCo nd HS posts.

If the coaching staff is waiting to watch some emerging players, that would get some SN'ers panties in a huge wad

I'm with the pirate on this one. I'm disappointed as much as many of us here on SN but I don't view this as a negative on the program or as hurting the 2014 team. 3G has been a master at finding athletes who are unselfish and willing to play BB as he believes it should be play. It's clear some of the guys we've targeted this year aren't willing to buy into that and that's really too bad because I think HCGM has shown his style of BB can get a team to the Big Dance consistently.

I will say that in the case of Mr. Hurt, I wonder how much he felt "jilted" by Forbes and was unwilling to buy his spiel this time around. It wouldn't be a stretch to think it played a small part in the kid's decision. That being said, I'd have to think that the rehabilitation of Steve Forbes will probably take at least two seasons at WSU before the right situation calls him away to his own program.

[1972Shocker]

I'm sure the coaches are disappointed they were unable to reel Hurt in, but I'm also sure they understand that recruiting is a highly competitive and unpredictable endeavor and are prepared to move on to the next challenge.

Hurt made the decision he thought was best for him and you have to respect that. I'm sure it was tough decision for him to make.

[Aargh]

Hurt averaged 11.5 and 7.8 at Lipscomb. That's not exactly high-level competition. He had good games against Kentucky and another upper-level D1 school (whose name I don't recall right now). Those year-long stats are similar to Coleby's. I believe Coleby faced tougher competition than Hurt faced at Lipscomb.

Hurt's rating as the #3 JuCo in the nation is based on his performance at Lipscomb and against 2 upper-level D1 schools that probably didn't scout or game-plan heavily against Lipscomb.

The big clue was when Hurt said he didn't want to play a running game. WSU plays a running game off of turnovers and rebounds. If Hurt watched the F4 team - ya think? He probably noticed that WSU had a 7' post player who had no problems with a running game.

Hurt's JuCo rating is total speculation. He may be at his projected level. His previous stats both give credence and a lack of support to his #3 rating. He did very well against teams that ignored him, but 11 and 7 against teams that scouted him in the Atlantic Sun???

I would have loved to sign Hurt. He had a lot to offer, but 11 and 7 in a low major conference from someone who doesn't want to run the court is a player who made a good decision to play somewhere other than WSU.

[pie n eye]

How many national championships have been won by teams without a true center? Is the goal to win it all or just to win the Valley?

Take a deep breath chicken little. The Miami heat have won consecutive NBA championships without a "true center". They got rid of the center position for nba all star games. Also there was this team called the Wichita State Shockers who went to the final four with a 6'7-6'8 Carl Hall starting at center. They beat a team who had a very good "true center" named Kelly olynk.

Sure it's great to have tall people on your basketball team but height alone doesn't make a player.

[SubGod22]

The NBA means nothing to me. It's a completely different game than what's played at the college level.

Again though, how many national champions haven't had a center? Apparently very few since nobody has been able to point to one. We're not winning a title with a team of 6'7" guys and under. We can be competitive and very good, but that's not the recipe for ultimate success. Bury your head in the sand if you wish, but we need to find an actual big for next year.

[im4wsu]

The NBA means nothing to me. It's a completely different game than what's played at the college level.

Again though, how many national champions haven't had a center? Apparently very few since nobody has been able to point to one. We're not winning a title with a team of 6'7" guys and under. We can be competitive and very good, but that's not the recipe for ultimate success. Bury your head in the sand if you wish, but we need to find an actual big for next year.

Okay. From a feeble memory, Texas Western and Chicago Loyola. True, it was before you you were born,but you asked, I answered.