Seaton false littrell reports teach lessons k-state sports themercury.com tgas advisors company profile

#########

That’s a fundamental problem: The employer — K-State — can’t ever say anything while it’s in the middle of a search. The would-be employee — the coaches — can say whatever they want. And remember, coaches are always represented in these matters by their agents, who get paid a percentage of whatever the coach makes. So they have a very strong incentive to make their clients look gas urban dictionary good, and to use the leverage of appearing to be a sought-after coach to make more money somewhere.

Last Tuesday, a college kid on the student paper in Denton, Texas, tweeted that Littrell was headed to K-State. That set off an eruption of reports based on that report, which set off reactions on social media, which set electricity and circuits class 6 pdf off further reactions. That’s when I got the texts. We at The Mercury never reported that because we judged it to be a big batch of nothing. That is, in fact, what it was. One online fan publication reported the next day that K-State had not offered the job yet. That seemed to slow things down for a bit. Social media — Twitter and certain fan Facebook groups — just started down the path of tearing into gas pain other people — Snyder, Taylor, each other…whatever, instead.

But by Friday, online reports started surfacing that Littrell had turned down the job. These were attributed to unnamed sources, identified at most as “close to the search process” or something like that. One report of that nature came from a Kansas City television talking head; another came from an ESPN person. The Kansas City face o goshi technique reported as follows: “Source: Contract negotiations between Kansas State and top coaching target Seth Littrell fell through when Littrell wanted to clean house and bring his entire staff to Manhattan. K-State said no.”

So…think about it. If the report surfaced that contract negotiations broke down because of that kind of requirement, who do you suppose is the source of that report? There are only two parties in an employment negotiation, and the source gas exchange in the lungs happens by the process of of that sure as heck wasn’t K-State. So, it had to be connected to Littrell; it had to be his agent. It served his interest very well: He could get away looking like he had been offered the job, but stood on principle that he wanted to remain loyal to his own assistants. It made K-State look like toads, but what did that matter to him? He probably stands to make more money, and have more adulation, in Denton, and maybe be in line for another Power 5 job in a year or so.

What’s the real truth? Well, I wasn’t in the room. I haven’t talked to Taylor, nor have I talked to Littrell. I have reason to believe that Taylor did interview Littrell. My own sources, who again are connected to K-State, indicate that Littrell electricity facts history was never offered the job. Just wasn’t quite the right fit. These are people I believe. I would also note that the reporter for the Wichita Eagle and Kansas City Star published a story with the same conclusion. He’s a serious reporter.

Why should you believe that version of the story grade 6 electricity unit test? I’m not naming my sources, either, because of promises I made to them. If you are a serious person you recognize that my frame of reference is from the employer, rather than the would-be employee. I believe strongly in this version of the story, for the reasons I’ve already laid out, particularly related to the status of the assistant coaches.