REGISTER for full content
If John Currie fulfills his new contract at Kansas State, he will have earned every penny the school can pay him.Currie has encountered some tough stuff in his first 18 months as K-State's athletic director, from the financial mess he inherited to the Big 12 realignment scare. He handled those hurdles admirably, and the reward was a new contract, announced this week, that runs through 2016.Currie may appreciate the added security, because the next challenge will require every ounce of his administrative acumen.Sometime between now and 2016, K-State likely will undergo a monumental transition, from Bill Snyder to whatever happens next. It will be a delicate, combustible situation, and Currie will be the guy in charge of making it work.Whew. Tough job.Maybe it sounds premature to discuss a transition plan two years into Snyder's return. It's not. With a 71-year-old football coach at the helm, Currie must prepare for every possibility.Remember what happened in 2005, when Snyder abruptly retired and immediately regretted it. Sensing Snyder's indecision, South Florida coach Jim Leavitt declined the job, and K-State reached for Ron Prince, an unproven offensive coordinator who failed miserably.It was Leavitt, ironically, who brought all these issues to the surface this week. His name has enflamed Internet message boards, fans desperate for someone — anyone — to fix a defense that ranked 106th in the Bowl Subdivision this season.Fair or not, fans see Leavitt as a referendum on the program's future. If Snyder shuffles his defensive staff, it's a sign he is willing to recognize a weakness and address it.If not, it's a vote for the status quo, an indication that fans shouldn't expect radical change — or radical improvement — for as long as Snyder remains at the helm.Who knows if those perceptions are accurate, but public opinion is one factor Currie must consider as he surveys K-State's football future. Fans want a graceful transition, but they also want to know the program is building toward something.More than anything, fans want to know K-State has a plan in place. There must be benchmarks, expectations and evaluations, as with any other coach and any other program.Ultimately, it must be Currie, not Snyder, who sets K-State's future course. Snyder's input should be valued, but Currie is the one responsible for making sure the program is positioned to grow.If that means intervening in staffing decisions, so be it. Currie didn't want to address that possibility while talking to reporters Wednesday, but he better be willing to address it with Snyder."Well, again, if you want to talk about specific hypothetical personnel situations, we just don't get into those things publicly," Currie said, which raises the question of what, exactly, constitutes a specific hypothetical personnel situation.That's fine. Keep the conversations private, but make sure they happen.Because it's Currie, not Snyder, whose reputation rests on the next five years of K-State football.
