Lavin Logic

by **Waz** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 12:50 pm

I know we aren't going to get rid of Dement, yet. I know that even if we did, Lavin would be such a long shot that a lotto ticket would be a better bet. BUT, when a poster questions the logic of having Lavin over Dement and concludes that he would rather have Dement, THAT is the real logic of why we are stuck with a guy like Dement for so long. I personally wouldn't mind having a coach with 6 of 7 years in the NCAA's and 5 Sweet 16's, and pretty close to a 70% winning percentage lead our program. Not bad for a 38 year old in his first head coaching job. That is against the PAC 10, not against the WAC.

Apples to apples is how it is done. Lavin has done a lot more with his apples at UCLA than Dement will ever do with his apples at SMU.

by **mulletmike** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 1:48 pm

I think the admisinstration should ante up some show "the Commitment" and get a vivacious winner on campus. Being a great hoops powere is considerably easier and less expensive than cultivating a fottball power.

Steve Lavin would be a great fit at SMU. He'd clean up in Dallas and would bring some profile to a floundering atheltic department. A great guy to have running your team come re-alignment. We'd get quite a few out of LA, methinks.

Don't sell SMU short. Dallas is profile, a few renovations to Moody, a buy-out of Dements contract and loot for a $750000 contract and it could be on. Thats chump change for positive media, WAC Championships, a Sweet 16 every once and again.

by **OldPony** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 1:56 pm

Simple question. Why did he get fired at UCLA? He had great facilities,fantastic tradition, super recruiting area plus national recognition, great fan base. He has none of the above at SMU although you could say Dallas is a good recruiting area, I don't think it compares to LA.

by **mulletmike** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 2:05 pm

He got fired at UCLA b/c they expect more than Sweet 16s and Elite 8s. They just came off a championship w/Harrick.

He's got an excellent resume and track record. His teams win and win in March. e'd bring excitement and a better quality of athlee to the HillTop. He'd open up LA and probably be great in Texas. He's put guys in the league and is profile.

Its about getting this program visable and some excitement around it. At worst, Lavin would be a lateral move to Dement.

Status quo can be achieved by any number of coaches, but we must dare to be great.

by **Blunt Pony** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 3:05 pm

OP,

He got fired because of expectations and not living up to them, sound familiar? The big difference is that UCLA expects to win National championships and not just top half of the WAC! He wasn't winning National Championships, although he did go to 5 sweet sixteens and knock off 4 #1 teams during his tenure. Lavin would be a huge pickup for the Mustangs and to ask why he was fired just shows that you do not know what it is like to coach at a big time level with HUGE expectations.

Lets get some balls and make a move that might improve our situation. What we are doing right now is not working!!!

by **BigEasyPony** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 3:53 pm

Amen to the Blunt Pony!

If we don't demand excellence we won't get it. As alumni we must demand of our athletic department that we have a championship basketball team. We should compete for the WAC championship every year. We haven't won it since Dement's been the HC. It is obvious that Mr. Copeland doesn't intend to do anything about it so we must hold him accountable. As the AD how can you defend retaining Coach Dement:

Has he won a WAC championship? No.
Has he been to the NCAA tournament? No.
Is attendance good? No.
Are we graduating our basketball
players? Yes.

At least Mr. Copeland can say that he has graduated his players. Guess what that is it and that is not good enough.

by **OldPony** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 4:10 pm

In other words, he couldn't maintain the level they were accustom too? Hmmm. Sounds like he may be Big Hat, No Cattle.

by **Blunt Pony** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 7:09 pm

OP,

you need to explain that analogy to us non texans on the board

by **Bergermeister** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 7:43 pm

Non-Texans, who have not taken the oath, need to get off the board. Now! If you had taken the oath you would know what "Big Hat, No Cattle" means.... now you're exposed!

We need a Gerald J. Ford/Lamar Hunt for basketball.

by **Blunt Pony** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:25 pm

Berger,

Don't think I will be taking that oath, particularly if that means I would become a Texan.

I really don't understand the false pride that people have in being a Texan. If you happen to be born in Texas do you get some sort of belt buckle that you wear as a badge of honor?

by **mulletmike** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:27 pm

Berger, thats exactly what we need. A booster to prop the hoops program up. anSMU should be a high profile mid-major in a major market. It takes money and a few right moves to have the beginnings of a Stanford/Dook/Wake style tradition.

Infuse some life, get a profile coach to bring some vibe to the program and upgrade the facilities and schedule. Dallas and SMU are easy sells.

Its alot easier to be a basketball power than football juggernaut. The right coach and two recruiting classes and we're off.

by **FloridaMustang** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 10:54 pm

False pride indeed! Dallas is nice.... the rest of Texas...well I won't comment on the rest of Texas.

by **OldPony** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 12:20 pm

Someone who walks around with a big name or big strut talking big about his ranch but actually doesn't have much of an operation would be Big Hat & No Cattle. I was just implying that Lavin is a big name but he is (was) the coach of one of the most celebrated basketball programs in all of college basketball. The fans and boosters of UCLA didn't think he was getting the job done so he got fired. Although UCLA expectations are much higher than SMU's, why would we think that a guy who had every tool possible to work with and failed in maintaining a program would be good for a program that offers no tradition, sorry fan base, poor facilities etc. LA is a hotbed of college recruiting (much more so than Dallas) and UCLA has only one really significant competitor in LA(although many mid major ones and out of the area ones) for that talent. If you can't produce top 10 programs at UCLA, you should be fired. He is a big name and the press would love it for about one season. Then he would have to produce.
One other point about the criticism of Dement on this board. What would you guys be saying if we had the expectations of TT and ended the year like they did? Would it be poor coaching? I'm not saying that Dement desrves a free ride. I am saying that he deserves one more year becuase of how much this team improved over the course of this year.

by **Waz** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 3:01 pm

If Dement would give his salary back, I would feel better, maybe just half, because that would give him mediocre pay for mediocre production. Knight's actions were a pretty clear indication that he expects more of himself and the program and he put his money where his mouth is, instead of the foot that he often inserts there.

by **Bergermeister** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 4:57 pm

Blunt Pony: I believe you when you say "......I don't understand.... "
It's a Texas thang.

Lavin Logic

Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Re: Lavin Logic

Who is online