PonyFans.com

It was my understanding that Jank was hand picked by LB, and that Miller not only endorsed this decision, but lobbied to make him one of the highest paid assistant coaches in college basketball. If this is true, how could they have been so wrong - or were they

The reality is besides maybe a top few programs, and probably even them, you need, in to some way or another, pay players to come. I'm sure Larry Brown is great at actually coaching, but there's very little chance players weren't being paid. It's a reality of the sport and I'm sure our administration is making a conscious decision to try to not be a part of that given our history of cheating.

ponyup123456 wrote:The reality is besides maybe a top few programs, and probably even them, you need, in to some way or another, pay players to come. I'm sure Larry Brown is great at actually coaching, but there's very little chance players weren't being paid. It's a reality of the sport and I'm sure our administration is making a conscious decision to try to not be a part of that given our history of cheating.

Plenty of 4*’s wanted to come to SMU that didn’t require bags being dropped

Well documented on 247

ponyup123456 wrote:The reality is besides maybe a top few programs, and probably even them, you need, in to some way or another, pay players to come. I'm sure Larry Brown is great at actually coaching, but there's very little chance players weren't being paid. It's a reality of the sport and I'm sure our administration is making a conscious decision to try to not be a part of that given our history of cheating.

We weren't paying our players under Larry, that is absurd.

We had to have a HCIW because of LB's history. It worked because it gave players a vision of the "now" and the "future". LB and Jank were a great pair because of the good cop, bad cop relationship.

Jank hasn't transitioned to the bad cop role as HC, and hasn't brougnt in an assistant to play that role either. The culture of the program has dissipated, and now we need a new coach to bring it back.

If you look at SMU's long history, this type of scenario happens constantly. We go on a run in a sport with a great coach. Then we get this perspective that the school is what matters, so when the coach leaves we promote an assistant or hire someone less well known. The program tanks. Then we take a long time to figure that out, suck for a while, and then finally invest to bring it back.

Hopefully the major donors and administration recognize this pattern and make the change this year before it will take ages to recover.

JasonB wrote:We go on a run in a sport with a great coach. Then we get this perspective that the school is what matters, so when the coach leaves we promote an assistant or hire someone less well known. The program tanks. Then we take a long time to figure that out, suck for a while, and then finally invest to bring it back.

I would say thinking "the school is what matters" is getting even worse now since the administration is so focused on academic rankings.

Honestly though, why is it absurd? The three college teams hes coached caught for NCAA violations. Also, its not like 247 shows who was paid. Obviously I have no idea what the truth is, but given his history, the quick rise of the program and then almost immediate drop, and the state of college basketball for the past bunch of years I don't think it is a crazy reach to say there's a chance.

The fact that SMU was sanctioned heavily under LB means that the NCAA thoroughly investigated the program. Illegal payments most definitely would have been discovered had any been made, especially given SMU's [ancient] history.

SMU Pom Mom wrote:The fact that SMU was sanctioned heavily under LB means that the NCAA thoroughly investigated the program. Illegal payments most definitely would have been discovered had any been made, especially given SMU's [ancient] history.

Our current head coach was there....