The Truth

[Pony_Law]

I used to sit right behind the visiting team bench right next to the student section. After LB’s second year The school actively worked to kill the atmosphere because I think they were embarressed to hear opposing coaches be upset at the students.

[ObeyMyDog]

And let's not get too off topic, but Dykes is not here because of Rick Hart. Believe whatever you like.

This is semi-relevant though - was speaking with a bunch of Tennessee alums over the holidays and they think it's laughable Rick even got a job here. Further, they can not believe he is still here. This entire perceived pedigree from his father is for suckers. They've been in the woods for a long time on finding the guy for AD and will readily admit it.

[Shetland]

Moody atmosphere is way down and the reseat is the least culpable.

When Moody started rocking was the NIT year. The student section was crazy. The team started to get good and there were no season ticket holders so there were a lot of walk up tickets available and actual Dallas basketball and not SMU fans came to the games.

The next year alumni bought all the seating leaving no seats for Dallas bball fans. So we blew any chance to build a following with casual fans during the three years where we were ranked.

They put in the stupid students need to go to soccer games to get a bball ticket and killed the Mob. And our students have always been fair weather. They may go if we are ranked but if not they have too many better things to do. So those last LB years Was ood but not nearly what year 1 was.

Jank year one was more of the same good for some games, but less than half full for lower conference games.

The atmosphere last year sucked. The games were not crowded and no students showed. My seats which I got the NIT year were in row 10. I never sat higher than row 5 last year. You could sit wherever you wanted except in the 100 level. It's been like this the last three years.

This year is worse but I bet if the 800 people who did not renew because of the reseat were actually still going it would be the same mediocre atmosphere we had last year. Which just isn't good enough to sway a 4 star recruit.

[PonyKai]

The chances that Dykes is here because of Hart are slim. Hart’s tenure at SMU is one of “paint-by-the-numbers” where every number is a shade of beige.

There is no leadership. It’s not just Hart. It goes to the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’ve got to be [deleted] me. Every coach—save for women’s hoops, and no one cares about that—Hart has nailed. Including not only one, not two, but if you’re paying attention on 24/7 three separate football hires. AD isn’t perfect. Plenty of issues. But to try and poo poo Hart’s hires—which he’s frickin nailed since he got here—is asinine.

I’m looking forward to Hart cashiering the loser running the hoops program because he’s probably going to nail the hire.

There is not a coach in this county who is here because Rick Hart is the AD.

Hiring coaches is the easy bit. Leading a program is the challenge. He isn’t up to it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SMU &#^$*% up hiring coaches for decades and suddenly it's "the easy bit." If it's so easy, why did Orsini turn our hoops search into a national embarrassment and have to be brow-beaten into calling Larry back? if it's so easy, why did Copeland hire Bennett? And Tubbs? If it's so easy, why did Orsini hire June and apparently never ever 3$&#^% ask him if he ever planned to recruit the state of Texas or hire anybody to recruit the state of Texas? If it's so easy, why didn't a single coach hired by SMU to coach a revenue sport between 1988 and 2017 ever get hired for a better gig? You can't make this crap up.

Look I'm sorry that Rick sucks at social interactions and pissed in your corn flakes and that clearly you feel like he's personally wronged you and it's clouding your judgment. There are numerous grounds to criticize the AD and they'd be valid. But the coach's bit is just complete garbage. It's obvious you keep moving the goal posts in an effort to avoid even acknowledging that Rick might accidentally be good at portions of his job.

[PonyKai]

And let's not get too off topic, but Dykes is not here because of Rick Hart. Believe whatever you like.

You speak like it matters why the football coach is here, as if it reflects on the AD in some positive or negative capacity. It doesn't. I don't give a sh*5 why Sonny is here and I don't care what he thinks of Rick. I care that Rick knows how to flipping identify good coaching candidates for football and men's basketball because for one reason or another, the ones we currently have are going to move on. And guess what? He does.

[Mustangsabu]

I’m not mad at anyone, I just recognize the failures and lack of leadership. I have not seen anything to suggest that Hart is the reason why anyone comes to SMU and his catalogue of issues is getting longer all the time.

I can assure you that Hart is not the one driving any of our coaching searches. Ever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ObeyMyDog]

I’m not mad at anyone, I just recognize the failures and lack of leadership. I have not seen anything to suggest that Hart is the reason why anyone comes to SMU and his catalogue of issues is getting longer all the time.

I can assure you that Hart is not the one driving any of our coaching searches. Ever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I'm not going to get in to particulars either, but yes to the above and everything it says.

[Pony ^]

I'm just amazed anyone can defend Hart at this point. The guy has the personality of a door and pissed off thousands of loyal fans. He has ZERO interaction with normal SMU fans. Zero. The guy is a complete d!!ck. Plus, he created burner accounts on twitter to defend himself

He needs to take 1 page from the Chris Del Conte playbook. Just 1 page....and he would be a better AD.

Totally right on the above though. He will have very little to do with finding a new coach (if he even fires Jank). He will use the thousands he made off the reseat to have a search committee do his job for him.

[PonyKai]

FFS.

[JasonB]

Okay, time to play devil's advocate. Just want to understand the positions a little more...

1) Some of the primary things an AD is judged on are their coaching hires, whether or not sports improve, and facilities. Under Hart, we have a new Nadatorium to bring back the swimming program, built the IPF, and had the Moody renovations. Hires - LB, Dykes, June, soccer coach brought them back. Sure, there are search committees, but the previous committees hired crappy coaches. Did he change who was involved? Did he establish different criteria? Not sure, but hires are typically part of the evaluation. I would say the football, basketball, and soccer competitive situations are better than when he showed up (with the clear exception of this year in basketball). The message that he does nothing or has had zero impact might be a little overblown?

2) I hate the reseat, just to be clear. But what if it was actually done from a vantage point of "If we expect to be a top tier program, this is what our donation levels and pricing needs to look like. That is what similar teams do." So, they chose a time to institute the policies to get to that level, and they did it. And what if the decision to do that comes with a commitment to actually compete at the highest level? What if the reseat actually puts more pressure on the organization to fire Jank? And what if the reseat prevents casual SMU alumni from buying season tickets, so that more tickets are available for hardcore Dallas bball fans to buy tickets for individual games? It might actually have a positive long term impact.

Just interested in hearing the responses to the above two points. Now granted, if SMU reverts back from the reseat after this year or they decide to not fire Jank, it would call complete BS on point number 2. But just wanted to throw these concepts out there and hear the reaction...

For point number 1, I'm not sure who to blame for not paying the guy who put together the game presentation and music in year 1, if that is Hart or someone else. But that was an awful decision by whomever was responsible.

[sadderbudweiser]

The chances that Dykes is here because of Hart are slim. Hart’s tenure at SMU is one of “paint-by-the-numbers” where every number is a shade of beige.

There is no leadership. It’s not just Hart. It goes to the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’ve got to be [deleted] me. Every coach—save for women’s hoops, and no one cares about that—Hart has nailed. Including not only one, not two, but if you’re paying attention on 24/7 three separate football hires. AD isn’t perfect. Plenty of issues. But to try and poo poo Hart’s hires—which he’s frickin nailed since he got here—is asinine.

I’m looking forward to Hart cashiering the loser running the hoops program because he’s probably going to nail the hire.

There is not a coach in this county who is here because Rick Hart is the AD.

Hiring coaches is the easy bit. Leading a program is the challenge. He isn’t up to it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s a good take on an even better discussion.

[ObeyMyDog]

FFS.

Why is this hill so important to you? Look, what I am trying to say is not difficult. I know you are extremely mad at the complete failure of Jank, as anyone with a brain should be. Also, you obviously think you know processes w/r/t Hart, and I know what I know, but all of that is besides my point. For purposes of this I am going to concede to you that Hart is an absolute maestro at finding coaches and a we are oh so lucky he has led and nailed every hire. You can have that. As I have stated, I am not mad about Jank getting the job and I think essentially every school will have flame outs like this with a hire that makes perfect sense at the beginning. I mean, of course you let LB designate his successor as he is doing a fantastic job. Who would not listen? I am only mad the Jank era had to occur right after the fun of the LB run. Just wish we could have strung 2 runs together and created a decade of new tradition. But I digress.

The point is the handful of people I know who follow AAU and recruiting closely were calling this before the last season had begun. The statement from them was always a close variation of "Jank needs to show he can get a few quality kids during this season/next offseason while we can still play, or we are in big trouble." Then last year (recruiting and season) happens and the encouraging signs aren't there. Then this last offseason happens and many more people see the writing on the wall. Then this playing year unfolds as it has to the surprise of nobody who actually pays attention. All the while, the AD and Hart push forward on pretending as if basketball success and the underlying demand for it is here to stay. At any of these points over the last 2.5 years how does 1 person, just 1, at the AD department not stand up and say "hey, this might blow up in our face. If any of us actually were looking at the likely trend of the team then you would see it is not great." There are only 3 explanations - 1) they're very bad at their jobs; 2) they were willfully ignorant because they wanted money; or 3) they may have held actually had a realistic view and plan, but they are spineless and got told what to do.

There is so much more tbh but I can't type it anymore and won't do it to yall. But, that is our problem. Our problem is not Jank. Janks happen. Our problem is nobody at the AD is smart enough to be proactive at any obvious key marketing and management points.

If I was in the AD, I would die a little inside every time poor Jarrey or Ethan is tossed on the jumbotron trying to get the beaten down crowd excited for us maybe to make a run against UCF.

[PerunasHoof]

The chances that Dykes is here because of Hart are slim. Hart’s tenure at SMU is one of “paint-by-the-numbers” where every number is a shade of beige.

There is no leadership. It’s not just Hart. It goes to the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’ve got to be [deleted] me. Every coach—save for women’s hoops, and no one cares about that—Hart has nailed. Including not only one, not two, but if you’re paying attention on 24/7 three separate football hires. AD isn’t perfect. Plenty of issues. But to try and poo poo Hart’s hires—which he’s frickin nailed since he got here—is asinine.

I’m looking forward to Hart cashiering the loser running the hoops program because he’s probably going to nail the hire.

Do you ever get sick of being right and correcting all the people who have no idea what they are talking about?

[mustangxc]

Okay, time to play devil's advocate. Just want to understand the positions a little more...

1) Some of the primary things an AD is judged on are their coaching hires, whether or not sports improve, and facilities. Under Hart, we have a new Nadatorium to bring back the swimming program, built the IPF, and had the Moody renovations. Hires - LB, Dykes, June, soccer coach brought them back. Sure, there are search committees, but the previous committees hired crappy coaches. Did he change who was involved? Did he establish different criteria? Not sure, but hires are typically part of the evaluation. I would say the football, basketball, and soccer competitive situations are better than when he showed up (with the clear exception of this year in basketball). The message that he does nothing or has had zero impact might be a little overblown?

2) I hate the reseat, just to be clear. But what if it was actually done from a vantage point of "If we expect to be a top tier program, this is what our donation levels and pricing needs to look like. That is what similar teams do." So, they chose a time to institute the policies to get to that level, and they did it. And what if the decision to do that comes with a commitment to actually compete at the highest level? What if the reseat actually puts more pressure on the organization to fire Jank? And what if the reseat prevents casual SMU alumni from buying season tickets, so that more tickets are available for hardcore Dallas bball fans to buy tickets for individual games? It might actually have a positive long term impact.

Just interested in hearing the responses to the above two points. Now granted, if SMU reverts back from the reseat after this year or they decide to not fire Jank, it would call complete BS on point number 2. But just wanted to throw these concepts out there and hear the reaction...

For point number 1, I'm not sure who to blame for not paying the guy who put together the game presentation and music in year 1, if that is Hart or someone else. But that was an awful decision by whomever was responsible.

I think you meant Chad Morris, not June. Larry was not even his hire really. That was in between Orsini and Hart so I don’t even know who called the shots. If anything I credit Turner and Miller. The swimming has been a very long time campaign that is thanks to the swimming alums. The Mays hire in women’s basketball has been a disaster so far. Who else has he hired? Does it even move the needle? The re-seat is on Hart 100% and Turner since it was a huge decision. His legacy is the re-seat so unless he hires a Pitino type to re-energize everyone and sell out the building his tenure will have been a complete failure. I don’t even think he deserves the opportunity to hire the next basketball coach.

[SoCal_Pony]

The point is the handful of people I know who follow AAU and recruiting closely were calling this before the last season had begun. The statement from them was always a close variation of "Jank needs to show he can get a few quality kids during this season/next offseason while we can still play, or we are in big trouble." Then last year (recruiting and season) happens and the encouraging signs aren't there. Then this last offseason happens and many more people see the writing on the wall. Then this playing year unfolds as it has to the surprise of nobody who actually pays attention.

All the while, the AD and Hart push forward on pretending as if basketball success and the underlying demand for it is here to stay. At any of these points over the last 2.5 years how does 1 person, just 1, at the AD department not stand up and say "hey, this might blow up in our face. If any of us actually were looking at the likely trend of the team then you would see it is not great."

There are only 3 explanations - 1) they're very bad at their jobs; 2) they were willfully ignorant because they wanted money; or 3) they may have held actually had a realistic view and plan, but they are spineless and got told what to do.

Solid post OMD. I would add that the OOC schedule speaks volumes as to the type of product they knew they had.

Hart brags about reading a book on attendance, I find that childish, out-of-touch and self serving.

All he had to do is follow Mark Cuban's 3 main guidelines regarding marketing:

1) Know where your team is in their “lifecycle” - as stated above by OMD - FAIL by Hart.
2) Know who your long time fans/customers are. Fans know when you care. You can’t fake it, treat them like gold - MASSIVE FAIL by Hart.
3) Price to the market, not to maximize revenue. FAIL by Hart.

Everyone on here agrees that student participation is a chronic problem for our athletic programs. Shetland is correct. Telling students interested in BB that they must also attend soccer games is NOT treating them like gold. IMO another FAIL by Hart.