PonyFans.com

EastStang wrote:Let's say our players looking at the draft decide they have enough juice to be drafted and hire agents. Now suddenly, we are without arguably our two best players. Do you still give Jank an NCAA or bust ultimatum? I know some of you will say, well he should have a team two deep with that kind of talent. Yeah, right, unless your name is Coach K, ain't happening. He hasn't performed at LB level that's for sure, but I'm not one to change unless I know what I'm going to get. How did firing Cavan for Phil Bennett work out? Or hiring RoboDoh? They seemed like upgrades, but.... So, be careful what you wish for. Jank may not be our savior, but his replacement could put us completely into the dumpster or back on probation. We have to play the cards dealt us this year and see what happens.

Just curious ES, have you ever fired anyone in your lifetime????

SoCal_Pony wrote:Most of tankovich’s HS recruits have been ranked over 300!!!, what a loser this man is.

Jank’s 2017 class wasn’t awful on paper, but it was a pivotal class with all the talent we had graduating, and man what a bust it has been:

Chargois - wildly inconsistent, hasn’t developed at all, MIA defensively
Ray - injury problems, defensive liability, on his best day he’s just a guy
Douglas - would come off the bench for a decent D3 team
Landrum - gone after a year

Transfer market has been key to SMU basketball success going back to RoboDoh's tenure. LB brought us Kennedy, Tolbert, Nic (Jank gets the assist if not full credit), Semi & Mike. I will give Jank credit for Davis and hope that McNeill turns out to be a stud as well...but given his success rate with true frosh, Jank will need to find more impact transfers if he is going to get this team back to the NCAA Tourney and keep his job.

Little rickey panicked when he gave jank the extension. It wasn't a necessary move, jank suckered little rickey into giving it to him using the LB players 30 win season and the sanctions argument. Most importantly, a good AD has cultivated a set of donors who will at least defray a large portion of a buyout so the program is not handcuffed. Little rickey is lazy so its easier to go with the "we're screwed because the buyout is too big so we have to live with it" argument. Even though it was his weak decision that has put us in this predicament. What a loser...........

Charleston Pony wrote:Transfer market has been key to SMU basketball success going back to RoboDoh's tenure. LB brought us Kennedy, Tolbert, Nic (Jank gets the assist if not full credit), Semi & Mike. I will give Jank credit for Davis and hope that McNeill turns out to be a stud as well...but given his success rate with true frosh, Jank will need to find more impact transfers if he is going to get this team back to the NCAA Tourney and keep his job.

Mike is 100% Tim Jankovich. You are thinking about Whitt who was a Larry recruit.

JasonB wrote:Nobody handed anyone a 7 year contract.

LB was only supposed to be here originally for like 2 years. He extended his stay, Jank had to extend his HCIW position, and he was given an extension. Then after he went 30-5, we gave him another extension. That seems reasonable. Hasn't worked out how anyone would like, but it was a reasonable decision at the time.

My understanding was different, albeit only slightly. The way I was told, it wasn't that Jankovich received an extension after winning 30 games through some negotiation or conversation with the administration. Instead, it was written into his original contract that certain incentives would automatically trigger an extension, which happened when the Mustangs won 30.

That might be exact legal language, but that's the way it was explained to me.

PonyPride wrote: . Instead, it was written into his original contract that certain incentives would automatically trigger an extension, which happened when the Mustangs won 30.
That might be exact legal language, but that's the way it was explained to me.

This is a classic example of how bad and incompetent our AD is, as well as being a pathetic negotiator.

mustangxc wrote:

Charleston Pony wrote:Transfer market has been key to SMU basketball success going back to RoboDoh's tenure. LB brought us Kennedy, Tolbert, Nic (Jank gets the assist if not full credit), Semi & Mike. I will give Jank credit for Davis and hope that McNeill turns out to be a stud as well...but given his success rate with true frosh, Jank will need to find more impact transfers if he is going to get this team back to the NCAA Tourney and keep his job.

Mike is 100% Tim Jankovich. You are thinking about Whitt who was a Larry recruit.

Forgot about Whitt and there was also McMurray; may have been others but the bottom line is that transfers have propped up this program for years as SMU's H.S. recruiting has been less than stellar.

East Coast Mustang wrote:

SoCal_Pony wrote:Most of tankovich’s HS recruits have been ranked over 300!!!, what a loser this man is.

Jank’s 2017 class wasn’t awful on paper, but it was a pivotal class with all the talent we had graduating, and man what a bust it has been:

Chargois - wildly inconsistent, hasn’t developed at all, MIA defensively
Ray - injury problems, defensive liability, on his best day he’s just a guy
Douglas - would come off the bench for a decent D3 team
Landrum - gone after a year

I stand by my statement, most of tankovich’s HS recruits were ranked over 300 which is pathetic under ANY circumstances but especially so given the recent successes of our program.

But you are correct, on paper the 2017 class was his best, including 2 of his 3 highest ranked HS players, Douglas #167 and Chargois #186 (Hunt #194 being the only other tank HS recruit in Top 200).

Unfortunately the 2017 reflects 2 other major flaws in tank’s game. One, he doesn’t run off players who clearly don’t belong (Ray and Douglas) and Two, he doesn’t develop players who might (Charg).

redpony wrote:

PonyPride wrote: . Instead, it was written into his original contract that certain incentives would automatically trigger an extension, which happened when the Mustangs won 30.
That might be exact legal language, but that's the way it was explained to me.

This is a classic example of how bad and incompetent our AD is, as well as being a pathetic negotiator.

Hmmm ... I like some decisions Hart has made (Sonny Dykes, Kevin Hudson), and I dislike others (Travis Mays), so this is not taking a side on his negotiating. However, a question:

If it was done that way, how is that any different than a baseball player who gets a bonus for hitting a certain number of home runs, or a quarterback throwing a certain number of touchdowns, activating an incentive bonus, and then tailing off because of injury, age or some other reason? Isn't it the same thing -- an incentive based on certain agreed-upon performance standards?

Maybe the lawyers on here can differentiate. I'm not saying you're wrong, redpony. Just curious about your perspective.
Thanks

Otto- IMO those agreements are two totally different things. Now I am the last person you want to ask about pro athlete agreements but here is my impression.
Pro agreements have incentives built in as part of the compensation not tenure. Also very little (normally) is guaranteed- it tends to be on a year to year basis. Plus the team has the right to cut/trade/terminate a player at most any time.

Janks contract was one that was not earned nor should it have been negotiated the way it was. i.e. if there were incentives for a number of wins in a season there should also have been the ability to terminate the contract if a specific number of losses occurred in any given season. A major part of his compensation should have also been based on his win/loss record against quality high level schools not 'push over games' to protect his job. I think it would have been better to have any extension tied to a much longer term, perhaps 3-4 years so any success could have been verified by his true coaching ability instead of winning with another coaches players.

But then again, this situation reflects on the AD and how poor of a job he did with this contract as well as other bball activities.

SoCal_Pony wrote:

EastStang wrote:Let's say our players looking at the draft decide they have enough juice to be drafted and hire agents. Now suddenly, we are without arguably our two best players. Do you still give Jank an NCAA or bust ultimatum? I know some of you will say, well he should have a team two deep with that kind of talent. Yeah, right, unless your name is Coach K, ain't happening. He hasn't performed at LB level that's for sure, but I'm not one to change unless I know what I'm going to get. How did firing Cavan for Phil Bennett work out? Or hiring RoboDoh? They seemed like upgrades, but.... So, be careful what you wish for. Jank may not be our savior, but his replacement could put us completely into the dumpster or back on probation. We have to play the cards dealt us this year and see what happens.

Just curious ES, have you ever fired anyone in your lifetime????

Yes, have you?

You gentlemen must be very powerful firing people.

EastStang wrote:

SoCal_Pony wrote:

EastStang wrote:Let's say our players looking at the draft decide they have enough juice to be drafted and hire agents. Now suddenly, we are without arguably our two best players. Do you still give Jank an NCAA or bust ultimatum? I know some of you will say, well he should have a team two deep with that kind of talent. Yeah, right, unless your name is Coach K, ain't happening. He hasn't performed at LB level that's for sure, but I'm not one to change unless I know what I'm going to get. How did firing Cavan for Phil Bennett work out? Or hiring RoboDoh? They seemed like upgrades, but.... So, be careful what you wish for. Jank may not be our savior, but his replacement could put us completely into the dumpster or back on probation. We have to play the cards dealt us this year and see what happens.

Just curious ES, have you ever fired anyone in your lifetime????

Yes, have you?

ES, I say that because I interpret your post as a defense of tank. He's a loser.

From the 30-win season our team has dropped in rankings to #65 in 2018, #97 in 2019 and #104 in 2020.

He has given us marginally ranked HS players in Landrum (#232), Ray (#354), Young (#370) White (not even ranked), McBride (#424) and Cook (#494).

As LA as posted multiple times, he doesn't market SMU.

So please, no comparisons to Coach K, that is rather juvenal.

Saying we are stuck with tankovich for financial reasons, I can live with that.
Saying anything in defense of tank, I'm not buying it.

He's a loser.

One Trick Pony wrote:You gentlemen must be very powerful firing people.

I once had to fire an employee within the first 6 months of my job because the superiors didn't have the guts to do it and assigned it to me.