PonyFans.com

Looking more and more like a massive mistake that will likely entail a 7-figure penalty if and when we cut bait. No one was more critical of Jank than me, I guess be careful what you wish for. Lanier is worse than Jank

ECM- totally agree. And I was critical of Jank as well. This hire and the results are a total dumpster fire. IMO he was hired because we have an AD that is a pawn for RGT and RGT does not like sports. I think it also shows that D. Miller and the other bball supporters don't really care that much about winning and moving up or we would have had a well known top level coach.
Does anybody believe that the PAC12 does not see the quality of our bball program. IIRC they currently have some very high level teams. If we do not get an invite to join the PAC our bball could easily be one of the reasons.

redpony wrote:ECM- totally agree. And I was critical of Jank as well. This hire and the results are a total dumpster fire. IMO he was hired because we have an AD that is a pawn for RGT and RGT does not like sports. I think it also shows that D. Miller and the other bball supporters don't really care that much about winning and moving up or we would have had a well known top level coach.
Does anybody believe that the PAC12 does not see the quality of our bball program. IIRC they currently have some very high level teams. If we do not get an invite to join the PAC our bball could easily be one of the reasons.

Actually, Pac basketball outside of Arizona is looking pretty thin once UCLA and USC depart. Utah, Oregon and Washington should be able to put together solid programs but have been lacking as of late. At one point I think Cal was 0-12 this year. SDSU is ranked and on top of the MWC; it sure would be nice if our program could go back to showing a pulse.

Whatever you think of Jank, we have not moved to the next level with Lanier. I see a couple of guys on this squad who have talent and several more who could develop, but I don't see the fundamentals being stressed at all and I wonder how efficiently practices are being managed.

Give him the time he is due. Go Mustangs

Topper wrote:Whatever you think of Jank, we have not moved to the next level with Lanier. I see a couple of guys on this squad who have talent and several more who could develop, but I don't see the fundamentals being stressed at all and I wonder how efficiently practices are being managed.

Not moved to the next level????? lol, that is one way to put it

We were 24-9, 2nd in the AAC with an NIT appearance

We are currently 8-16 and next to last in the AAC this season

Just curious, who are the players on THIS team you think could be make major contributors for SMU if we made a conference championship run???

To drive a stake through the heart of the basketball program? To kill it once and for all?
Did they even attempt to contact Tang?

Winning not required here. 0 pressure.

redpony wrote:ECM- totally agree. And I was critical of Jank as well. This hire and the results are a total dumpster fire.

I was also critical of Jank - but maintained that there was no reason to make any sort of move unless they were going to go after an impact hire. I feared it could actually get worse. Lanier was a coach I had not even heard of - and I follow college basketball.

I was advocating for Pitino for some time. Know we beat his Iona team in Hawaii - it is likely their worst loss of the year, but I would guess we will be seeing Iona playing in the NCAA tournament again this March and I think they are favorites to win their conference.

I also advocated for his son - Lil Ricky back when he was up at Minnesota. Now look at what he is doing at New Mexico. They also will be dancing this March with the best Lobos team they have had in a decade. He has brought magic back to the Pit and a top 25 team. The right coach can do that...

https://www.si.com/college/2023/01/25/new-mexico-lobos-mens-basketball-the-pit-richard-pitino-comeback

PonyTime wrote:

redpony wrote:ECM- totally agree. And I was critical of Jank as well. This hire and the results are a total dumpster fire.

I was also critical of Jank - but maintained that there was no reason to make any sort of move unless they were going to go after an impact hire. I feared it could actually get worse. Lanier was a coach I had not even heard of - and I follow college basketball.

I was advocating for Pitino for some time. Know we beat his Iona team in Hawaii - it is likely their worst loss of the year, but I would guess we will be seeing Iona playing in the NCAA tournament again this March and I think they are favorites to win their conference.

I also advocated for his son - Lil Ricky back when he was up at Minnesota. Now look at what he is doing at New Mexico. They also will be dancing this March with the best Lobos team they have had in a decade. He has brought magic back to the Pit and a top 25 team. The right coach can do that...

https://www.si.com/college/2023/01/25/new-mexico-lobos-mens-basketball-the-pit-richard-pitino-comeback

100%

He took Siena to the dance once in 4 years and Georgia State to the dance once in 3 years. He had winning seasons all three years at Georgia State. Was he an impact hire? No. Is he a coach with a decent track record? Yes. No one was going to be beating down our doors to come here. Let's give this man a couple of years and see how he does.

Lanier's hire was guided by a search firm, and in general, search firms are supposedly pitching the Rick Barnes coaching tree as producing guys who offer strong recruiting plus a good mix of player development, game planning/strategy, and in-game execution. And a great pool of assistants.

Lanier spent almost a decade under Barnes at Texas and Tennessee, as well as a couple years at the beginning of the Tony Bennett UVA rebuild that eventually hung a banner. As with Barnes himself, Lanier is probably regarded more positively in Knoxville than Austin. Lanier showed about what you'd expect to see at Georgia State, which suggests his flop at Siena was nothing more than a young head coach who didn't get it the first time.

Combined with his pre-Siena stint under Barnes at Texas, Lanier was regarded as having the vision for how to build a culture that attracts elite talent, and the personality and relationships needed to get in early and take advantage of SMU's strengths (metro location and NIL $$$$). An entire generation of TX high school and AAU coaches grew up with him in the gym.

His contract and program budget demands were reasonable, too, and he didn't insist on anything crazy for NIL this year. Also, he's happy to have the job, and far less unpleasant for an AD to manage than alternatives with a stronger record. Can't underestimate that factor for an AD getting, uh, long in the tooth and who'd rather focus on fundraising.

So, yeah, that's the literal answer from last spring. He's getting another year, and probably two, but this offseason is gonna be uncomfortable.

I would like to do away with search firms. Shouldn't our AD know how to evaluate and manage talent? Isn't that his job?

EastStang wrote:He took Siena to the dance once in 4 years and Georgia State to the dance once in 3 years. He had winning seasons all three years at Georgia State. Was he an impact hire? No. Is he a coach with a decent track record? Yes. No one was going to be beating down our doors to come here. Let's give this man a couple of years and see how he does.

His NCAA tournament appearances were due to conference tournament championships, not because he built NCAA tournament teams. I hope we get that lucky, but that is not the recipe for building a solid program.

ponyboy wrote:Give him the time he is due. Go Mustangs

OK. I think he needs to at least make the NIT next year to keep his job. Is that fair?

The days of three year rebuilds in college basketball (and football, for that matter) are over with NIL and the new transfer rules. There's no reason we shouldn't have a Top 25 basketball program.