Risk/Reward

[Stallion]

Just outpaying CUSA teams ain't going to get you a BCS type Coach. I don't think anybody attempted to refute my claim the other day that no BCS Coach has willingly w/o pressure left a BCS team to Coach a non-BCS Coach. (I don't know the true answer to that claim). About the only way for SMU to get a BIG NAME Coach with winning experience and reputation is to get a guy with a couple of scars and nicks. Otherwise, as they say in Casablanca. "SMU's Coach has been FIRED! Round up the usual suspects."

[mrydel]

This is so ridiculous to assume that because you spend 3 times more for a person that a scandal will never occur. Typically the scandals are caused by boosters. I would think the more spent, which is money from a booster's pocket, the more likely the booster would be to "win at any cost".

[jtstang]

Otherwise, as they say in Casablanca. "SMU's Coach has been FIRED! Round up the usual suspects."

A.

[Phxfan]

I love how people here spend other people's money. Also, many of those big $$$$$ coaches have no clue how to recruit for a school like SMU with its incumbent academic handicaps. If Clemson fired Tommy Bowden for instance, he would be a great choice given what he did at Tulane. Barnett clearly would get it. Willingham with his experiences at Stanford and Notre Dame would understand. Fran would work within the system. But someone like Pat Hill would not have a clue how to recruit for SMU given his historical reliance upon JUCO's and partial to non-qualifiers. And salary is not the sole ingredient of money going to a coach. There are endorsement deals, shoe deals, television deals and the bigger the school and the more exposure they have, the more $$$$ he's going to get. Also, the BCS schools can pay more. If they want someone, they can outbid us without blinking an eye because they have bowl and TV money which is 25 times as large as what we get. So, dream on. Unless you have $15-20 Million sitting in money market to throw at a coach for a five year deal, don't tell other people how to spend their donations.

$ is not the only consideration, agreed. Dallas (SMU) is about to get a $500,000,000.00 library with $ donated by rich friends of W. You have an alumni base that would blow the socks off most schools financially speaking. So hire Barnett, Fran etc for $1-2 million. You get what you pay for. Auburn is private, ND is private, Stanford is private and all in the BCS.
All are getting those $ endorsements from Nike, TV, etc. SMU is not in the BCS for ONE reason. If this is done right they may get there. If SMU would have spent the $ 20 yr.s ago they would probably be in the BCS. It's the snowball effect. Hire a great coach, get national attention, get great recruits, get endorsements and TV.

[Phxfan]

This is so ridiculous to assume that because you spend 3 times more for a person that a scandal will never occur. Typically the scandals are caused by boosters. I would think the more spent, which is money from a booster's pocket, the more likely the booster would be to "win at any cost".

Ya know whats ridiculous, spending $100,000,000.00 or more to have one winning season in 20 yr.s. THAT IS INSANE. The difference between some of the coaches mentioned on this board and those that really could turn around this program is ethics. Fran. Why in the hell would someone making $2m send out a letter to get $38,000.00. Why would Barnett make such stupid remarks about the female athlete who alleged rape at UC or CU? Got me? $ ain't going to guarantee anything for sure. But it may get a coach with some ethics or at least know how to stay out of a scandal.

[originaloverthehilltop1]

the actual hc dollar amount might not be the key factor, guys.

can he get the players he wants recruitted and admitted? jucos, too?

are there adequate football friendly majors to attract them?

will we pay his assistants enough to attract the ones he wants? this was a behind the scenes mustang club question with the recent staff.

if you have the right answer to these questions, you may not need a million to get the the coach who knows these are solved. and that would probly be the right coach. dings or no dings, a smart coach won't go for your big check if these arent guaranteed solved, not just "addressed".

[mrydel]

This is so ridiculous to assume that because you spend 3 times more for a person that a scandal will never occur. Typically the scandals are caused by boosters. I would think the more spent, which is money from a booster's pocket, the more likely the booster would be to "win at any cost".

Ya know whats ridiculous, spending $100,000,000.00 or more to have one winning season in 20 yr.s. THAT IS INSANE. The difference between some of the coaches mentioned on this board and those that really could turn around this program is ethics. Fran. Why in the hell would someone making $2m send out a letter to get $38,000.00. Why would Barnett make such stupid remarks about the female athlete who alleged rape at UC or CU? Got me? $ ain't going to guarantee anything for sure. But it may get a coach with some ethics or at least know how to stay out of a scandal.

Thank you Mrs. Mariucci.

[jtstang]

The difference between some of the coaches mentioned on this board and those that really could turn around this program is ethics.

Ethics?? All of those coaches whose ethics you question have already proven they can turn a program around. New Mexico ring a bell? TCU?? Northwestern??? Ethics, my @ss.

[Phxfan]

The difference between some of the coaches mentioned on this board and those that really could turn around this program is ethics.

Ethics?? All of those coaches whose ethics you question have already proven they can turn a program around. New Mexico ring a bell? TCU?? Northwestern??? Ethics, my @ss.

A person can be ethical and a good coach at the same time. Bill Walsh comes to mind. Ty Willingham, Pete Carroll etc. the two aren't mutually exclusive.

[mustangxc]

I would have more faith in the scarred coaches avoiding future scandals simply because they cannot afford any future scandals.

[jtstang]

The difference between some of the coaches mentioned on this board and those that really could turn around this program is ethics.

Ethics?? All of those coaches whose ethics you question have already proven they can turn a program around. New Mexico ring a bell? TCU?? Northwestern??? Ethics, my @ss.

A person can be ethical and a good coach at the same time. Bill Walsh comes to mind. Ty Willingham, Pete Carroll etc. the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Maybe so but you said that only "ethical" coaches are "those that really could turn this program around" and that is just [deleted]. The very coaches you used as examples of lacking ethics have already shown they can turn a losing program around, and you can try and dispute that all you want but you will only look foolish in dosing so.

[peruna81]

I would hire a chimp with a bad rash if he could coach on Saturdays and recruit. Morals, ethics or not, the next hire for SMU will be the choice of whether the football program remains relevant or not. We are/have fast moved to the point of no return in the past 20 years.

The "model" ( for the sake of Stallion, who in this case was spot on ) must be changed...the academic curriculum must be leveled to a playing field that is appropriate for the schools we compete against for said athletes( do not read LOWER, read majors that are athlete-friendly )...the academic community, ie faculty, should take a trip down memory lane and research the relationship between winning football/basketball and admission applications...it all ties to eventual increased revenues and eventual higher quality academic candidates...at present, the majority of the faculty SEEM to view SMU athletics either from a hostile perspective or more damaging from a perspective of benign contempt. SMU athletics
( read football ) has in fact been a great drain on financial resources without any appreciable return ( ie championships/winning seasons/revenue neutral years).

After years in the sunshine ( with the sunburn to prove it ) I choose to go over to the Dark Side with jtstang...I will be pleasantly surprised by a victory on saturdays, but without the expectations or prior anticipation...expecting a different outcome for SMU football following the same formula as the last 20 years is...well you know...

or we could just go back to paying players..

[Nacho]

The job is for coach, not pope.

Polls show that if Bill Clinton could run for president next year he would win in a landslide. Some people hate Bush; some love him.

All I want is results. Barnett is fine with me. I would be overjoyed with him. Not that I wouldn't be with someone similar either.

It is very true that if we want a quality head coach with skins on the wall to prove it we are going to have to take someone with a little dirt under his fingernails. OK by me.

If you want goody 2 shoes we are going to suffer 3-9 for another 6 years. Good luck with all that.

[Phxfan]

The difference between some of the coaches mentioned on this board and those that really could turn around this program is ethics.

Ethics?? All of those coaches whose ethics you question have already proven they can turn a program around. New Mexico ring a bell? TCU?? Northwestern??? Ethics, my @ss.

A person can be ethical and a good coach at the same time. Bill Walsh comes to mind. Ty Willingham, Pete Carroll etc. the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Maybe so but you said that only "ethical" coaches are "those that really could turn this program around" and that is just [deleted]. The very coaches you used as examples of lacking ethics have already shown they can turn a losing program around, and you can try and dispute that all you want but you will only look foolish in dosing so.

Fran did turn A&M around didn't he? You don't seem to get the FACT that SMU is in a different place than any Univ. in the country. If we were talking about another school, public or private, they have a lot of room to hire someone with a "past". We are not talking about another school. I didn't say that only ethical coaches could turn the program around. I said you can hire an ethical coach that has had huge success without baggage. A big name, ethical, winning coach. is that to much to ask? Maybe? Maybe not?

[peruna81]

At present, it is too much to ask.