Hypothetical Question

ponyboy · Post by **ponyboy** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:28 am

Assuming:

1) Bennett will be fired
2) The new coach has already been identified and we have enough money to pay him

When do you pull the trigger on Bennett? Would you not want to do it sooner rather than later so that you can salvage the 2008 recruiting class? Are they any contract/payout implications for Bennett? Other thoughts?

mustangxc · Post by **mustangxc** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:30 am

As soon as we lose our next game.

DiamondM75 · Post by **DiamondM75** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:35 am

If you already have a new coach lined up. That means he has been identified, offered the job, job offer accepted and contract signed. Threfore the money is not an issue. If all of this is in place, you pull the trigger immediately. If not, Bennett finishes the season, but you have the Armstrong Relocation trucks sitting outside Lloyd.

Billy Joe · Post by **Billy Joe** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:35 am

Orsini needs to let Bennett go after we get beat by Tulsa. He needs to make a statement that losing is not going to be accepted anymore. He then needs to get a new coach named and announce SMU is changing its model to better compete in Division 1-A football.

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:36 am

Coach needs to be in place by the first weekend in December-but SMU has always insisted on posting the job for a month which means SMU Coaches couldn't hit the recruiting trail until January 8 or so because of the Dead Periods. The recruiting ballgame is essentially over by about January 31. The only players coming in during the last week are essentially scrubs. If I were advising Orsini I would suggest that SMU inform Bennett he will be let go at the end of the season after his 7th loss-then you could post the job and still get someone in place by the first week in December. But let me warn you that with so many jobs opening up-these top candidates may not be willing to commit to SMU until the big jobs are taken. My prediction is that SMU DOES NOT have a Coach in place and ready to hit the recruiting trail until January 8th.

SMU Football Blog · Post by **SMU Football Blog** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:38 am

I don't understand the fascination with firing this guy as soon as possible. Why is everyone in such a hurry?

It isn't as if firing him today is going to make a bit of difference in the long run. Sure, SMU would get a little head start getting things done from an organizational perspective, but we aren't going to have a new head coach until the end of the year unless it is someone completely out of coaching. Even if we hired someone completely out of coaching, that coach isn't going to put a staff together until after the season is completely over. Firing Bennett today versus two or three weeks from now is virtually irrelevant.

Speaking of irrelevant, as soon as loss seven happens, you pull the trigger. I would let him coach the rest of the year if he wants too. However, if I think he is going to yank one more redshirt in that time, I buy him a one-way ticket for College Station and tell him to go see his wife.

SMU Football Blog · Post by **SMU Football Blog** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:39 am

Stallion wrote:Coach needs to be in place by the first weekend in December-but SMU has always insisted on posting the job for a month

Doherty was hired in less than a month.

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:39 am

Stallion wrote: SMU has always insisted on posting the job for a month which means SMU Coaches couldn't hit the recruiting trail under January 8 or so because of the Dead Periods.

Is this just a matter of internal policy. If so, I would imagine it is a policy that could be broken if necessary. As a private institution I would not imagine we are bound to this.

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:42 am

SMU has followed federal fair employment guidelines in the past.

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:44 am

Stallion wrote:SMU has followed federal fair employment guidelines in the past.

From a legal standpoint would that be a precedent that could be challenged by someone if a hire took place sooner and/ or without posting or does the fact we are private allow us to do otherwise if we so desired?

SMU Football Blog · Post by **SMU Football Blog** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:45 am

Not to be a pest, but I had to go back and look it up to be sure. Tubbs was fired on April 6, 2006. Doherty was hired April 24, 2006. That is 18 days.

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:48 am

Maybe it was more important to get the basketball program back on track quickly from those heinous NCAA violations by Tubbs that set us back so far, than to folllow non-binding federal hiring rules.

SMU Football Blog · Post by **SMU Football Blog** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:51 am

jtstang wrote:Maybe it was more important to get the basketball program back on track quickly from those heinous NCAA violations by Tubbs that set us back so far, than to folllow non-binding federal hiring rules.

Maybe it is the difference between Copeland accepting things the way they are and Orsini telling people the way things are done in the big city/downtown/the big leagues.

George S. Patton · Post by **George S. Patton** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:52 am

jtstang wrote:Maybe it was more important to get the basketball program back on track quickly from those heinous NCAA violations by Tubbs that set us back so far, than to folllow non-binding federal hiring rules.

The greatest violation the Tubbs committed was that he was clueless how to run a Division I basketball program. That was good enough for me.

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:53 am

Or maybe Copeland forgot to tell Orsini what date he fired Tubbs and 18 days later was Orsini's best guess.