DC: SMU won't hire coach with controversial past

by **mustangxc** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:59 am

The point is that SMU is and has been far from perfect. Don't expect the coaches to be something you yourself can't be! Also, like I said, don't ask for second chances if you yourself are unwilling to give them.

by **biggin** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:01 pm

To the original point of this thread, this is exactly what I surmised. Turner is tying the hands of Orsini. Same old SMU. Same old SMU. You wait. The reason your not hearing things is because the search is proving difficult. I told you this. Who mentioned the Bob Toledo hire? There you have it.

From what I can tell, we will not be happy with this hire. Those that claim they are will be lying to themselves, including Orsini. Hopefully, I will be wrong.

by **ponyboy** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:04 pm

If I'm right and we already have our man, Turner isn't tying anyone's hands. He's ameliorating negative public perception that is coming from rumors that we're looking at Bowden, Barnett, and Neuheisel.

by **dcpony** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:05 pm

If SMU is commited to being a top twenty-five program, then Turner and Orsini need to get the best available coach, controversial past or not, period...

Ideally, I'd like to see SMU go after an experienced HC.

If SMU decides to go the assistant route and his name is not Chow, Malzahn, Applewhite, or Steve Logan I'm done with SMU football.

by **FWMustangGirl** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:06 pm

ponyboy wrote:If I'm right and we already have our man, Turner isn't tying anyone's hands. He's ameliorating negative public perception that is coming from rumors that we're looking at Bowden, Barnett, and Neuheisel.

I thought the same thing.

by **mustangxc** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:06 pm

ponyboy wrote:If I'm right and we already have our man, Turner isn't tying anyone's hands. He's ameliorating negative public perception that is coming from rumors that we're looking at Bowden, Barnett, and Neuheisel.

I would argue he is creating the negative public perception that SMU as an institution advocates hypocrisy.

by **biggin** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:07 pm

Oh, and as far as Bowden - he is out. I have come to think he may change his mind, but only after he sees that no one else is willing to give him a job if that proves true.

by **ponyte** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:09 pm

If SMU decides to go the assistant route and his name is Chow, Malzahn, Applewhite, or Steve Logan then I'm done with SMU football. I am tired of being the on the job training ground for ambitious wannabe coaches.

by **Longtime** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:10 pm

What is this "tying the hands" nonsense?

There's only a few coaches with "sordid pasts" - there are many, many more potentially great coaches who don't have a scandal in their backgrounds. What a shame if we had to pick from that pool.

I would support a Barnett hire, but I don't think he's the only coach on the planet capable of winning at SMU. There are lots of guys who could get the job done here, many of whom you've probably never heard of. The big name, former head coaches aren't the only guys who can coach

by **Phxfan** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:15 pm

biggin wrote:Oh, and as far as Bowden - he is out. I have come to think he may change his mind, but only after he sees that no one else is willing to give him a job if that proves true.

So does he have a lot of baggage? Any baggage? re: ethics? He has the CJ ties, and I do think the CJ connection is a big deal. Does Nutt? I don't know. I don't see why Orsini would make such a big deal about CJ assistance, then ignore it.

by **Bergermeister** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:15 pm

biggin wrote: From what I can tell, we will not be happy with this hire.

That's the ol' Mustang spirit! Sorry to go against the grain, but I anticipate a terrific hire. I believe Orsini will get it right... again.

by **Billy Joe** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:19 pm

Most of the alumni, fans, and students have already given up on SMU football. The stands are usually empty except for when we play local teams or big 12 teams that bring fans. It is very important to hire the best available coach (history or no history) to help get people back in the stands. Orsini made a big mistake already in his short tenure by brining Bennett back. If Bennett did not get in done in his first 5 seasons then why is he going to get it done in season 6? Orsini has a chance to make up for it in the next head coach hire....he better get the best avaialble coach willing to come to SMU or we will all regret it.

by **crazy horse** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:21 pm

bigdaddy08091 wrote:with the coach speculating crap. It makes no difference who we bring in. We have done this for 20 years and for 20 years we have failed. What is different this time, Orsini. That is what we said with Copeland. We said the same thing with PB. We are wiping our [deleted] before we take a [deleted].

I'm confused, what are we supposed to do, suspend football for 2 years until professors are hired, curriculum created, admittance standards/allowable transfer hours are changed?

That's ridiculous. Hire a coach with proven experience/gravitas to tell Orsini, Turner et al what is lacking to build a winning program and make it condition of your hiring.

That is my problem with Bennett. If there were so many hindrances, why was he not raising holy heck with Copeland/Orsini/Turner/Board. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't, but it seemed rather late to be bringing it up at his dismissal press conference. I know I would have been going nuts if I was given a task and not the resources to be successful!

The right coach and Orsini will get whatever roadblocks remain removed.

I do agree 20 years of futility is way too long. A whole generation has grown up knowing SMU as nothing but a football loser.

by **George S. Patton** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:23 pm

Billy Joe wrote:Most of the alumni, fans, and students have already given up on SMU football. The stands are usually empty except for when we play local teams or big 12 teams that bring fans. It is very important to hire the best available coach (history or no history) to help get people back in the stands. Orsini made a big mistake already in his short tenure by brining Bennett back. If Bennett did not get in done in his first 5 seasons then why is he going to get it done in season 6? Orsini has a chance to make up for it in the next head coach hire....he better get the best avaialble coach willing to come to SMU or we will all regret it.

There was a clause in his extension for 2009 saying that if he reached 7 wins, it automatically kicked in. Think of it like a vested option.

Since he didn't, we only owe him for 2008. That possibly allowed Orsini to raise the $9-$10 million.

by **dcpony** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:24 pm

ponyte wrote:If SMU decides to go the assistant route and his name is Chow, Malzahn, Applewhite, or Steve Logan then I'm done with SMU football. I am tired of being the on the job training ground for ambitious wannabe coaches.

What do you expect? SMU is in a spare conference. And the job is percieved as a career killer.

Steve Logan was the HC at ECU for a while and has some skins on the wall.

Chow has never been a HC but he has the NFL and USC pedigrees ...he'll probably take the UCLA job if its open.

Malzahn and Applewhite would bring us some publicity. and hel p with recruiting.

DC: SMU won't hire coach with controversial past

Re: Please stop

Who is online