The official Matt Doherty contract extension thread

by **Mitch McConnell** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:10 pm

What are the odds he gets another year tacked on if this group can get to 17-20 wins, be in the conversation for the CBI and so forth? The thought crossed my mind after the win against Tulane.

I think it's a very real possibility. I can't even believe I'm posting this. Not long ago, I was one who wanted this to happen. I'm not saying that I would be fired up for it, but I just want SMU to succeed.

If 2011-12 was his last year -- I think some believe it's 2012-13 (and that's probably right) -- then it would it would be hard for him to recruit with a finite timeframe. That could be used against him.

April-Summer should be a time to look for that.

Food for thought.

by **RGV Pony** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:14 pm

If contract extension is such that it specifies "Doh" to mean "Doherty, Mangino, Hobbie & Reggie" I'm good w/ it.

by **Mitch McConnell** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:17 pm

RGV Pony wrote:If contract extension is such that it specifies "Doh" to mean "Doherty, Mangino, Hobbie & Reggie" I'm good w/ it.

I guess that part is understood. But then SMU would have to step up and give those guys competitive $$ to keep them. You never know what's going to happen after the season with all of the coaching and assistant coaching movement. Someone may look at SMU's season, call one of them and poof...they're gone.

by **couch 'em** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:18 pm

What % is Doherty responsible for our improvement? 20%? 80%?

by **Wuba** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:21 pm

couch 'em wrote:What % is Doherty responsible for our improvement? 20%? 80%?

I think he would have gotten 100% of the blame for failure, so I have a hard time not giving him 100% of the credit for the improvement. Of course the assistants play a huge role, but in the end he hired them (or maybe he was just on board with them being hired) and he is giving overall direction.

Obviously players have a lot to do with the improvement, but they are Doherty's players so to me he gets credit for their improvement just like he would get blame for their poor play.

by **mustangxc** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:34 pm

Doherty is the main reason for the team's success given that he is the one who decided to go with the current offense, ie the modified Princeton offense. He recruited these players and hired the assistant coaches so it's all on him now. It took one more year than he stated when he was hired, but I think we are on our way now.

Having said that, I would not extend him right now. One season does not make a coach. If he sustains the current success next year, then I would extend him so that he has 5 years left on the contract. I don't like knee-jerk reactions one way or another, and thankfully our AD is more patient than most of our fans!

by **PonyDoh** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:48 pm

I think he has next and the year after, which would mean no immediate extension. That said, you could always extend w/basically a limited buy-out etc, just to give him the ability to say he's under contract through whenever. Never hurts in recruiting. Extending doesn't have to be a death sentence if worded appropriately. SMU needs to be wary though, cause Doh's lawyers put a whooping on Orsini's in round 1.

by **GiddyUp** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:56 pm

by **PonyDoh** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:04 pm

GiddyUp wrote:Nope

If he only has next year, you have to do something, otherwise we can't recruit in '12

by **GiddyUp** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:09 pm

PonyDoh wrote:
GiddyUp wrote:Nope

If he only has next year, you have to do something, otherwise we can't recruit in '12

I thought he has next year and the year after - but it doesn't seem like anyone knows for sure.
The used car salesman might win again...

by **Dooby** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:24 pm

If he isn't under contract for the 2012-2013, then you have to give him an extension. You don't let a coach recruit going into final year of his deal. It is the cost of doing business in college sports. Period.

SMU is private. The terms of the extension don't have to be disclosed. SMU can make the terms of the extension very school friendly.

by **ibezu2** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:59 pm

Hopefully he's GONE. The sooner, the better for SMU Basketball. Get someone in here that can lead, build and develop a program. His record here speaks for itself.

by **CalallenStang** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:03 pm

ibezu2 wrote:Hopefully he's GONE. The sooner, the better for SMU Basketball. Get someone in here that can lead, build and develop a program. His record here speaks for itself.

Wow, that post really wreaks of ignorance of what's in the pipeline.

by **mustangxc** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:11 pm

Where did these 2 trolls come from?

by **PonyDoh** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:19 pm

ibezu2 wrote:Hopefully he's GONE. The sooner, the better for SMU Basketball. Get someone in here that can lead, build and develop a program. His record here speaks for itself.

i smell an scpony parody