PonyFans.com

PonyLawExpress wrote:He turned down Okie State this past offseason. I doubt he leaves for anything less than a blue blood or real close to it. Paying him to keep him won’t be a problem.

Thank you David Miller!

I would like to see Jank stay at SMU and turn it into his own Duke/UConn. Everything he needs is here. Money should not be an issue particularly if the program continues to grow.

UConn will go after Hurley at Rhode Island

I’d love to see Geno move over from the women but Hurley would be a good get.

Some are still blaming the conference they are in for their downward slide.

Ollie needs to go. Yes, he won the tourney. . . which is huge. But that program is clearly going in the wrong direction ever since. Time for a change.

I don't know how Ollie still has a job. He has done a great job of driving that program into the ground.

Stallion wrote:maybe SMU decides not to give Jank a raise or pay him the market rate-that seems to be our current strategy

Will you please shut the [deleted] up with this already? If you love Chad Morris so much, please PLEASE just follow that egotistical azzhole and show off your super sweet recruiting knowledge on the Arky Boards Captain High and Mighty. Maybe you’ve forgotten, but HE DIDNT WANT TO BE HERE AND NEVER EVER EVER EVER WOULDVE STAYED MORE THAN 3-4 YEARS. He was a self centered [deleted] who thought his [deleted] didn’t stink who only beat one team of note in 3 years. Woopity [deleted] do.

Move on and stop being such a crotchety whiner.

If the same cost-analysis pervades among the Basketball fund-raisers as our Football fund-raisers then yes it could be a consideration in the future. I think its so funny you guys get upset when I point out that SMU wasn't willing to pay the market rate in Football but you are so sure that it couldn't happen in Basketball. So no YOU GO [deleted] OFF. Its the same concept. the only difference is that in Basketball the fund-raisers implemented a comprehensive plan to transform the entire Basketball program and operations from Day 1 while the Football fund-raisers have not.

Stallion wrote:If the same cost-analysis pervades among the Basketball fund-raisers as our Football fund-raisers then yes it could be a consideration in the future. I think its so funny you guys get upset when I point out that SMU wasn't willing to pay the market rate in Football but you are so sure that it couldn't happen in Basketball. So no YOU GO [deleted] OFF. Its the same concept. the only difference is that in Basketball the fund-raisers implemented a comprehensive plan the transform the entire Basketball program and operations from Day 1 while the Football fund-raisers have not.

Blowhards gonna' blowhard.

You can't compare college football and college basketball. The system is not set-up for us to even have the opportunity to compete for national championships in football anymore (unless we moved to a P5 which is HIGHLY unlikely to ever happen). Chad wanted the opportunity to compete at the highest level. I don't blame him for that, but because of that even if we had paid market rate he wouldn't have stayed. In my opinion that would have been a waste of money.

However, in basketball we clearly CAN compete for national championships as we are in a conference that allows for that. Therefore paying the same as the big boys makes a whole lot more sense (and actually fair to say that we are on the track to becoming one of the "big boys"). Could Jank get blown away by an offer and leave? Of course. I'd like to think he will only leave for a blue blood but you never know. However, I tend to doubt that he would leave because he doesn't think SMU is committed to winning.

There is no school in any sport that is entitled to be good every year. Some fans think if they were good at one point or have been good in recent history they are always going to be good. UCONN fans think they are a blue blood and are entitled to be good at basketball even though their major long term success correlates very closely with 1 all time great coach (Calhoun), who was known to be pretty dirty. Remember when Nebraska was a top football program every year for about 10 straight years in the late 80's early 90's? UCLA hasn't won a national championship in basketball in 42 years and there will never be an as dominant period of success in any collegiate sport for what they achieved in the 1970s.

Its still subject to market forces. Right now Jankovich is or was when hired being paid 1.75 Million per year according to the DMN. That's not Top 25 in the Country. June Jones actually was being paid Top 20 salary in Football a decade ago. The salary for the SMU Football Coach if anything has gone down in the last decade despite inflation and enormous salary escalations. There are coaches earning 6 and 7 Million a year already in College Basketball. The question arises when and if Jankovich gets an offer from a Top national program would we be willing to pay full market rate of perhaps 2 or 3 times his current salary or would we just pay him the AAC market rate he is being paid now--like in SMU Football. TCU Football chose to pay full market rate repeatedly.

In other news... Per Jon Rothstein:

UConn's Alterique Gilbert will sit out the rest of the 2017-18 season due to a shoulder injury, per release. Surgery is likely.

Sucks for Gilbert to lose another year to injury. Not good for UConn either.

Stallion wrote:If the same cost-analysis pervades among the Basketball fund-raisers as our Football fund-raisers then yes it could be a consideration in the future. I think its so funny you guys get upset when I point out that SMU wasn't willing to pay the market rate in Football but you are so sure that it couldn't happen in Basketball. So no YOU GO [deleted] OFF. Its the same concept. the only difference is that in Basketball the fund-raisers implemented a comprehensive plan to transform the entire Basketball program and operations from Day 1 while the Football fund-raisers have not.

Then open your wallet King Stallion and show us peasants the way!