Larry Brown abruptly resigns at SMU amid contract dispute

When SMU began searching for a new basketball coach in March 2012, school officials were eager to make a splashy hire.

A Mustangs program that hadn’t made the NCAA tournament since 1993 sought a jolt of energy from a proven winner in time for its move to the higher-profile American Athletic Conference the following year.

An overly ambitious coaching search targeted the likes of Marquette’s Buzz Williams, St Louis’ Rick Majerus and Harvard’s Tommy Amaker, but each turned down lucrative offers. Only then did SMU turn its attention to basketball’s ultimate vagabond, a coach with a reputation for delivering spectacular success before running afoul of NCAA rules and abruptly moving on to his next gig.

Larry Brown’s four-year SMU tenure followed that exact pattern. The hall of fame coach quickly made the long-struggling Mustangs relevant in college basketball before major NCAA violations tarnished that success and a contract dispute paved the way for his latest hasty exit.

Brown, 75, resigned Friday morning as a result of his displeasure with the three-year contract extension SMU says it offered him. He reportedly wanted a five-year deal even though he’d be 80 years old by the end of that contract.

Evaluating SMU’s swing-for-the-fences gamble hiring Brown isn’t easy even now that his tenure is over.

On one hand, he won 25 or more games in each of his final three seasons, ended SMU’s 22-year NCAA tournament drought and made the Mustangs a factor for recruits they once couldn’t get to return phone calls. On the other hand, he didn’t win a single NCAA tournament game in four years and he leaves behind his usual trail of messes for coach-in-waiting Tim Jankovich to clean up.

SMU is still coping with scholarship reductions stemming from the NCAA’s investigation into whether basketball staffers helped ex-McDonald’s All-American Keith Frazier with the coursework he needed to become academically eligible. The Mustangs are also in jeopardy of facing APR penalties in the coming years as a result of their recent spotty academic performance.

The true barometer for whether Brown’s SMU tenure was a success may be how the Mustangs fare following his departure.

If the program fades back to irrelevance, it will be tough to argue Brown’s three winning seasons were worth the headaches he brought. If the program remains a frequent NCAA tournament contender, then Brown will rightfully get credit for raising its stature.

SMU will be eligible for the postseason next spring after a one-year hiatus, but the Mustangs may not be able to ascend to the heights of the last two seasons without star point guard Nic Moore. Duke transfer Semi Ojeleye and a solid recruiting class will try to help holdovers Ben Moore, Shake Milton and Keith Frazier keep SMU near the top of the American Athletic Conference.

As for Brown, he leaves a complicated legacy just like he did more than a quarter century ago at his previous two college coaching stops.

Brown led UCLA to the 1980 national title game, but the Bruins were put on probation for two years after the NCAA found players had received impermissible benefits. Brown led Kansas to a national title in 1988, but the Jayhawks were banned from postseason play the following year due to recruiting violations.

What do Brown’s three college head coaching stints have in common? They all follow a very similar pattern.

Instant success, followed quickly by the arrival of NCAA investigators and a hasty exit.