(04-18-2019 01:09 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Alford's teams just would not play defense and the nepotism really did not sit well with UCLA fans. Alford did a good job of recruiting, but it felt like the player development was lacking. UCLA should have fired Alford at the end of last season, but as usual, they bungled that decision. Firing Alford at the end of December was stupid. They should have let him finish the season.

Talk to any UCLA season ticket holder, and I know a few, and no one is expecting another John Wooden. They just expect good basketball, especially considering what it costs to support the basketball team through season tickets. John Calipari has produced 26 first round picks in ten seasons, but just one national championship. No one is going to do what Wooden did. Calipari at least has Kentucky competing for national championships. That is a reasonable expectation for UCLA, especially considering the talent available to them in Southern California.

Alford wasn't their guy. I don't disagree about the awkwardness of the hire; he had easily identifiable flaws that made the decision that much more destined to fail. So, what was wrong with Lavin, then?

I agree that UCLA should be a consistent presence in the sport and capable of making deep runs and vying for championships. But...Lavin was doing that. And it still wasn't good enough.

(04-19-2019 08:02 AM)esayem Wrote:  Good to see Anderson get a gig, I’ve always been a fan. Like previously mentioned, he’s never had a losing record. Seems like an odd fit at first, but it could work. With a great coach, there’s no reason why St. John’s can’t be a top team in the BE year in and year out.

It's not particularly a fit. But our job was open, Anderson is a major-conference qualified coach, so he doesn't have to be unemployed and we don't have to pretend that the guy who's been coaching Yale for 20 years is a realistic hire in the Big EAst.

This hire keeps us from falling further from where we were/are, a major conference job that's not in the top 50.

(04-19-2019 08:28 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-19-2019 08:02 AM)esayem Wrote:  Good to see Anderson get a gig, I’ve always been a fan. Like previously mentioned, he’s never had a losing record. Seems like an odd fit at first, but it could work. With a great coach, there’s no reason why St. John’s can’t be a top team in the BE year in and year out.

It's not particularly a fit. But our job was open, Anderson is a major-conference qualified coach, so he doesn't have to be unemployed and we don't have to pretend that the guy who's been coaching Yale for 20 years is a realistic hire in the Big EAst.

This hire keeps us from falling further from where we were/are, a major conference job that's not in the top 50.

I actually really like the hire. You’re getting tenacious defense and an experienced coach. This could be the job where he breaks through. I’ll be pulling for you guys.

(04-19-2019 08:19 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(04-18-2019 01:09 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Alford's teams just would not play defense and the nepotism really did not sit well with UCLA fans. Alford did a good job of recruiting, but it felt like the player development was lacking. UCLA should have fired Alford at the end of last season, but as usual, they bungled that decision. Firing Alford at the end of December was stupid. They should have let him finish the season.

Talk to any UCLA season ticket holder, and I know a few, and no one is expecting another John Wooden. They just expect good basketball, especially considering what it costs to support the basketball team through season tickets. John Calipari has produced 26 first round picks in ten seasons, but just one national championship. No one is going to do what Wooden did. Calipari at least has Kentucky competing for national championships. That is a reasonable expectation for UCLA, especially considering the talent available to them in Southern California.

Alford wasn't their guy. I don't disagree about the awkwardness of the hire; he had easily identifiable flaws that made the decision that much more destined to fail. So, what was wrong with Lavin, then?

I agree that UCLA should be a consistent presence in the sport and capable of making deep runs and vying for championships. But...Lavin was doing that. And it still wasn't good enough.

Lavin was just a series of clichés. He became head coach by pure luck. In the right place at the right time, after Harrick got fired for falsifying receipts at a student-athlete recruiting dinner. As the interim head coach, he took the Harrick team to the elite eight, which turned out to be his best season. He became head coach at 32 with no previous head coach experience anywhere, at any level.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/sport...storm.html

From the article above: Lavin, who was little more than a year removed from being a part-time assistant earning $17,000 a year when he was named the coach of U.C.L.A., one of college basketball’s most storied programs, spent a dizzying seven seasons there.

I went to a UCLA game in 1998 in Anaheim (Wooden Classic) and had great seats a few rows behind the bench. UCLA was playing Oklahoma State and Eddie Sutton. I could see and hear Lavin real clearly. He literally rolled the ball out on the court and became a cheerleader on the sidelines. The Bruins played undisciplined basketball that day but their talent was just too much for OSU. UCLA had six future NBA players on the roster. I was sitting a few seats from Coach Wooden and he did not look happy with what he was seeing. I never saw Lavin doing any coaching on the sideline that day.

Baron Davis, who was on that 1998 team, said it best a few years later. "As reported by Bay Area blogger Geoff Lepper of the Contra Costa Times, former UCLA point guard Baron Davis looked into the rafters at Pauley Pavilion last Friday during the Golden State Warriors' morning shoot-around and said, "We should have a banner up there: the only team to make the tournament without a coach."

Lavin was a salesman. The guy is terrific at talking and saying nothing. A very likeable guy and that worked for him as recruiter. But as a coach:

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-...story.html

"When we come out of the press and fall back into quicksand, sometimes it's hard to even notice what we're in," said Coach Steve Lavin, whose team has found success with the matchup zone in recent weeks. "In 1997, it was at its best. The great thing was the timeouts. Charles (O'Bannon) would say, 'What are we in?' And two guys would say, 'We're in quicksand,' and the other three would say, 'We're in man-to-man.' I'd say, 'Good. That's how we want it."'

Lavin's rationale? If the Bruins couldn't figure it out, the opposing players wouldn't have a prayer of doing so, either.

Arizona may soon have an opening

https://twitter.com/DanWetzel/status/112...8974510081



https://sports.yahoo.com/twist-in-fbi-ho...53177.html

(04-24-2019 11:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Arizona may soon have an opening

https://twitter.com/DanWetzel/status/112...8974510081

https://sports.yahoo.com/twist-in-fbi-ho...53177.html

I'm going to make a SWAG here: If the Arizona job opens, Billy Donovan will take it.

NKU hires Darrin Horn. He's been an assistant at Texas for the last four years.

Horn was formerly head coach at WKU for 5 years (where he made one Sweet 16 run in the NCAAs and 2 NITs) and South Carolina for 4 years (where he went 60-63 with an NIT appearance in his first year).

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/...555566002/

Here's an in depth article on the UCLA coaching search. “We would have loved for Jay Wright to walk out on the floor, but even when we offered to double his salary, he still wasn’t coming. Nothing we can do about that. But I am proud of our effort."

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-s...209bb0cbd6

(05-01-2019 07:32 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Here's an in depth article on the UCLA coaching search. “We would have loved for Jay Wright to walk out on the floor, but even when we offered to double his salary, he still wasn’t coming. Nothing we can do about that. But I am proud of our effort."

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-s...209bb0cbd6

There a few elite coaches that simply just refuse to move onto true, undeniable, blue blood positions because they are able to compete for national championships at their current schools, are compensated enough to feel appreciated and valued, and are in position to have full autonomy over their respective programs for many, many years to come.

Wright is in this camp. As is Few.

If Wright leaves Nova it's not going to be to a blue blood. It's going to be to the NBA.

(05-01-2019 08:28 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 07:32 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Here's an in depth article on the UCLA coaching search. “We would have loved for Jay Wright to walk out on the floor, but even when we offered to double his salary, he still wasn’t coming. Nothing we can do about that. But I am proud of our effort."

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-s...209bb0cbd6

There a few elite coaches that simply just refuse to move onto true, undeniable, blue blood positions because they are able to compete for national championships at their current schools, are compensated enough to feel appreciated and valued, and are in position to have full autonomy over their respective programs for many, many years to come.

Wright is in this camp. As is Few.

But it wasn't just Wright and Few who turned them down. Calipari, Beard, Barnes, and plenty more. It sounds like Cronin was their 40th choice?

UCLA has to face the fact that it's no longer a blue-blood that can get by on name alone. Kentucky and Kansas and North Carolina and Duke don't have to give up any control to a new hire. They can skimp on facilities because they'll still get the top recruits. UCLA can no longer do that.

(05-01-2019 09:08 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 08:28 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 07:32 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Here's an in depth article on the UCLA coaching search. “We would have loved for Jay Wright to walk out on the floor, but even when we offered to double his salary, he still wasn’t coming. Nothing we can do about that. But I am proud of our effort."

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-s...209bb0cbd6

There a few elite coaches that simply just refuse to move onto true, undeniable, blue blood positions because they are able to compete for national championships at their current schools, are compensated enough to feel appreciated and valued, and are in position to have full autonomy over their respective programs for many, many years to come.

Wright is in this camp. As is Few.

But it wasn't just Wright and Few who turned them down. Calipari, Beard, Barnes, and plenty more. It sounds like Cronin was their 40th choice?

UCLA has to face the fact that it's no longer a blue-blood that can get by on name alone. Kentucky and Kansas and North Carolina and Duke don't have to give up any control to a new hire. They can skimp on facilities because they'll still get the top recruits. UCLA can no longer do that.

Maybe their biggest mistake, compared to those schools you mentioned, was switching from adidas to Under Armour. Maybe UA doesn't bring "strong ass offers" to elite recruits (and their families, AAU coaches, and street agents) quite the way that Nike and adidas do.

And you have to win big, and consistently, to retain that program status. Look at Indiana. They can wear those candy stripe warmups from now until the end of time, but they don't even make the list of top programs in the Big Ten anymore, because to do that you have to win big today, not just point to banners from a long time ago.

(05-01-2019 09:08 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 08:28 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 07:32 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Here's an in depth article on the UCLA coaching search. “We would have loved for Jay Wright to walk out on the floor, but even when we offered to double his salary, he still wasn’t coming. Nothing we can do about that. But I am proud of our effort."

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-s...209bb0cbd6

There a few elite coaches that simply just refuse to move onto true, undeniable, blue blood positions because they are able to compete for national championships at their current schools, are compensated enough to feel appreciated and valued, and are in position to have full autonomy over their respective programs for many, many years to come.

Wright is in this camp. As is Few.

But it wasn't just Wright and Few who turned them down. Calipari, Beard, Barnes, and plenty more. It sounds like Cronin was their 40th choice?

UCLA has to face the fact that it's no longer a blue-blood that can get by on name alone. Kentucky and Kansas and North Carolina and Duke don't have to give up any control to a new hire. They can skimp on facilities because they'll still get the top recruits. UCLA can no longer do that.

From reports, it appeared that both Barnes and Dixon were prepared to accept an offer; it was just that their buyouts got in the way. Calipari and Beard were clearly leveraging UCLA's interest for salary increases at their current schools. If anything it was a lack of athletic administrative awareness as to why the search took so long. That, and a clear lack of established candidates that would be interested in the UCLA job in 2019.

(05-01-2019 10:21 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 09:08 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 08:28 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 07:32 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Here's an in depth article on the UCLA coaching search. “We would have loved for Jay Wright to walk out on the floor, but even when we offered to double his salary, he still wasn’t coming. Nothing we can do about that. But I am proud of our effort."

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-s...209bb0cbd6

There a few elite coaches that simply just refuse to move onto true, undeniable, blue blood positions because they are able to compete for national championships at their current schools, are compensated enough to feel appreciated and valued, and are in position to have full autonomy over their respective programs for many, many years to come.

Wright is in this camp. As is Few.

But it wasn't just Wright and Few who turned them down. Calipari, Beard, Barnes, and plenty more. It sounds like Cronin was their 40th choice?

UCLA has to face the fact that it's no longer a blue-blood that can get by on name alone. Kentucky and Kansas and North Carolina and Duke don't have to give up any control to a new hire. They can skimp on facilities because they'll still get the top recruits. UCLA can no longer do that.

Maybe their biggest mistake, compared to those schools you mentioned, was switching from adidas to Under Armour. Maybe UA doesn't bring "strong ass offers" to elite recruits (and their families, AAU coaches, and street agents) quite the way that Nike and adidas do.

And you have to win big, and consistently, to retain that program status. Look at Indiana. They can wear those candy stripe warmups from now until the end of time, but they don't even make the list of top programs in the Big Ten anymore, because to do that you have to win big today, not just point to banners from a long time ago.

This is easy for UCLA to solve. They don’t need the next great coach. They just need the next Sam Gilbert.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(05-01-2019 11:50 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 10:21 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 09:08 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 08:28 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 07:32 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  Here's an in depth article on the UCLA coaching search. “We would have loved for Jay Wright to walk out on the floor, but even when we offered to double his salary, he still wasn’t coming. Nothing we can do about that. But I am proud of our effort."

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-s...209bb0cbd6

There a few elite coaches that simply just refuse to move onto true, undeniable, blue blood positions because they are able to compete for national championships at their current schools, are compensated enough to feel appreciated and valued, and are in position to have full autonomy over their respective programs for many, many years to come.

Wright is in this camp. As is Few.

But it wasn't just Wright and Few who turned them down. Calipari, Beard, Barnes, and plenty more. It sounds like Cronin was their 40th choice?

UCLA has to face the fact that it's no longer a blue-blood that can get by on name alone. Kentucky and Kansas and North Carolina and Duke don't have to give up any control to a new hire. They can skimp on facilities because they'll still get the top recruits. UCLA can no longer do that.

Maybe their biggest mistake, compared to those schools you mentioned, was switching from adidas to Under Armour. Maybe UA doesn't bring "strong ass offers" to elite recruits (and their families, AAU coaches, and street agents) quite the way that Nike and adidas do.

And you have to win big, and consistently, to retain that program status. Look at Indiana. They can wear those candy stripe warmups from now until the end of time, but they don't even make the list of top programs in the Big Ten anymore, because to do that you have to win big today, not just point to banners from a long time ago.

This is easy for UCLA to solve. They don’t need the next great coach. They just need the next Sam Gilbert.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Gilbert x 10,000 is what you need today to run with Duke, Kansas, et al.

(04-25-2019 01:51 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-24-2019 11:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Arizona may soon have an opening

https://twitter.com/DanWetzel/status/112...8974510081

https://sports.yahoo.com/twist-in-fbi-ho...53177.html

I'm going to make a SWAG here: If the Arizona job opens, Billy Donovan will take it.

Today I'm going to double down on this guess...

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...onth-ayton

(05-01-2019 12:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 01:51 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-24-2019 11:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Arizona may soon have an opening

https://twitter.com/DanWetzel/status/112...8974510081

https://sports.yahoo.com/twist-in-fbi-ho...53177.html

I'm going to make a SWAG here: If the Arizona job opens, Billy Donovan will take it.

Today I'm going to double down on this guess...

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...onth-ayton

Not looking good. If true, he has to be fired.

(05-01-2019 08:39 AM)stever20 Wrote:  If Wright leaves Nova it's not going to be to a blue blood. It's going to be to the NBA.

Winner winner.

The rumor in these parts though is that he had a shot with the Sixers. He passed.

It doesn't stop at elite coaches being comfortable at positions where they have control, money, and can win championships:

Quote:The Bruins’ list of candidates was further winnowed, Rebholz wrote, when other coaches such as Washington’s Mike Hopkins, Purdue’s Matt Painter and Iowa State’s Steve Prohm declined to be interviewed “regardless of our ability to pay more than we ever have, a commitment to charter as a team, and increase to assistant salary pool, etc. Very disheartening to not even have a chance with ‘Tier II’ guys.”

Looks like Calipari was interested, but all things considered the pressure might have actually been lower at UCLA than at Kentucky. Very few schools are in that camp.

They could have had Dixon, but:

Quote:It was going to take some creative math. The search committee had found the money to pay Dixon’s hefty buyout but there was a catch: Because of a California provision that taxes buyouts as a gift, Dixon was going to be on the hook for around $4 million in taxes even after UCLA restructured his contract to cover the buyout, two people close to the situation said.

They could have had Barnes, but:

Quote:After a series of back-and-forth discussions, Barnes agreed to take the job for just short of $6 million per season, with the Bruins footing his $5-million buyout, according to two people familiar with the talks. But Barnes subsequently had a representative contact UCLA, asking for more money.

UCLA pulled out of the discussions at that point, even after Barnes said he would accept the previously agreed-upon terms in an attempt to salvage the deal.

Barnes told reporters in the following days that he momentarily thought he was going to become the Bruins’ coach and that the holdup had been UCLA’s unwillingness to pay his buyout.

The whole thing was kind of a cluster.

But like I've said, the only thing special about UCLA these days is its history.