Just announced he took the Arkansas job. Probably looked at the fact 99% of his teams offense was gone and he of course capitalized on his times at Reno. Brown decision to go to Reno just keeps getting worse. Do you stay and play on a bad team while putting up #'s or do you bounce?
Musellman Says Adios to UNR
- Thread starter larry legend33
- Start date
UCLA is still an elite program. It's funny to me how people completely tear them apart. They lost their 2nd best recruit (Shaq's Son) to a random heart ailment. Lets say they get Shaq's son back, Moses Brown comes back, Jaime Jacquez Jr doesn't de-commit, and David Singleton improves. Boom, one year a NCAA tournament team. And that's not even including their still in the running for Cassius Stanley somehow.....
Arkansas is an interesting choice. And it def. puts Jordan Brown in a very weird position. If I were him I would stay, but if he does transfer, he would be better off transferring to a USF, St. Mary's, Santa Clara, etc. in order to re-establish his value in a slightly less difficult conference.
Musselman will do fine at Arkansas, and i'm sure he's getting paid an arm and a leg to leave UNR. My guess at least double.
Arkansas is an interesting choice. And it def. puts Jordan Brown in a very weird position. If I were him I would stay, but if he does transfer, he would be better off transferring to a USF, St. Mary's, Santa Clara, etc. in order to re-establish his value in a slightly less difficult conference.
Musselman will do fine at Arkansas, and i'm sure he's getting paid an arm and a leg to leave UNR. My guess at least double.
I don't agree that UCLA is an elite program, and it hurts since I've been a fan since I was 9...
Reasons I think this are:
1) While their AD, Dan Guerrero, has spearheaded a lot of recent badly-needed stadium/arena projects, spending oodles of UCLA's and their boosters' money, and the Bruins keep stockpiling banners in sports that only the athletes and their families care about, their main revenue sports teams underachieve with regularity.
2) Probably partly because of reason #1, it's very unlikely the Bruins will find a top coach, or even be able to hang onto a pretty-good one (if they can get one to actually take the job).
3) For the most part, the Pac-12 has become just a medium-good basketball conference and isn't really the recruit draw that it used to be.
4) It is suspected by many that the Guerrero isn't much of a basketball fan, making it unlikely that he'll have the drive to put the money and effort where it needs to be in order to right the Bruins' basketball program.
I'm sure that if I were to ponder on this some more, I would think up more reasons.
Anyway... I would replace the word "elite" with "better-than-average". Maybe if they fire Guerrero and put in an AD that demands better performance from the Bruins' major money-maker sports programs, they could build up again... in maybe 3-5 years if things go REALLY well.
Dark days in Bruinville.
Reasons I think this are:
1) While their AD, Dan Guerrero, has spearheaded a lot of recent badly-needed stadium/arena projects, spending oodles of UCLA's and their boosters' money, and the Bruins keep stockpiling banners in sports that only the athletes and their families care about, their main revenue sports teams underachieve with regularity.
2) Probably partly because of reason #1, it's very unlikely the Bruins will find a top coach, or even be able to hang onto a pretty-good one (if they can get one to actually take the job).
3) For the most part, the Pac-12 has become just a medium-good basketball conference and isn't really the recruit draw that it used to be.
4) It is suspected by many that the Guerrero isn't much of a basketball fan, making it unlikely that he'll have the drive to put the money and effort where it needs to be in order to right the Bruins' basketball program.
I'm sure that if I were to ponder on this some more, I would think up more reasons.
Anyway... I would replace the word "elite" with "better-than-average". Maybe if they fire Guerrero and put in an AD that demands better performance from the Bruins' major money-maker sports programs, they could build up again... in maybe 3-5 years if things go REALLY well.
Dark days in Bruinville.
I could see Nevada going after some of the coaches thrown out on the Cal coaching thread.
Argenal is getting support too if they choose to go in-house
Argenal is getting support too if they choose to go in-house
There is ONE problem and only ONE problem that is causing all of the top coaches to turn down the UCLA job. It is known to EVERY coach in the country and I am 10,000% certain of that reason.
The UCLA donors and season ticket fan base is the most difficult to deal with in the country. They are completely delusional. They believe it is still the 60's and 70's and that they are entitled to multiple NCAA titles.
I was with a large number of UCLA alums and fans today at Stanford for their baseball series (UCLA is #1 in the country and Stanford is #2). The UCLA baseball fans are NOT anything like their basketball fans. The UCLA baseball fans are normal and easy to deal with.
Go to some UCLA basketball games and you will immediately understand the problem. They have run off or fired coach after coach going back to Gene Bartow and Gary Cunningham; the two excellent coaches that followed John Wooden. NOTHING has changed in the minds of the UCLA donors and administration since then. NOTHING.
If I were Rick Barnes (I got drunk with him 39 years ago when he was at Davidson and I was stuck in Charlotte for a night), there is no way in hell I would take the UCLA job.
The UCLA donors and season ticket fan base is the most difficult to deal with in the country. They are completely delusional. They believe it is still the 60's and 70's and that they are entitled to multiple NCAA titles.
I was with a large number of UCLA alums and fans today at Stanford for their baseball series (UCLA is #1 in the country and Stanford is #2). The UCLA baseball fans are NOT anything like their basketball fans. The UCLA baseball fans are normal and easy to deal with.
Go to some UCLA basketball games and you will immediately understand the problem. They have run off or fired coach after coach going back to Gene Bartow and Gary Cunningham; the two excellent coaches that followed John Wooden. NOTHING has changed in the minds of the UCLA donors and administration since then. NOTHING.
If I were Rick Barnes (I got drunk with him 39 years ago when he was at Davidson and I was stuck in Charlotte for a night), there is no way in hell I would take the UCLA job.
There isn't a lot of sympathy for those UCLA basketball fans. Folks with long memories well recall those grim decades when the Bruins and John Wooden utterly dominated the Far West (and national) hoops scene to the point where everyone else was a mere afterthought. Schools like USF, Cal, Santa Clara, UOP, USC and a few others all had strong teams on occasion and all fell to the UCLA juggernaut right through the mid-1970s. It was a steady diet of losses and frustration for everyone else. UCLA was the Boston Celtics and the New York Yankees rolled into one. It wasn't pretty. What made things even more depressing was that the NCAA tournament did not feature at-large or non-title teams to any significant degree. If you didn't win your league, you were out, for the most part. Some independents did receive invites. Most did not. The NCAA West Regional became the sole province of the Bruins. Watching them blow through the West bracket year after year was a regular root canal. Today, UCLA is back in the pack, way back. The only downside: The Bruin's travails aren't helpful for the Pac-12 which has become a mediocre hoops conference, a mere shell of its former excellence.
You're right about the UCLA hoops fanbase. I have watched games while in live Bruinzone game forums... I don't do that anymore. Just like it's said above, wayyyyyyy too many of the forum denizens expect wayyyyyyy too much. There have been times where I felt I was going to be accused of being some sort of "spy" for the enemy because I tried to actually be reasonable... Add that to the fact Guerrero doesn't really seem to care about winning hoops and ya got a crap situation that no coach in his right mind should want to get involved with.
The boosters don't seem to realize that even if Wooden and Wilkes and Walton and Alcindor were to magically come to life, in their primes, all at the same time, they wouldn't just cakewalk to more banners. Back then there were maybe ten really good teams in any given season and none that could match what the Bruins had. Now we have 16 seeds threatening to beat 1's and some other very good teams that just don't even make the Dance.
Anyway, looks like UCLA talk has kinda hijacked this thread... Now what were we talking about again?
The boosters don't seem to realize that even if Wooden and Wilkes and Walton and Alcindor were to magically come to life, in their primes, all at the same time, they wouldn't just cakewalk to more banners. Back then there were maybe ten really good teams in any given season and none that could match what the Bruins had. Now we have 16 seeds threatening to beat 1's and some other very good teams that just don't even make the Dance.
Anyway, looks like UCLA talk has kinda hijacked this thread... Now what were we talking about again?
As I stated before I have been to multiple Nevada games this year. When you look at the players in their rotation (Brown not included) they looked like 2 different teams. Men who lifted weights and were experienced, to the other guys who looked 18y-19yrs old and never took off their warmups. They are in trouble.
Similar threads
