2019 College Basketball Coaching Carousel

Alford is out at UCLA.

My guess is Eric Musselman gets the job. UCLA has historically not landed big name coaches for that job for a variety of reasons. UCLA would pay a lot more than Nevada and give Musselman a better chance to to build a national power than in Reno.

 

The thing about Musselman - great coach, but I've always had the impression he lacks the "refinement" that blue blood schools look for. He's coached whatever and wherever - I'm not sure he's the most booster-friendly coach out there (somewhere between Bob Huggins and Mike Leach). Oregon State could have had him four years ago, but they went for the more booster-friendly coach and they've gone nowhere. Meanwhile, Musselman hired an OSU assistant who took at least one Beaver recruit with him to Reno and he's now in G-League averaging 16 points and 8 rebounds a game in 26 minutes.

 

How good was Alford with the booster's? My impression of following Alford is that he is stand-offish. UCLA obviously has a "blue-blood pedigree" but does not seem to attract great candidates for the it when it opens (Alford, for example). I don't see UCLA attracting a Tony Bennett type for a variety of reasons. So they are going to have to look at a level below the top tier.

I think Musselman would take the job. I think his success at Nevada would give credibility to the hire. When OSU opened Musselman had only been a college assistant for a couple of years and was known basically as a good minor league basketball coach.

 

We are more removed from John Wooden today than John Wooden was from Knute Rockne and Frank Leahy.

UCLA is not that blue blood anymore. They had a nice run 10-12 years ago. They have been a top 40 program for 30 years.

 

The thing about this job that seems like a small detail but isn’t: The team doesn’t charter. I know the PAC-12 road trips are two-fers — at Oregon on Thursday and at Oregon State on Saturday— but isn’t that still a disadvantage? If you’re depending on airlines to get you home on Sunday while your opponents in the league are already back on campus, you’re at a competitive disadvantage. With all the cash in the game these days, why is UCLA stuck in the 1980s?

 

I understand your point but but since Steve Lavin took over in the 1996-1997 season the Bruins have been to 11 appearances in the Sweet 16. I am not sure how many schools have had more appearances but I suspect it is not many. And Lavin and Alford are no ones idea of elite coaches. A good coach could get in there and do a lot.

 

UCLA is 7th in Sweet 16 appearances from 1997 onward. Not too bad.

 

The problem for UCLA is the people there think they should win like UNC, Kentucky and Kansas, but they aren't providing the same bells and whistles. No charter flights, Pauley is shared with other sports, they finally got a practice facility, I don't think they have the luxury residences like other blue bloods.

Why would a top tier coach want to get into that?

 

It ain’t 1968 anymore. They’ve done pretty well over the past 20 years, but everyone — from boosters to local media — seem to think UCLA should win the title every year.
Now I see where Vitale is acting as Pitino’s agent by advocating for the Bruins to hire a guy whose program paid a prospect seven weeks after being placed on probation.

 

Doesn’t the PAC-12, for the most part, still play in the crappy 8500-seat arenas they used in the 60s?

 

No.