Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

2018-2019 MBB Coaching Carousel

A rising tide lifts all ships.

We want UCLA to be a program that is a top 4 seed making at least the Sweet 16 every year. We need Arizona at that same level.

Basically, I want them to be the Duke/UNC of the West. I’m perfectly fine with CU being consistently equivalent of the ACC’s next tier programs that sometimes win the conference and/or make the 2nd & 3rd weekends of the Dance.

We can’t get there on our own. To get there, recruits need to see a PAC-12 offer as a very prestigious opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Buffnik said:
A rising tide lifts all ships.

We want UCLA to be a program that is a top 4 seed making at least the Sweet 16 every year. We need Arizona at that same level.

Basically, I want a them to be the Duke/UNC of the West. I’m perfectly fine with CU being consistently equivalent of the ACC’s next tier programs that sometimes win the conference and/or make the 2nd & 3rd weekends of the Dance.

We can’t get their on our own. To get there, recruits need to see a PAC-12 offer as a very prestigious opportunity.
Click to expand...
I agree. Nothing wrong at all with being the second tier in a top tier conference. Getting that top tier takes a commitment that I don’t think CU is willing to make.
 
Buffnik said:
A rising tide lifts all ships.

We want UCLA to be a program that is a top 4 seed making at least the Sweet 16 every year. We need Arizona at that same level.

Basically, I want them to be the Duke/UNC of the West. I’m perfectly fine with CU being consistently equivalent of the ACC’s next tier programs that sometimes win the conference and/or make the 2nd & 3rd weekends of the Dance.

We can’t get their on our own. To get there, recruits need to see a PAC-12 offer as a very prestigious opportunity.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, but I'm not gonna lie, I get a lot of joy and enjoyment out of watching UCLA **** up repeatedly. For example...

 
Darth Snow said:
That's pathetic
Click to expand...
Completely.

Have some damn pride, UCLA. You’re the program of frikin Wooden. If you found your guy, you don’t let a contract buyout with TCU scare you off. They should be ashamed if they lose Dixon over this nonsense.
 
Seriously, they offered Calipari a PAYCUT.

Earl Watson is back on the table.
 
Buffnik said:
Completely.

Have some damn pride, UCLA. You’re the program of frikin Wooden. If you found your guy, you don’t let a contract buyout with TCU scare you off. They should be ashamed if they lose Dixon over this nonsense.
Click to expand...
What a horrible sign if you are a potential head coach. Dixon must want the job BAD if he hasn't withdrawn from consideration. Plus, all TCU has to say is "no" to any reduction and they get to keep their coach.
 
This whole story line is not going to help UCLA attract a top level coach. Why would you go there if they are going to be that tight. Unreal how a supposed blue blood thinks that their name only will attract talent in a world where dollars are being throw around like water. You can't put the Bruin name in the bank
 
Buffalo Brad said:
This whole story line is not going to help UCLA attract a top level coach. Why would you go there if they are going to be that tight. Unreal how a supposed blue blood thinks that their name only will attract talent in a world where dollars are being throw around like water. You can't put the Bruin name in the bank
Click to expand...
Former blue blood, they don't seem to be anymore. More like a ****ing clown show these days.
 
I don’t really understand why UCLA didn’t offer that contract to Bennett instead of Cal. Even shave a couple million off and you would still be 2 million above his current salary. Instead you have 3 months of clear back channel communication with Cal, fall for his **** he does every off season to float his name and then get a raise, and then immediately drop to Dixon and Cronin? Where is the middle ground here, and this is coming from a person who thinks the Dixon hire is a good one (if it happens).
 
onealcd said:
I don’t really understand why UCLA didn’t offer that contract to Bennett instead of Cal. Even shave a couple million off and you would still be 2 million above his current salary. Instead you have 3 months of clear back channel communication with Cal, fall for his **** he does every off season to float his name and then get a raise, and then immediately drop to Dixon and Cronin? Where is the middle ground here, and this is coming from a person who thinks the Dixon hire is a good one (if it happens).
Click to expand...
Too often, UCLA puts value on style of play for the LA market instead of just worrying about winning. Whether football or basketball, they want high powered offense and faster pace. They want good defense out of the new coach so they’re going to bend on this, but going all in with a style like Bennett plays is likely a step too far for them.
 
Buffnik said:
Too often, UCLA puts value on style of play for the LA market instead of just worrying about winning. Whether football or basketball, they want high powered offense and faster pace. They want good defense out of the new coach so they’re going to bend on this, but going all in with a style like Bennett plays is likely a step too far for them.
Click to expand...

And this is where UCLA completely loses me. I can understand wanting a particular style (God, for years I screamed for the Nugs to always go up tempo no matter what), but they're more worried about the perception of a style than actual. I have no doubt that you're right and Bennett wasn't at the top of their list because of his style (although waiting for the F4 to end was a concern too), but over the last 5 years here are the rankings of the Bennett as well as Dixon and Cronin - who are rumored to be the two candidates in the running now - in overall pace:

* Tony Bennett - 350th
* Jamie Dixon - 225th
* Mick Cronin - 334th

If you take out Dixon's TCU teams (which have been higher tempo, I will give them that) his last 5 years at Pitt averaged 310th overall in pace.

Cronin averaged 63 possessions per game this year, Bennett averaged 59. Is the extra four possessions of speed really worth going from one of the top 10 coaches in the game to a guy who hasn't made it through the first weekend in 7 years?
 
Kelvin Sampson's name should have been in the UCLA search imo (but if they ain't writing the big check then maybe that was just me thinking it). Cronin and Dixon didn't do much for me. I will say Dixon surprised me at TCU...so my opinion of him went up....he had some good Pitt teams but they were often dreadful in the Tourney.
 
Goose said:
And this is where UCLA completely loses me. I can understand wanting a particular style (God, for years I screamed for the Nugs to always go up tempo no matter what), but they're more worried about the perception of a style than actual. I have no doubt that you're right and Bennett wasn't at the top of their list because of his style (although waiting for the F4 to end was a concern too), but over the last 5 years here are the rankings of the Bennett as well as Dixon and Cronin - who are rumored to be the two candidates in the running now - in overall pace:

* Tony Bennett - 350th
* Jamie Dixon - 225th
* Mick Cronin - 334th

If you take out Dixon's TCU teams (which have been higher tempo, I will give them that) his last 5 years at Pitt averaged 310th overall in pace.

Cronin averaged 63 possessions per game this year, Bennett averaged 59. Is the extra four possessions of speed really worth going from one of the top 10 coaches in the game to a guy who hasn't made it through the first weekend in 7 years?
Click to expand...
Yep.

fwiw, though, most of the speculation I've been skimming the past day or so has been that UCLA still lands Dixon and that once that happens it will open up VA Tech's ability to land Cronin.

And the other factor with UCLA and how they like to market is that Dixon more looks the part for an LA photo shoot & PR campaign than Cronin does. Dixon's got a bit of that Pat Riley personal image. (I strongly believe that looking the part is a big reason that Lavin and Alford got hired there in the past.)
 
Buffnik said:
Yep.

fwiw, though, most of the speculation I've been skimming the past day or so has been that UCLA still lands Dixon and that once that happens it will open up VA Tech's ability to land Cronin.

And the other factor with UCLA and how they like to market is that Dixon more looks the part for an LA photo shoot & PR campaign than Cronin does. Dixon's got a bit of that Pat Riley personal image. (I strongly believe that looking the part is a big reason that Lavin and Alford got hired there in the past.)
Click to expand...

Oh the image is 100% a factor. It's UCLA. They just cant' get out of their own way.

And for the record, I like the Dixon hire. The only way that you can view it as a bad hire is if you completely bungle the process, offer the best coach in the game a paycut to come work for you, float tons of names that are elite without coming close to landing them and then take an extra 72 hours or so to get your coach of choice because you're too cheap to just pay his buyout.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top