I think this is all spot on, zg.zonagrad wrote:UCLA's location in LA is both a blessing and a curse. Yes, there's the Hollywood angle and fertile recruiting. But from a fan perspective, LA is a fickle, transplant town. The millions of people in LA don't have ties to SoCal. And certainly not UCLA. Not in the way the local fanbase in the state of Kentucky rallies around its programs. It's really why the SEC is so strong. There aren't a ton of professional teams interfering. The programs are tied so strongly to the states and the fanbase. Same is true for much of the Big 10, Big 12 and ACC.
For UCLA to fill Pauley, they need to be ranked in the top 10 and definite Final Four contender. It's not that way in so many other programs. And when the fan support is tepid for a team that may be fighting for a top 25 program, then the perception is the program isn't that great. And what coach wants to deal with that?
Having lived in/near L.A. for most of my life (save for the 5 years I was in Tucson), I've seen interest in and enthusiasm for UCLA hoops (and really, UCLA athletics more generally) decline steadily. One of the crazier memories was seeing Pauley half- or less-than-half full during the Howland years. Try to imagine what the home court games look like at Rupp or Allen or the Dean Smith Center in a year immediately after a FF. I mean, these arenas are out of control regardless of how the team is doing, which is really the point. But even amid UCLA's most recent period of sustained greatness, it was largely ignored in Los Angeles.
Maybe this is why it makes sense to roll the dice with an Earl Watson or Cameron Dollar or some other guy with UCLA ties. Someone who understands and respects UCLA's past may not be as affected by local media relegating UCLA hoops to page four of the sports page or a tertiary slot on local TV sports news.
