UCLA Basketball in trouble!

[KaibabKat]

Last decade averages:

Sagarin Ranking:
51 Tennessee
53 UCLA

Pomeroy Ranking:
52 Tennessee
55 UCLA

2018 average attendance per game:

16,209 Tennessee
8,619 UCLA

[MrBug708]

That's a much better look for Barnes than what happened.

[Beachcat97]

Last decade averages:

Sagarin Ranking:
51 Tennessee
53 UCLA

Pomeroy Ranking:
52 Tennessee
55 UCLA

2018 average attendance per game:

16,209 Tennessee
8,619 UCLA

That's some crazy shit. UCLA has fallen further than I realized.

[NYCat]

[Beachcat97]

Wilkes and Hands were expected, not Brown. Well, Cronin will have his work cut out.

[MrBug708]

It's that or a JC

[U.P. Zona Fan]

Ah, is it effort in the classroom that is the issue?

Maybe efforting isn't one of his strong suits?

[Beachcat97]

It's always crazy to me when any UCLA athlete turns out to have serious academic shortcomings. That is arguably the top public school in the damn world. Anyone who gets in as a freshman is presumed to be a first-rate student. I actually think the basketball coach makes a mistake when he recruits guys who *aren't* better than average students. You don't have to compromise those academic standards to get a Moses Brown. There are plenty of first-rate prep athletes just in CA who would be great on that team. Whatever happened to the Matas, Aboyas, and Rolls?

[MrBug708]

Ah, is it effort in the classroom that is the issue?

Maybe efforting isn't one of his strong suits?

He also was suspended for a conduct violation for a game as well this year. Which is usually code for fair drug test for the third time

[FreeSpiritCat]

It's always crazy to me when any UCLA athlete turns out to have serious academic shortcomings. That is arguably the top public school in the damn world. Anyone who gets in as a freshman is presumed to be a first-rate student. I actually think the basketball coach makes a mistake when he recruits guys who *aren't* better than average students. You don't have to compromise those academic standards to get a Moses Brown. There are plenty of first-rate prep athletes just in CA who would be great on that team. Whatever happened to the Matas, Aboyas, and Rolls?

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

[Beachcat97]

It's always crazy to me when any UCLA athlete turns out to have serious academic shortcomings. That is arguably the top public school in the damn world. Anyone who gets in as a freshman is presumed to be a first-rate student. I actually think the basketball coach makes a mistake when he recruits guys who *aren't* better than average students. You don't have to compromise those academic standards to get a Moses Brown. There are plenty of first-rate prep athletes just in CA who would be great on that team. Whatever happened to the Matas, Aboyas, and Rolls?

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

Fair enough, but even if so, it's not as though Cal and Michigan are head and shoulders above UCLA. The three schools are incredibly difficult to get into, and they all draw huge numbers of international applicants. My point is that anyone on scholarship at one of these schools should be a pretty good student.

[MrBug708]

It's always crazy to me when any UCLA athlete turns out to have serious academic shortcomings. That is arguably the top public school in the damn world. Anyone who gets in as a freshman is presumed to be a first-rate student. I actually think the basketball coach makes a mistake when he recruits guys who *aren't* better than average students. You don't have to compromise those academic standards to get a Moses Brown. There are plenty of first-rate prep athletes just in CA who would be great on that team. Whatever happened to the Matas, Aboyas, and Rolls?

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

Are there many publications that rate Michigan higher than UCLA?

[Beachcat97]

It's always crazy to me when any UCLA athlete turns out to have serious academic shortcomings. That is arguably the top public school in the damn world. Anyone who gets in as a freshman is presumed to be a first-rate student. I actually think the basketball coach makes a mistake when he recruits guys who *aren't* better than average students. You don't have to compromise those academic standards to get a Moses Brown. There are plenty of first-rate prep athletes just in CA who would be great on that team. Whatever happened to the Matas, Aboyas, and Rolls?

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

Are there many publications that rate Michigan higher than UCLA?

No. But again, among those schools in the top 10, you're talking about a hair's breadth of difference for the most part. If a school is rated that high, it's a world-class institution, period.

U of Michigan is indeed elite, though. Across the board, I'd say UCLA is a little higher, especially if you include grad schools, but UofM is up there with UVA, UNC and UT-Austin.

[dirtbags]

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

there was (is) more than a fair amount of student angst in the east bay when one of the ranking services put ucla above cal, the crown jewel of the UC system, earlier this school year.

[Beachcat97]

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

there was (is) more than a fair amount of student angst in the east bay when one of the ranking services put ucla above cal, the crown jewel of the UC system, earlier this school year.

UCLA has been getting more international applicants, thus elevating its status worldwide. It's not as though Berkeley has plummeted in the rankings; they're obviously right up there. These squabbles over who's ahead are very silly. If you get into UCLA, Berkeley or UofM, you did incredibly well in high school.

[MrBug708]

It's always crazy to me when any UCLA athlete turns out to have serious academic shortcomings. That is arguably the top public school in the damn world. Anyone who gets in as a freshman is presumed to be a first-rate student. I actually think the basketball coach makes a mistake when he recruits guys who *aren't* better than average students. You don't have to compromise those academic standards to get a Moses Brown. There are plenty of first-rate prep athletes just in CA who would be great on that team. Whatever happened to the Matas, Aboyas, and Rolls?

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

Are there many publications that rate Michigan higher than UCLA?

No. But again, among those schools in the top 10, you're talking about a hair's breadth of difference for the most part. If a school is rated that high, it's a world-class institution, period.

U of Michigan is indeed elite, though. Across the board, I'd say UCLA is a little higher, especially if you include grad schools, but UofM is up there with UVA, UNC and UT-Austin.

I agree, I've never heard Michigan mentioned though. Cal yes, UVa on occasion, just never Michigan, though I agree those are probably the elite ones

[dirtbags]

UCLA has been getting more international applicants, thus elevating its status worldwide. It's not as though Berkeley has plummeted in the rankings; they're obviously right up there. These squabbles over who's ahead are very silly. If you get into UCLA, Berkeley or UofM, you did incredibly well in high school.

agree, but being ranked below another UC just doesn't (can't) happen at cal. i think the international applicants (and big alumni $$$) bolstered usc's academics over the last 20 years or so. at cal, i blame the tech industry. the very best and brightest seem to want to go haas or EECS - or both - instead of like, the humanities or one of the other stem fields. ucla doesn't do undergrad business or have tons of tech money influencing fields of study, extracurriculars, partnerships, funding, etc. i'm overstating things yeah, but it grates my nerves.

[Beachcat97]

UCLA has been getting more international applicants, thus elevating its status worldwide. It's not as though Berkeley has plummeted in the rankings; they're obviously right up there. These squabbles over who's ahead are very silly. If you get into UCLA, Berkeley or UofM, you did incredibly well in high school.

agree, but being ranked below another UC just doesn't (can't) happen at cal. i think the international applicants (and big alumni $$$) bolstered usc's academics over the last 20 years or so. at cal, i blame the tech industry. the very best and brightest seem to want to go haas or EECS - or both - instead of like, the humanities or one of the other stem fields. ucla doesn't do undergrad business or have tons of tech money influencing fields of study, extracurriculars, partnerships, funding, etc. i'm overstating things yeah, but it grates my nerves.

Did you go to Berkeley, dirtbags? Or do you work there?

[dirtbags]

grad school + inlaws.

[UAEebs86]

1 UCLA
2 Berkeley
3 UVa
4 Michigan

According to:

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/ra ... top-public" target="_blank

[midnightx]

It's always crazy to me when any UCLA athlete turns out to have serious academic shortcomings. That is arguably the top public school in the damn world. Anyone who gets in as a freshman is presumed to be a first-rate student. I actually think the basketball coach makes a mistake when he recruits guys who *aren't* better than average students. You don't have to compromise those academic standards to get a Moses Brown. There are plenty of first-rate prep athletes just in CA who would be great on that team. Whatever happened to the Matas, Aboyas, and Rolls?

As a public school I would rate Cal-Berkeley and Michigan higher.

Are there many publications that rate Michigan higher than UCLA?

Michigan undergrad is generally viewed much more favorably than UCLA nationwide. UCLA undergrad is viewed as elite by UCLA alums, and clearly the school still has relatively prestigious grad school programs, but UCLA is below Michigan, Virginia and clearly UC Berkeley undergrad. Anyone living in LA can attest that UCLA undergrad graduates are generally unimpressive. Let's put it this way, I would never pay out-of-state tuition to send a kid to UCLA undergrad.

[Beachcat97]

Michigan undergrad is generally viewed much more favorably than UCLA nationwide. UCLA undergrad is viewed as elite by UCLA alums, and clearly the school still has relatively prestigious grad school programs, but UCLA is below Michigan, Virginia and clearly UC Berkeley undergrad. Anyone living in LA can attest that UCLA undergrad graduates are generally unimpressive. Let's put it this way, I would never pay out-of-state tuition to send a kid to UCLA undergrad.

This is the impression I've gotten too. Still, though, I wouldn't knock UCLA undergrad so hard. I worked in their English department for a few years and got a pretty good sense of both the caliber of students admitted as freshmen and the quality of undergrad course offerings.

The pissing match over which of these schools is best is sort of boring. Many students admitted to UCLA as freshmen also get into Berkeley. I don't know if UofM and UVA draw nationally the way that these flagship UCs do, but in terms of quality, you can't do much better than the schools mentioned in this thread.

[midnightx]

Michigan undergrad is generally viewed much more favorably than UCLA nationwide. UCLA undergrad is viewed as elite by UCLA alums, and clearly the school still has relatively prestigious grad school programs, but UCLA is below Michigan, Virginia and clearly UC Berkeley undergrad. Anyone living in LA can attest that UCLA undergrad graduates are generally unimpressive. Let's put it this way, I would never pay out-of-state tuition to send a kid to UCLA undergrad.

This is the impression I've gotten too. Still, though, I wouldn't knock UCLA undergrad so hard. I worked in their English department for a few years and got a pretty good sense of both the caliber of students admitted as freshmen and the quality of undergrad course offerings.

The pissing match over which of these schools is best is sort of boring. Many students admitted to UCLA as freshmen also get into Berkeley. I don't know if UofM and UVA draw nationally the way that these flagship UCs do, but in terms of quality, you can't do much better than the schools mentioned in this thread.

I hear you. Having previously lived in the LA for over a decade, and then in other parts of the country, outside of LA, I have found Michigan to have a more favorable view from people outside of LA, and more prestigious by students looking to attend good state universities. That said, both would look good on a resume.

[ASUHATER!]

Michigan undergrad is generally viewed much more favorably than UCLA nationwide. UCLA undergrad is viewed as elite by UCLA alums, and clearly the school still has relatively prestigious grad school programs, but UCLA is below Michigan, Virginia and clearly UC Berkeley undergrad. Anyone living in LA can attest that UCLA undergrad graduates are generally unimpressive. Let's put it this way, I would never pay out-of-state tuition to send a kid to UCLA undergrad.

This is the impression I've gotten too. Still, though, I wouldn't knock UCLA undergrad so hard. I worked in their English department for a few years and got a pretty good sense of both the caliber of students admitted as freshmen and the quality of undergrad course offerings.

The pissing match over which of these schools is best is sort of boring. Many students admitted to UCLA as freshmen also get into Berkeley. I don't know if UofM and UVA draw nationally the way that these flagship UCs do, but in terms of quality, you can't do much better than the schools mentioned in this thread.

I hear you. Having previously lived in the LA for over a decade, and then in other parts of the country, outside of LA, I have found Michigan to have a more favorable view from people outside of LA, and more prestigious by students looking to attend good state universities. That said, both would look good on a resume.

I seriously considered going yo Michigan out of high school since I knew it would look good. I went to Arizona since I got a scholarship. I definitely would've gotten into Michigan but I would've had to pay my own way since I wouldn't have had a scholarship or help from my parents. But there was a period there where the final 3 schools I was considering we're Arizona, NAU and Michigan.

[Longhorned]

Ratings are overrated. I wouldn't want anything to do with four years of my young life at UM and that dark campus.

[Beachcat97]

Ratings are overrated. I wouldn't want anything to do with four years of my young life at UM and that dark campus.

Dark campus, yes, but man, there aren't too many schools with better sports across the board.

Turning us back to the thread's intended topic, UCLA would be up there too, and I believe there's even a rating system out there now that accounts for a school's entire athletics program/culture. I would imagine Michigan, UCLA, Texas, Florida, Ohio State, Stanford, maybe Wisconsin, maybe Arizona...not sure which others.

But the beauty of places like Michigan and UCLA is that they tend to have elite athletics to go with their stellar academics. It may not always be in football and hoops, but chances are they're among the nation's best in several other sports.

[Newportcat]

But Cronin is at least as good as Alford, and he's probably going to give UCLA tougher, more disciplined teams.

It's not an A-level hire, but it's probably a B/B- level.

Let’s say wiretaps were published in January and Sean Miller is on tape talking about money for recruits so UA goes ahead and fires him mid-season....

If here we were in mid-April and Mick Cronin was our coach, would you be happy?

Personally, I’d be less than thrilled, but I’d also be pleading patience. Overall, I’d give the hire a C-.

I would fucking hate this hire and I am never patience as you well know Chi. Thankfully, we would never hire him or someone this underwhelming

Tim Floyd.

At the time in 2009 Tim Floyd was a much better hire then Mick Cronin is now.

[MrBug708]

But Cronin is at least as good as Alford, and he's probably going to give UCLA tougher, more disciplined teams.

It's not an A-level hire, but it's probably a B/B- level.

Let’s say wiretaps were published in January and Sean Miller is on tape talking about money for recruits so UA goes ahead and fires him mid-season....

If here we were in mid-April and Mick Cronin was our coach, would you be happy?

Personally, I’d be less than thrilled, but I’d also be pleading patience. Overall, I’d give the hire a C-.

I would fucking hate this hire and I am never patience as you well know Chi. Thankfully, we would never hire him or someone this underwhelming

Tim Floyd.

At the time in 2009 Tim Floyd was a much better hire then Mick Cronin is now.

You've doubled down hard on this to the point where you are saying stupid shit for effect Floyd was 38–33 in conference when he left USC in 2009, including the afterglow of OJ Mayo.

[Beachcat97]

Think Cronin vs. Floyd is a toss up.

[MrBug708]

A comparison to Floyd would be Hoiberg, considering they are both failed Bulls coaches and also had success at Iowa State.

Floyd ended up at UTEP after USC.

[Newportcat]

At the time in 2009 Tim Floyd was a much better hire then Mick Cronin is now.[/quote]

You've doubled down hard on this to the point where you are saying stupid shit for effect Floyd was 38–33 in conference when he left USC in 2009, including the afterglow of OJ Mayo.[/quote]

USC is a much harder job then cincinatti

Cincinatti is actually a great job for where it is as the school as strong fan support and a history of success and is now in a weak conference

USC can’t draw shit for fans and has no tradition

Floyd also at that point had established himself as a strong west coast recruiter

Now quickly after he turned down the Arizona job went all the crap on him came out so thankfully we did not hire him.

But at the time of potentially hiring him, I think he was a better option then mick Cronin

If you can have a winning conference record at USC, with the resources at Arizona you should do well

Good news is we ended up with Sean Miller who is a 10 times better hire then mick Cronin

[Beachcat97]

Cronin is a better coach than Alford, so I’d imagine the rivalry could heat up again.

[Newportcat]

Cronin is a better coach than Alford, so I’d imagine the rivalry could heat up again.

Being a better coach then Alford is not saying much

I honestly do not see this rivalry coming back in any great degree unless the sport changes. Teams change over too much nowadays so you don’t develop the Hatreds like I did back in the day

I remember hating Jason kapano and his stupid head band.

I really don’t even know who Moses brown is

College basketball is all about the tournament nowadays. Conference rivalries outside of duke vs UNC seem meaningless

I used to talk all sorts of shit to UCLA fans I knew about basketball, those days are long since over

I still hate UCLA but it’s nothing like it once was

[MrBug708]

If you can have a winning conference record at USC, with the resources at Arizona you should do well

You are starting to blend thoughts. By this thought, Cronin should do well since the "resources" at UCLA are 11x better at UCLA, than Cincinatti

[azgreg]

I have a feeling Cronin is going to be just fine at UCLA.

[Newportcat]

I have a feeling Cronin is going to be just fine at UCLA.

Most coaches should do just fine at UCLA

Question though is if Cronin can do better then just fine and be really good

Seems so doubtful

[Newportcat]

If you can have a winning conference record at USC, with the resources at Arizona you should do well

You are starting to blend thoughts. By this thought, Cronin should do well since the "resources" at UCLA are 11x better at UCLA, than Cincinatti

UCLA is a better job then cincinatti for sure, but not 11x times better

Cincinatti is a very good job

USC basketball is a very tough job

[Beachcat97]

So sad what happened with Rick Majerus. Gone way too soon. Hired at USC and then resigned shortly afterward. That would’ve been by far the best coach they’ve had. I’ve always wondered what a good coach could do with that program. They have all the same advantages as UCLA, without the lofty academic standards.

[Newportcat]

So sad what happened with Rick Majerus. Gone way too soon. Hired at USC and then resigned shortly afterward. That would’ve been by far the best coach they’ve had. I’ve always wondered what a good coach could do with that program. They have all the same advantages as UCLA, without the lofty academic standards.

Was really sad

They just have some structural issues such as terrible fan support, football school, difficult location for alumni to get to on a Thursday night, many other options etc

Just no one gives a shit there unless they are playing UCLA or us.

[MrBug708]

Lengthy summary by the Times about the coaching search

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la- ... Y8Vj1PHdVA" target="_blank

[Beachcat97]

Lengthy summary by the Times about the coaching search

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la- ... Y8Vj1PHdVA" target="_blank

My takeaway: Calipari played UCLA like a damn fiddle, and the guy they ended up with was not even among their initial large list of candidates.

Don't despair, UCLA fans. You get to be an underdog. Cronin is probably well suited for that role.

[enfuego]

This thread and title is a tad ironic given the elephant in the room, isn't it?

[Chicat]

This thread and title is a tad ironic given the elephant in the room, isn't it?

This thread and title go back a decade or more on the old site and what do we keep telling you about glass houses and walking around in assless chaps with nothing underneath enfuegito?

[MrBug708]

Rod Palmer hired as an assistant for UCLA

[NYCat]

[Jefe]

Latest on Shareef? Going to be healthy/eligible?

[Beachcat97]

Probably just not expected to start right away. Think Shareef is a little project-y.

[MrBug708]

Latest on Shareef? Going to be healthy/eligible?

Probably not an accurate lineup. Shareef is healthy allegedly, but he's not really a threat to start

[MrBug708]

And DG will likely get a contract extension...haha

[Jefe]

So Shareef "gets" our Assistant fired but he's good to play for UCLA?