Dixon to UCLA?
- Thread starter DiehardPanther
- Start date
Gonzaga has three top 50 recruits coming in this year. THREE!! Top 50. It sure seems like Few is really comfortable there. I would have thought, if he wouldn't take the Oregon (alum) or UW job, he is not going to take the UCLA job.
That's part of my point. I'm not sure what they are. They have some good players, but they don't do anything particularly well or consistently--much the same as it was on the Artis-Young teams but with somewhat better personnel.
UCLA is swinging for the fences on Billy Donovan. Apparently, he might be fired by OKC. That would be a grand slam for UCLA if they can pull it off.
A move for more money and more commitment from the people above you is never a bad one.
The article that highlights this also cites the 5 candidates for the job..
Tony Bennet - no chance
Earl Watson - may be the worst hire ever
Mick Cronin - most reasonable
Chris Beard - not leaving Tech
Bill Donovan - shouldn't be mentioned with these coaches.
Let's get this straight, if Billy Donovan is actually a candidate, he should be on a list by himself. He should be first and it's not even a question. CBS cited these five and they nonchalantly but Donovan at the end of the list? That tells me they're trying to create buzz. That's it.
Also, the article says Donovan is on the hot seat. That's not true - a month ago they were negotiating an extension for him. A slump over the past month isn't putting him on the hot seat, especially when it's because his best player (PG13) hurt his shoulder.
Dixon and Cronin are the two top candidates. Donovan isn't a possibility for this dumpster fire of a program.
There was an initial list with a lot of big names, but after vetting, it was narrowed to 3 names. The only one who would take an interview was Calipari. What is a head scratcher is that if the vetting was to cull out those with questionable recruiting practices, how harsh could it have been if Calipari remained. Supposedly, the other two were Few and Bennett. But, they didn’t contact Bennett because UVA still is alive in the tourney. They want to name a coach this week.
Supposedly, there is another list if they don’t get a new coach this week and that list includes coaches still alive in the tourney: Bennett and Izzo. Izzo wasn’t on the first list because they thought he was a Hail Mary. The second list has more NBA coaches, but again the concern was they wanted to get it done this week so the first list didn’t have NBA coaches.
I think it has sunk in that this isn’t the UCLA of the Wooden years anymore, but it’s hard. Both of my friends went there during the Wooden years. Neither played basketball. Both played football; one also played baseball. But, both were ushers at Pauley during the Wooden era and recall when UCLA basketball was a dynasty.
But don't they realize during those Wooden years, they could have taught Jerry Tarkanian and Adolph Rupp, Bruce Pearl and Sean Miller course on cheating. They practically invented it with Sam Gilbert.
Now THIS is the type pf program that I thought Hoiberg would go after and vice versa.
Definitely the type of program, but it's not in the midwest so I never expected Hoiberg to be interested. His geographic profile is the most limited I've ever seen from any coach - born in Nebraska, went to school in Iowa, played in Indiana, Illinois and Minnesota, coached in Iowa, Illinois and now Nebraska.
...they're talking about Bill's son Luke
Izzo? He's beyond a Hail Mary for UCLA. No way he's on that list. He's turned down about a dozen NBA job offers in his time at MSU, he certainly wouldn't leave MSU for another college program. He's also 65 years old and has lived his entire life in Michigan, he loves the state and it loves him. There is no report mentioning this anywhere out there. Where did you come up with that?
Bennett? Maybe--although as long as UVA pays him what he's worth, which is now a lot more than it was last Friday, I would think he stays put.
His geographic profile is the most limited I've ever seen from any coach
How about Izzo? Entire life and career spent in one state.
Neither of UCLA’s options are sexy, but I’d be interested to see how Cronin can do our of Cincy. He’s a fantastic coach, but he’s limited in the type of player he can recruit to that school. I doubt UCLA fans would be excited by his grinding style, but to have to “settle” for a guy like that isn’t the end of the world
Musselman is outstanding, but he would have to change his approach to go to UCLA. Going all in on transfers isn’t going to work at a high academic school like they are, so unless he is confident that he can transition to taking mostly HS recruits, I don’t see it happening
One should not confuse high academics w CBB.
If I were a uclan fan I’d take him over Dixon everyday of the week.
Dixon would get them to the Sweet 16 within 3-4 years. The PAC 12 is weak and he would have them in the Top 4 of their conference. Is that good enough for their fanbase?
I agree that with Zona and Oregon down the timing is as favorable as it will ever be for UCLA to restore its place at the top of the PAC 12. That’s a big reason why this hire is so critical for them, and why JD is such a risky hire.
Really? According to Bill Walton, it's the best conference, then again, he is an idiot, what's next for Dixon after Ucla? Let me guess, Mississippi St.
I don't think it's risky at all. It might not have as high a ceiling as UCLA fans expect for the program, but I wouldn't call it a risk. If Dixon can go ~.500 in the B12 then he can easily be in the top-3 of the terrible P12.
UW was 17-4 in P12 games this year and was on the bubble. If things finally do dissolve for Miller at UA, then there's a giant power vacuum in that league.
Folks in this forum don’t seem to value a high floor coach .
That’s what Dixon is- a high floor coach.
He’s going to keep your program in the conversation- And make the dance regularly.
I miss being in the conversation.
Last edited:
What folks are you referring to? There were a few posters that said this already, including the handsome gentleman who started this thread.
I wouldn’t say Oregon is down actually. Had serious injury issues this year and still managed to get in the tournament and play well.
Altman is the best coach in that conference by a longshot and I would expect them to continue to recruit well and make the tournament almost every year.
It's been a decade since Jamie made it to the second weekend of the tourney. That's only going to fly for so long at most any major program.
He helped elevate both Pitt and TCU. Why wouldn't he elevate UCLA? There is a ton of talent out west still and even if he won't out-recruit Calipari, he won't have to.
Last edited:
Steve Alford made the dance regularly at UCLA too-4 of 6 years. 3 Sweet 16s in 6 years to boot.
UCLA is in a different conversation than the one you're talking about. They're in the conversation that, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, MSU, etc. are in.
UCLA isn't looking for a "high floor" coach. Those types don't cut it with the bluebloods, and like ND football, even though UCLA isn't what it once was, its still a blueblood. Making the dance and a couple of Sweet 16s will be seen as abject failure there. Don't take my word for it, ask Steve Alford. If you don;t buy it from him, talk to Steve Lavin.
Dixon is a coach with a low ceiling.
He hit "the wall" at PITT. His ceiling.
He's great for a developing program, he's affordable, and will do well until he has to begin recruiting and competing against the elite coaches and teams.
At that time is time for Dixon to get on his horse and ride out of town to another place or stay and flat line the program at that point!
"it's five o'clock somewhere"
Signed: Mr Buffett
Go PITT & CSU Rams!
Last edited:
UCLA won’t consider playing in the nit and getting knocked out of the ncaas as a 9 seed in the second week of the tournament as elevating their program...that’s Dixon territory, UCLA could have kept Alford if they were satisfied with that,
Pretty interesting assumption that Dixon will have the same level of talent at UCLA as he did at historic bottom dweller TCU?
It's a good gig despite the high expectations -- great location, ton of talent, "major" conference that is actually very winnable, newly upgraded top rate practice facilities.
Some other Pitt coach went to UCLA and went to three final fours. Maybe Howland is a little better than Dixon, depends who you ask, but it's still a place you can win.
He's going to have access to elite talent and he will win there. The question is whether he can win enough to be successful in the eyes of Bruin fans. Keep in mind, they don't hang banners for Final Fours there. Final Fours are pretty much necessary to hang on to a job there.
maybe Barnes can help with this
Jon RothsteinVerified account@JonRothstein
Sources: Jamie Dixon's candidacy for the head coaching vacancy at UCLA is dependent on whether or not his buyout can be reduced. Until that happens, the focus is on other candidates. Dixon is currently recruiting for TCU.
Jon RothsteinVerified account@JonRothstein
Sources: Jamie Dixon's candidacy for the head coaching vacancy at UCLA is dependent on whether or not his buyout can be reduced. Until that happens, the focus is on other candidates. Dixon is currently recruiting for TCU.
Then they’re going to keep firing every coach they hire because that’s not possible. UK and Duke haven’t made a F4 in the last four seasons. UNC went 8 years between F4s in 2009 and 2017. KU went 6 years between 2012 and 2018.
Since Howland’s 2008 F4, UCLA has won 8 tournament games in 11 seasons.
Similar threads
