Another one bites the dust...
I'm currently in a monumental state of confusion.
My impression when I sent in my UCLA Statement of Intent to Register was that I was signing up to be a fan of a successful sports program.
Far be it for Ben Howland and Rick Neuheisel to grant my wish.
Yeah, UCLA is extremely successful in all the small sports.
But the ones on TV, the ones that the nation sees weekly, those ones have become laughable.
Not only have the UCLA basketball and football programs been unsuccessful over the past four years, they've been utterly embarrassing.
And in my opinion, it's safe to say that lack of success derives from a lack of great coaching, the type that our basketball program is used to at least.
So on this Monday morning, as I learn that Rick Neuheisel is deservedly fired for his mockery of a coaching performance during his tenure at UCLA, while Ohio State lands the biggest fish in the coaching pond in Urban Meyer, my thoughts are simple.
Four years ago, UCLA faithful thought that big fish was Neuheisel. But after amassing a record of 21-28 in four seasons, with none of those 21 victories coming against USC and only one coming against a top 10 opponent, we have learned that Rick is an undeserving guppy in a deep pond.
Why don't we get the Urban Meyer's of the world?
It seems that every time UCLA is on the coaching search, which is about every five years, they're either giving someone like Neuheisel a second chance or giving a guy like Karl Dorrell his first chance.
It's over. No more first or second or third chances.
When I say 'the real,' I mean a proven winner with a big name. Someone whose hiring sends shockwaves throughout the nation. Someone that we can sign up to pay money we don't have because we know they are going to generate money unforeseen in UCLA football history.
That last idea may be a bit of a stretch, but can you feel the drama in my sentences?
UCLA can't afford to make another mistake when choosing its next coach. The program, more than anything, needs stability, and stability comes from winning.
You win, you keep your job.
You win, you garner respect.
You win, kids want to play for you.
Winning solves everything, and UCLA has a boatload of problems in desperate need of solving.
I don't care if Matt Barkley and USC are the best team in the world, losing 50-0 to your crosstown rivals, the university that has access to the same recruits that you do, is not only embarrassing, its horrifying.
That game was so bad that UCLA should forfeit its default appearance in the Pac-12 championship game. They don't deserve to be there and furthermore, Oregon might win 100-0.
There I go with the exaggerations again.
UCLA should look to the NFL to for its next hire. I doubt they'll be able to pluck any big names within the college ranks.
Names that come to mind are John Calipari, Coach K, Phil Jackson...wait, that's basketball!
My wires are all crossed!
I must say, it's easy to confuse Neuheisel with Howland these days.
UCLA football has never been considered an elite level program, but basketball has been considered the most elite for decades.
Howland is doing his part to negate that vision of the UCLA basketball program.
I will admit, after a shaky start last season, Howland and the Bruins were able to put together a decent end to the season. They lost a game they shouldn't have lost in the first round of the Pac-10 tournament, but they did make it to the NCAA tournament and win a game before losing to Michigan State.
The problem is, that's not good enough for UCLA.
I've always thought, from an unbiased perspective, that John Wooden transcended college basketball, meaning his accomplishments lie outside the normal realm of college basketball.
Despite John Wooden's 10 NCAA championships, UCLA has won one title since 1975.
Truly elite programs don't win one title every 36 years, which is why the unbiased part of my brain believes schools like Duke, which I despise, have far surpassed UCLA on the college basketball totem pole.
The unbiased part of my brain believes that.
But as they say, there are two parts to every brain.
I don't know who, but somebody says that.
My biased brain still has UCLA at the top of the college heap, but the Bruins status will continue to decline as long as Howland is in charge.
UCLA is 1-4 this season, including losses to Loyola Marymount and Middle Tennessee State, which is a good team, but should never beat UCLA in basketball.
The other two losses came against Kansas and Michigan, both of which are good, ranked teams.
But every loss, even against LMU and MTST. has been by at least 11 points.
They lost to MTST. by 20!
You could say it's our players, and I would agree totally.
But it's not Lazeric Jones' fault he's the starting point guard, Howland recruited him.
In no sport are coaches more responsible for the team they assemble than in college basketball.
Look at Coach Cal at Kentucky. He gets the best players every year, every time. That program will never be down as long as he is there.
That can't be said about Howland, which makes no sense, considering UCLA essentially sells itself.
Come play basketball at UCLA, the most storied university in all of college basketball, based in the sunniest place in America.
Oh yeah, and we're one of the best schools in the country.
What am I missing? Why aren't we getting the best recruiting classes every year?
People always say, "Well, Howland took UCLA to three straight Final Fours."
True, and that's remarkable.
But let's be clear, some of those players were recruited by Steve Lavin, not Ben Howland.
Kevin Love, although one of Howland's recruits, chose to come to UCLA rather than being convinced, as it was well-known that Love had always wanted to come to Westwood prior to Howland's arrival.
Howland did land Russell Westbrook, but did anybody really anticipate Westbrook being this good?
We didn't see the Westbrook we see now when he was at UCLA. I'm inclined to believe Howland got lucky in that situation, as I'm inclined to believe luck played a big part in Howland's Final Four trips.
That was undoubtedly more about the players and less about the coach, because since then, a trip to the Final Four has been a wish more than an expectation.
Now, not only is UCLA not getting the best players, the players they do get are either not as good as advertised or they're transferring.
Did anyone catch that UNLV-North Carolina game the other night? The one where Chase Stanback had 28 points and 10 rebounds, and Mike Moser had 16 points and 18 rebounds?
Both former UCLA players, both of whom transferred.
Some big decisions need to be made surrounding both the UCLA football and basketball programs.
The players don't look happy, the alumni aren't happy, and the fans aren't happy.
I hope UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero takes notice of what's happening, because if not, people will turn their attention to him shortly.
My attention is already there.
