Hire Lavin & Toledo = Get Inducted Into UCLA Hall Of Fame?

by Nestor on Sep 3, 2008 7:52 PM PDT

These are good days to be a Bruin fan.

Our basketball program is back where it belongs. Hope is back in the world of UCLA football. UCLA baseball is on a steady rise. Rest of our powerhouse athletic programs are humming along. Things are good. For this Dan Guerrerro deserves a ton of credit. He will get lots more once we start to getting a total picture on the Neuheisel era in next few years.

Yes we still have issues to address such as the renovation of Pauley Pavillion, which we are keeping an eye on. But I still have hope that DG and his staff will do what they can to move that process along. We will see. Still don't have a lot of things to be concerned about these days about actions taking place in Morgan Center.

Until today when Morgan Center announced Pete Dalis as a member of the 2008 Hall of Fame Class. The rest of the 2008 inductees are Traci Arkenberg, women's soccer; Leah Homma, gymnastics; Kurt Krumpholz, men's swimming/water polo; Robert Seaman, men's track & field; Jackie Tobian-Steinmann, women's golf coach; Eric Turner, football; and Todd Zeile, baseball (official release here).

But someone answer me this question.

How can Peter Dalis be inducted into the UCLA Hall of Fame after hiring an incompetent fool who methodically destroyed the greatest program in the history of college basketball and failed to do anything about it?

How can Peter Dalis be inducted into the UCLA Hall of Fame for after botching one major head coaching searches after another resulting in the embarrassment of 1988 (when UCLA's name was bandied around infront of the entire nation before settling on Jim Harrick) or the one from 1994 when he conducted a joke football head coaching search by settling on Bob Toledo?

During Dalis's tenure UCLA's two major program continued to slid downhill resulting in the dark years of Lavin and Toledo with no end in sight.

So why did UCLA induct Peter Dalis into our athletic hall of fame?

GO BRUINS.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 18 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I saw this earlier today

and was shocked. This must have been part of his deal to retire.

by ryebreadraz on Sep 3, 2008 8:28 PM PDT 0 recs

When it comes to Dalis...

Mom puts it best: If you can’t say something nice about someone, say nothing at all.
…
…
(crickets)
…
…

by bruinhoo on Sep 3, 2008 10:39 PM PDT 0 recs

Why?

Maybe it’s because he hand picked CTS.

by bornagainbruin on Sep 4, 2008 7:06 AM PDT 0 recs

I don't get it

Some years ago I got free tickets to a UCLA basketball game from a Trojan I worked with. She got them through Pete Dalis’ office. Very suspicious. Puts his hiring track record in a whole new light.

The good news is that game was against USC and we spanked them by 30.

A coach is someone who can give correction without causing resentment. John Wooden

by MexiBruin on Sep 4, 2008 8:52 AM PDT 0 recs

I have always been very critical of PD

Its not the bad hires so much, as his total lack of vision. He did everything on the cheap, had no vision to expand and improve the athletic. He was an absolutely terrible leader who did nothing to move UCLA athletics into the future.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Sep 4, 2008 9:49 AM PDT 0 recs

"The Accountant" In The Hall Of Fame?

Well, he WAS a famously bad AD.

by bru79 on Sep 4, 2008 10:07 AM PDT 0 recs

Dalis was over his head

His experience prior to being AD was running the UCLA intermural programs, making sure there were enough referees for the big Sigma Chi – Beta flag football game. My understanding is that he was made AD for the express purpose of weakening the athletic department and giving more power to the folks in Murphy Hall, namely vice chancellor Elwin Swenson. When Swenson left, the monkey was allowed to continue to run the zoo. His great accomplishment was balancing the budget. His handling of the major UCLA sports was abysmal. For one thing, he allowed Donahue to essentially “retire” without telling anybody for about 8 years. He allowed Neuheisel to get away and then hired the hack Bob Toledo as head coach. Don’t forget that he also hired Walt Hazzard without doing a major coaching search. He got lucky in that Harrick was able to win a title in ‘95, which wouldn’t have happened but for the Tarkanian/UNLV scandal that brought us Ed O’Bannon. And we know about Harrick’s ethical “challenges.” But perhaps the greatest shame of all is that the demise of the Olympic class men’s swimming and gymnastics programs came on his watch, all in the interest of balancing the budget. Putting him in the Hall of Fame shows that all it takes is the ability to keep the job for a long period of time – how you do the job is irrelevant.

by bruin7982 on Sep 4, 2008 11:06 AM PDT 0 recs

Amen

Well said. It’s a crying shame that world-class men’s gymnastics and swimming programs were allowed to die unceremonial deaths.

Maybe “Dalis” was an acronym for Dumb-Ass Lame Intramural Shyster?

by Bruinut on Sep 4, 2008 12:18 PM PDT up 0 recs

Ho-hum

Gymnastics, swimming AND rowing were cut. I have a more personal reason to hate Pete “Rotten Schlong” Dalis than anyone here. No creativity, no clue, no skills. Just a waste of taxpayer money.

by tasser10 on Sep 4, 2008 12:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

"Rotten Schlong"

A most unsettling image. Not sure I want to know the origin of this nickname.

I feel for you. A creative, or even competent, administrator would have found a way to share funding equitably for men and women, and keep these three strong programs.

Hall of Fame? Really?

by Bruinut on Sep 4, 2008 1:21 PM PDT up 0 recs

I have a new nickname

for him every time his name gets brought up. And it will almost always be a derisive allusive to his first name “Peter”. Sorry for the distasteful imagery, but that is what his name brings out in me.

by tasser10 on Sep 4, 2008 3:13 PM PDT up 0 recs

Derisive allusion

is what I meant to say

by tasser10 on Sep 4, 2008 3:14 PM PDT up 0 recs

Dalis

is like Steve Lavin and Tom Hansen.

by bluestreet on Sep 4, 2008 2:14 PM PDT 0 recs

For what Dalis did

He’s lucky he walked away healthy, pocket full of $$$pension etc. In some South American countries, they would have made him wear the " Columbian necktie " as his retirement gift.

by Htse005 on Sep 4, 2008 6:54 PM PDT 0 recs

Just Curious

I, too, am not a Dalis fan. CTS and CHS are enough to disqualify anyone from the Hall of Fame.

But, I wonder how many of the 102 were won during his term. Anyone know? Could that be the reason he was selected? ?And,who makes the selection? Finally, does he remember birthdays and send cards. That seems to be important.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 4, 2008 11:15 PM PDT 0 recs

39 titles under his watch

and 102 conference titles.

by ryebreadraz on Sep 4, 2008 11:43 PM PDT up 0 recs

ryebreadraz is right ...

39 nine of the first to 100 came under his watch, as did the building of the Morgan Center and the Acosta Center and probably other facility building and improvements.

I’m not trying to defend Dalis’ induction, I felt like Nestor felt when I read it, but rye makes the case.

There is also the longevity factor. Honestly, I’m stunned that Terry Donahue is in the college football hall of fame, but due to his longevity, he is (I believe — at least he was) the all time winningest pac 10 coach in terms of conference wins.

One thing in Pete’s defense — he had to deal with a certain type of superior. I don’t think he ever went against Charles Young and Pete Blackman — so from their point of view he did a good job.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Sep 5, 2008 10:43 AM PDT up 0 recs

This is sort of the equivalent of Pete Rose

I recognize Rose’s skills which were superior to about everyone else’s. But I don’t think he’s entitled to be in the Hall of Fame because of the other part of his legacy.

Dalis presided over the two greatest debacles in UCLA sports history — the disintegration of our basketball and football programs. That disqualifies him for Hall of Fame consideration in my opinion, no matter what else he accomplished. To his supporters, I ask this — would you vote him into the HOF if it were proven that he was the gunman on the grassy knoll? Some bad things outweigh the good things.

by Fox 71 on Sep 5, 2008 5:56 PM PDT 0 recs