At the Salary Guerrero is Taking Down: UCLA Should Be Getting Excellence, Not Luck
-Bumped. BN Eds.
In football, my sense is that UCLA has not been relevant on the national scene since the fumble in the Miami game. So when it was time to replace Bob Toledo, the bar for a suitable hire was pretty low. Simply find somebody who could make us relevant again- didn't have to be in the BCS title game every year, just make us part of the BCS equation on a regular basis. And yet DG went under the bar with Karl Dorrell, a totally untested member of the family.
When it was time to replace Karl Dorrell, the bar for a suitable hire was again low. Not only were we not part of the BCS equation, we weren't even part of the Pac-10 equation. Simply find us somebody who could make us relevant again in the Pac-10, and then move us back to the BCS discussion. And DG again went under the bar by hiring Rick Neuheisel, another member of the family, and tying him down with DG's hand picked coordinators.
When it was time to replace Rick Neuheisel, the bar for a suitable hire was again low. We were still not part of the BCS equation, we weren't part of the Pac-10 equation, and we were getting blown out by $C. Simply find us somebody who could make us competitive in every game, relevant in the Pac-10, and get us back at some point to the BCS discussion. And DG again went under the bar by hiring Jim Mora, who has no meaningful experience at the college level, and was run out of town after 1 year in his most recent NFL gig.
If Jim Mora does turn the program around, it will not be because DG made a competent search. It will because DG was lucky. At the salary DG is taking down (highest in the Pac-12), we should be getting excellence competence, not luck.
In basketball, the expectations are completely different, and rightfully so. The last time our team was revelant on the national stage was Kevin Love's season. That is not ancient history. And yet since that time we have morphed into a program where the discussion has become about whether winning the Pac-12 regular season would get us into the dance, or whether we would need to win the tourney and get the automatic slot. After last night (losing to the next to worst team in the conference, coupled with Cal winning in Seattle), we can forget about winning the Pac-12 regular season. So now we are down to talking about our chances of winning the conference tourney, and thereby sneaking into the dance. Let me spell out after the jump why we need to get rid of Chianti NOW before he is position to make another dumb decision with regards to hiring of a new hoops coach.
For me, there are 5 fabled college basketball programs in the country- UCLA, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky and North Carolina. We are the best public university in the second largest city in the country, with plenty of talent in our backyard and beyond, and with our history, we should be in the mix every season. You can bet that the other 4 schools on this list don't talk about whether they can win the conference and hope to get in the dance, whether they have to win the conference tourney to get in the dance, or similar topic. They talk every year about whether they will be in the final 4, or whether it will be a major disappointing year because they got knocked out in the elite 8. That used to be the discussion we could reasonably have also. We need to get back to that level.
Back in the day, I would have added Indiana to the list. But they have been down so long, that people don't think of them at the start of the season as an automatic program to be reckoned with. If we keep going on our current path, in a few years people will say "UCLA. Didn't they used to have a good basketball team?"
Given where we are, and the reasonable expectations we should have for basketball, we need a coach who can bring us back to the level where being in the dance is a given, not a hope for, and the question is final four or "only" elite eight. This is not like fottball, where we wanted to compete in the conference and hope to play for the national championship in special years. And yet in football, with the bar lower, DG came under the bar time after time. It is pretty clear based on recent experience, that Ben Howland is not the coach to get us back to where we should be in basketball. Otherwise, we would still be there.
One down year is possible. More than that? No. So the athletic director will be making a basketball hire at some point. If DG can't hire a football coach with a low bar, how could he possibly hire a basketball coach with a high bar? He would be under the bar for sure. And we, the long suffering alums and fans, would pay the price, as would the student-athletes who devote their time to the university for the honor of playing in front of ever decreasing crowds.
Dan Guerrero must go. And now.
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.
27 comments
|
8 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
To recap: Since Guerrero was hired as AD in 2002
he has precided over the worst 10 year stretch of UCLA football in over 60 years.
If that weren’t bad enough, he has, concurrently, precided over the worst 3 1/2 years of UCLA basketball in over 60 years.
If that weren’t horrific enough, he is the highest paid AD in the Pac12 and one of the highest paid ADs in the entire country.
What am I missing here? Why is this guy still our AD?
Gene Block.
Nothing else needs to be said . . .
by orlandobruin on Jan 20, 2012 9:08 AM PST up reply actions
I am still waiting to see a list of events ...
… where Block shows up in public. From what I hear Block only shows up in closed door events surrounded by lackies.
It sure seems that way
Since he is so enamored of the Medical Center, maybe he would relate more to the following-
Danectomy- Removal of an unwanted appendage from Morgan Center
by islandbruin on Jan 20, 2012 11:07 AM PST up reply actions
Appropriately named
Geno is blocking all attempts to make UCLA relevant in the sports scene with his indifference.
Quibble over numbers
I’d say that at one-third DG’s salary, UCLA deserves competence. At DG’s current salary, UCLA deserves excellence.
Great post, islandbruin.
This begs the obvious question:
Did DG learn from his most recent football hiring failure to prepare IN ADVANCE for the possible need for a replacement basketball coach should the need arise, or is he completely blind to this forseeable contingency? I naturally suppose the latter . . . I wish I were wrong. But if I am correct, and Dan is busy planning wine trips, what the hell is he doing running our athletic program into the ground? We are BEGGING for accountability . . . and our collective voice continues to be ignored.
And “oh by the way,” as a public employee, we’re all paying this guy’s salary with our tax money . .. even you trogan and cal trolls! How does that taste?
Remember
Chianti wasn’t sure if he wanted to fire Neuheisel after 0-50 because in his mind we were in the hunt for a Rose Bowl championship. Do you think this guy has a contingency plan?
He doesn't blame Howland
he blames the roster. He thinks the roster just needs time to gel. His other excuse is that they’re not playing at home.
The guy clearly has decidophobia. Yes, that’s a word.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Overall we'd be better off
by hiring an unheralded Division II Athletic Director, pay him 1/3rd of Guerrero’s salary, cross our fingers and hope for the best. Performance outlook would be no worse than where we are now. Fiscally, we’d be much better off. I’m sure the UC system could find something useful to do with an extra $400K anually.
We might be better off
but that would not be a smart thing to do. This is UCLA, the athletic program with the most national championships, hall-of-famers, you name it. You need someone with experience running big time programs with national exposure.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
LOL
At least Dan is good for gallows humor
by islandbruin on Jan 20, 2012 11:08 AM PST up reply actions
Does anyone know what type of player Dan was in college?
Was he more of a guy that was just content to be on the team or was he someone that hated failure more than he enjoyed success? It seems to me that he was more of the former than the latter… and just sucked up to the right people to finally get to where he is.
Rick was fired partly because of the fired Dan campaign.
If you want Dan fired, I think you have to have a fire Block campaign. They always dump their underlings to save themselves.
That makes sense
but it’s a tough sell. Block is responsible for lots of things, and one (maybe more, but surely one) is underperforming. Maybe some of his other responsibilities are being handled well. Chianti Dan, on the other hand, is responsible for only one things – athletics. He is failing at handling the only thing he’s responsible for.
There is a more obvious case for firing Chianti Dan.
Block?
How does the general public even know he’s handling things well? Performance measures are so indirect and take even longer to determine than most positions. We wait five years and then look at rankings? Oversight of some measure projects and talent brought to the university may be a good sign.
But I agree in these times bringing pressure to fire him over the sports programs will be a tough sell. Financial concerns rank #1 in today’s world.
Funny, I was just thinking about Indiana...
…and then you addressed that a paragraph later. I agree with that, too. Great post.

by 



















