[Updated w a POLL] Has Howland Earned the Right to Stay?
by KSBruin on Jan 21, 2012 3:00 PM PST
Email
Print- Bumped again for those who have noted voted in the poll yet. BN Eds.
-Bumped. We are also adding a little poll after the jump. BN Eds.
In simplest terms, there's been a debate in progress between two mindsets regarding our current basketball coach.
One: Howland did great things, he took us to three Final Fours, recruiting lately has been an issue but that happens everywhere, Howland's still the man who can and will return us to not only relevance, but consistent dominance once more.
The other: Howland did great things leading us to three Final Fours. However, his management of recruiting and management of scholarship players once on the team has been awful, the team has suffered, and he is unlikely to return us to national prominence.
In the postgame thread for the OSU game, a commenter posted this (emphasis mine):
...for many who think like me to be convinced Ben must go, we need much greater evidence that it’s him per se versus his recruiting, which i have definitely found wanting.
I’ve read the comments delineating errors in coaching, so regurgitating those on their own will not be enough. If i can be convinced with other facts about Howland’s coaching that prove his best seasons are irrevocably behind us, not only i would be convinced we need a change but i think many thousands of alumni would. The evidence to change the minds of those of us, alumni or not, who have faith in Howland, hasn’t been presented.
Here's what I present, with apologies for SBN making formatting lists and attempting to indent portions being a pain in the rear, and my not wanting to deal as it approaches midnight here:
Ben Howland through his three Final Four years: 126-37 77.3%
Ben Howland through his three Final Four years, not counting the first year post-Lavin: 115-28 80.4%
Ben Howland in only his three Final Four years: 97-17 85.1%
Ben Howland day one through OSU Thursday night: 192-88 68.6%
Ben Howland since his three Final Four years: 73-46 61.3%
Ben Howland since Shipp, DC, and PAA left: 47-37 56.0%
So...the winning percentages for all UCLA coaches since Wooden:
- 86.2% Gary Cunningham
- 85.2% Gene Bartow
- 85.1% Ben Howland's three Final Four years
- 80.4% Ben Howland seasons 2-5
- 75.6% (and #11) Jim Harrick (eight seasons)
- 72.6% Larry Farmer
- 71.1% Larry Brown
- 68.6% Ben Howland overall (8.5 seasons)
- 65.0% Steve Lavin (seven seasons)
- 62.1% Walt Hazzard
- 61.3% Ben Howland post-Final Four years, through OSU
- 56.0% Ben Howland last 2.5 seasons
I realize that Howland has been here longer than half the other post-Wooden coaches. His overall percentage places him 6th in a field of 8. His most recent...not so much. I'll borrow a method of comparison that Fox71 used for our recent football "coaches": for Howland to bring his overall winning percentage up to that of Jim Harrick, all he would need to do is go undefeated for the next 81 games.
I can’t guarantee that Howland’s "best seasons are irrevocably behind us," but the evidence sure doesn’t look good.
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.
87 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank you for this
It puts into cold numbers the failure of Ben Howland as the keeper of the torch of your signature program. How depressing.
the apathy around athletic programs is damning...
of course, a good share of that responsibility falls at the feet of our athletic “director” as well…
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." --John Wooden
I like how you separated the Howland eras.
And not just between the glory years, you made several distinctions.
I think Howland was the right man for the job. He restored toughness to our teams he showed the country that UCLA can get right back to regularly playing in Final Fours with a combination of LA recruits and a coach that knows what he is doing.
I think all the problems that have plagued us since then can unfortunately traced right back to him. I’m not sure that if we land Shabazz Muhammed everything would be fixed overnight. And, let’s face it, Shabazz is not going to be around long enough to build around.
In Short, is Howland the kind of guy that can get his team to buy in, play Howland ball and become world beaters overnight? We were supposed to be that this year, with the loss of Malcolm Lee and to some extent Tyler Honeycutt being the mitigating factor as to how far we went. I don’t see it happening.
Next question, is Howland ball championship worthy? It was not when he had the best players available and that was with complete buy in. I’m going to agree with KS; the trajectory does not look good.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Howland went away from his bread and butter
Hard working, disciplined players. He started going after too many hot shots all over the place. You look at his F4 teams, that’s not who they were. Most were local studs with the right attitude, and the ones from other places were lunch pale kind of guys. He has gone away from recruiting the LMR, Aboya, LRMAM types. And he struck out on PGs who just wouldn’t have fit his system anyway.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
the thing is...
what are the chances Howland can recruit a class as good as he had during his Final4 runs (which inlcuded future NBA studs)
by UCLA_beer&mathematics on Jan 21, 2012 1:54 PM PST up reply actions
well, the 2012 class would speak to that.
I’m in the “2012-13 is the hot seat season” camp. I’m obviously not thrilled with the last few years under Howland, but I want to see his squad next year in a renovated Pauley before I’m sold one way or the other. (And as others have noted, I’m not confident in the AD to find a suitable replacement.)
by Kenneth Powers on Jan 21, 2012 2:16 PM PST up reply actions
Howland's coaching trajectory while at UCLA
Similar to the one I did for Jim Mora’s NFL coaching trajectory when he was hired. I have plotted CBH’s winning percentages in graph form.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
I think the evidence is there that Coach Howland needs to be thanked and excused from further coaching responsibilities
His job is not to prepare players for NBA careers. His job is to prepare teams to be successful, using Coach’s definition. He is not doing that, and has not for quite some time. Coach was prepared to kick the best player in the country off his team because he would not get a haircut. Coach Howland won’t kick guys off the team who get arrested or who refuse to get into basketball playing shape or who cannot or will not play as part of a team. Coach Howland cannot keep players he has recruited such that the guys who have left the program would probably be a top 25 team on their own.
I don’t know what other evidence is needed. This juror is ready to vote.
Discipline
What troubles me is we have no idea about other discipline issues that probably exist. I’m sure CBH feels he is a disciplinarian—after all, he dispatched what could have been his best player. And yesterday, he immediately benched players who made bad passes and the like.
But the other issues you raise show his desire to advance his reputation for getting students ready for the N.B.A. interferes with his willingness to drop the hammer on a thief or a guy whose appetite is destroying U.C.L.A. basketball.
He'll always immediately bench players for bad passes/shots
if they’re not among the chosen few. They can stay on the court forever. That’s part of the problem.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Don't worry
The Howlers (basketball version of “Neubs”) will keep howling about those three Final-4s and pleading for “patience.”
LOL
Ugh the Neubs were the worst. At least the Howlers have some barometer of success to point to, but both the Howlers and Neubs need to learn how to live in the here and now.
Dump Dan!
by bruinclassof10 on Jan 21, 2012 1:55 PM PST up reply actions
I don't really care about recruiting at this point
Getting someone like Shabbaz will only be a bandaid on much deeper wound. Perhaps Shabbaz and Anderson will help us for a year or two and then we will go right back to old problems.
So you're saying that a great recruiting class would be an anomaly?
Here’s my read on the situation. Howland was bit hard by the fools gold class of ’08 and since then has been wary of chasing the eilte class for fear of mass defections. The result has been a severe lack of talent and thus a severe lack of wins.
This time around Howland is showing a seemingly newfound willingness to recruit mutliple elite prospects and multiple out of state prospects. If these are the new trends in his recruiting then I see no reason that CBH can’t haul in another great class after this one and another great class after that.
I agree
Talent is lacking this year, I think. One more year, and if we start off the first five games as bad as this year, we should fire him because then we’ll know if his improved recruiting makes a difference.
I have the Sons of Westwood on my iPod in my "favorites" playlist ...
http://sonsofwestwood.wordpress.com
It's not talent that's the problem
It’s bringing in talent that doesn’t fit his style and system. It’s chasing low probability elite prospects when there are many better options locally. It’s not having a backup plan.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Not making a judgement on whether he should go or stay.
But it is looking like he may need to a Shabbaz lifeline to continue much longer. My vote is he’ll be gone, and in usual UCLA fashion a year or two late.
Def
I think Shabbaz will most likely be seen as a “lifeline” by casual fans who are not plugged into day to day operations of this program. But the more plugged in ones are well aware of how deeply flawed this program is under the failed leadership of Howland.
Now can we get rid of DG before getting rid of Howland?
That’s the million dollar question.
To get the most accurate results
the wording of the question might want to be changed as to avoid bias. The last part of the question is a subjective statement. This is a great topic to explore.
But we are close to being an elite program
the same way any program is close to being elite (i.e. one great recruitnig class away). That’s the nature of college ball these days. And I’d say with Anderson on board and a strong potential for Bazz, we’re much closer than most
interesting point, but
do you have faith in Howland to manage these stars in one year and make a run?
What my eyes have seen is that CBH will not let them ‘fly’ calling a million timeouts and over-coaching…compare this to the Memphis teams around the same time we were at Final4s…
by UCLA_beer&mathematics on Jan 21, 2012 2:07 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not sure
but I do know that I’d rather have Howland and Shabazz than not Howland and not Shabazz, assuming that the loss of CBH could effect that recruitment
It'll affect it
One more shot.
I have the Sons of Westwood on my iPod in my "favorites" playlist ...
http://sonsofwestwood.wordpress.com
So untrue
Elite entails a consistency that has been absent for a long time in our program. And any time you have to rely on “savior” recruits, you have already lost the battle and are not an elite program at all.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
We are 1 recruiting class away from being dead last in the PAC-12 or whatever it is.
Proof—this week in Oregon.
There was nothing that happened in the state of Oregon which shows we are ready to have a good year much less be an elite team using your definition (which I like).
Voted unsure.
But if we’re talking about removing CBH for next year, let’s talk replacements? I’ve been out of the loop but has anyone suggested a few names who could take charge?
Coaches
I would love to see these names:
Mark Few-Gonzaga
Brad Stevens-Butler
Jay Wright-Villanova
Chris Mack-Xavier
Billy Donovan-Florida
Tom Izzo-Michigan St.
by Trojanswearskirts on Jan 21, 2012 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
I'll add one more
Buzz Williams of Marquette.
I'd start just left of Coach K
Wojo. Maybe even Collins. I know, people say he is the heir apparent to Coach K. The same was said for Dawkins. Speaking of Dawkins, what about him? Although I like the idea of Stevens, Donovan and Buzz as well. With that said, I voted ‘yes’ but only because I would need to have some reassurance that one of these guys would says yes if offered. A competent AD would be working that direction when your current coach is mired in multiple disappointing seasons. I would not want us to relieve Howland and have no plan, which with the current AD is likely the case. Change the AD and my vote very well changes.
After re-reading the question
I was wrong. It is not a subjective statement. “Close” is not a relative term, and the question is indeed objective. It may be stated without argumentation and with certainty. Death, taxes, and “nowhere close to being an elite program”
Who are these people voting "yes" for Howland?
Common people pull your head out of the sand…it’s UCLA, I hear people preach about mediocrity in football and how it shouldn’t happen…UCLA’s basketball team has been a free fall since the last Final Four appearance…notice Duke, Kentucky, UNC, and Kansas constantly in the top 10 and where has UCLA been since not in that spot…Westwood is a humble man and always supported the team, but I’m sure he never liked what he saw.
by Trojanswearskirts on Jan 21, 2012 10:16 AM PST reply actions
Wooden
What was Wooden’s overall percentage??? What was coach K’s overall after 8 seasons? How about some of the more famous Kansas, Kentucky, UNC coaches? Howland by his own hand or through bad luck has had issues with recruiting. He has a chance to return us to glory if next year’s class lives up to expectations. Also, one and done has changed everything and I do not think he has quite figured that part of recruiting out. He has probably learned from his errors, we will see.
LOL at referencing Wooden's percetage
That’s the same tactic Lavin psychophants use to deploy to argue for their coach. “It took Wooden 15 years to build UCLA! give Lav a break!”
You can’t blame “bad luck” on 2 disastrous recruiting classes and failure to land a true pg for 4 classes in a row. That is purely on Howland.
That's the thing, BruinDoc
I don’t think Howland has learned from his errors. Or perhaps he is just too stubborn to change his ways. But it doesn’t matter which, because we’re still nowhere near where a U.C.L.A. program should be anymore.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Yeah and Wooden did not back track
If this was season one of CBH it would be a good year. This is year nine and the last two of three are not in the Tourney. (At least it looks that way.)
+1
Great point. One year would be a fluke. But not 2 out of 3. And even the recent NCAA tourney teams (post-final 4) have been clunkers. Last year they were 2nd in a weak Pac-10, got a 7 seed in the southeast, and were bounced in the 2nd round. In 2009, they were again 2nd in the Pac-10 (albeit a stronger conference that year), got a 6 seed in the east, and were thumped in the 2nd round.
So the Bruins haven’t made it past the round of 32 since 2008. Ben Howland built up incredible recruiting advantages through the 2008 season (location, history, education, develop NBA skills, go deep in the tourney). And he squandered those advantages.
If he couldn’t get deep in the tourney with those advantages, how is he going to do that now? And more to the point, Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, and Kansas aren’t having these discussions.
Enough is enough.
Wooden also built the program into one of (probably THE) standards of college basketball.
Howland and all others that followed Wooden cannot be compared to that. They were hired to an elite job. UCLA was not an elite job when Wooden took over.
You can have 8 years of decent success at a 2nd tier school, that’ll be enough. If the Yankees, Lakers or Celtics, Steelers or Cowboys, become mediocre, you get fired. That’s the way it is.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
And
the Yankees, Lakers, Celtics, etc did not have a complete change of roster every 3 years.
That's not entirely true any more, island.
There’s lots of roster turnover on those teams and on every pro team.
80.8%.
His 15 seasons prior to his first championship, 69.5%…still better than Howland.
Wooden’s worst season? 2 games above .500. Next worst? 6 games above .500.
He has probably learned from his errors, we will see.
9-9 vs. D-1 teams argues otherwise.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
I don't think Howland has the "right" to stay
But I worry that I’d prefer to keep him over whoever the clowns at Morgan Center would hire to replace him.
I think this is a valid concern
Not necessarily a dominant concern, but valid. I’m pretty much done defending Howland (unless people start saying things that are patently untrue), but I cannot actively advocate for his dismissal while Guerrero is AD, given the process seen in the football search.
by VeniceBruin on Jan 21, 2012 12:41 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Stay or go??
CBH is stubborn, until Zeke rarely looked outside his comfort zone for talent, and totally screwed up the Dragovich case and therefore is at least on a very hot seat. Conversely the idea that Fat Dan (the nominal AD) would have ANY input in the hiring of a replacement is both repulsive and could be catostrophic. Would he be willing to pay what is needed to attract a good coach or would he even know what one looks like? Given these facts let CBH have another year to see if Kyle Anderson and Jordan Adams can get us back to the Final Four.
He needs to be fired now
I don’t see how anyone with brain could vote for him to stay. The current situation of this program is entirely Ben Howland’s fault. He recruited these players and his bad coaching is what has the team playing the way they are. His stubbornness has drove some very talented players away, be it through transfer or the draft. He plays favoritism to players that aren’t producing. What other D1 coach would’ve given Drago the kind of playing time CBH gave him when he wasn’t producing on the court and getting into trouble off of the court? He sucks at getting the most out of his players. He completely wastes timeouts, he refuses to make any kind of adjustments when the original game plan isn’t working, and his slow pace offense isn’t something the top recruits want to play in. There’s a ton of other stuff I could name that he’s doing wrong but I’ll let it rest for now. The 3 final fours were nice but its time for him to go. Regardless of what kind of players we got coming in, if he has to coach them, then the team will not reach their fullest potential.
I am going to pose a question which I'm sure I will get yelled at for
but I think it is a topic for legitimate discussion. First of all, I’d like to say that I am a great admirer of Coach Wooden – I went to school during his tenure, and I find his philosophy and quotes a source of inspiration and wisdom. That being said, Coach was old-fashioned, and got pushback from some team members for his stances, even at the time (like Bill Walton’s beard and how to tie your shoes). Even in the late 60s/early 70s, we may have fancied ourselves as rebels, but we didn’t have the sense of entitlement that the kids of today have. Also, the NBA was different, and kids didn’t go to college with the expectation of playing a year or two and then moving on. In his later years, Coach didn’t like dunking or showboating, which are a hallmark of today’s basketball environment.
So, the question I’d like to pose, which is obviously theoretical, is how would Coach have fared with today’s kids and in today’s college basketball environment? Would he have put up with the prima donna attitude of some of today’s recruits? Would they have tolerated his discipline and approach? This is not to excuse some of CBH’s judgment calls over the last few years, especially WRT some of his favorites, but I’ve often wondered how Coach would fare in today’s world, rather than the world that he coached in. Of course, he would probably have been a bit different (it is, after all, over 40 years ago), but I’d be curious to know how he would have handled some of the modern dilemmas faced by today’s coaches.
It is easy, take Sidney Wicks v. Reeves Nelson
Coach benched then Sophomore Sidney Wicks his second best player at the time and would not start him or play him much because he was a tremendous talent but not a team player and had attitude issues. Coach managed Wicks ego perfectly. The next year Sidney was not only the UCLA team’s best player, he was the best player in college basketball.
I think Reeves is a lot like Sidney, just not nearly as good. If you think they were all easy to deal with, think again. But compare CBH to Coach. CBH tried to bench Reeves his freshman year. Then started people like Brendan Lane and a very hurt James Keefe in front of him. Reeves was clearly better than both. But CBH wanted to win too much. He played Reeves too many minutes and the not starting thing was more a formality. He gave Reeves too much leeway.
Wooden would have kicked Reeves off the team and let him back if he behaved. Wooden was forgiving if he shaped up. But Howland could not quite do it. Reeves got kicked out and then missed the plane but CBH still played him. CBH wanted to win too much. Ironically it led to him losing.
That is part of the brilliance of Coach.
He would have adapted.
But, in that hypothetical situation which has Wooden, in modern times, coming from Indiana State unheralded and without all the titles and acclaim, he would not have made it more than 3 years without success at UCLA with the way college sports now cater to athletes.
My honest opinion.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
With the moron we have in charge of the moron center
I think “deserve” is the wrong word. He will get at least one more year, regardless of what happens.
As a fan of the game, I really, really like Coach Howland’s ability to teach the game. I want to defend him against all attacks. But the stats don’t lie, and this season should plant Howland firmly on the hot seat. As much as it pains me, since I don’t really think there are too many better Xs and Os coaches out there, I’d only give Howland one more year to dramatically improve, or he should be gone.
And I think two of his failures have resulted in our predicament.
1. He plays favorites. There is no excuse for Dragovic. There is no excuse for mismanaging game minutes, resulting in tremendous talent fleeing from UCLA on a yearly basis.
2. He has failed several years in a row to pull in a true PG. This is the most stunning development to me. With all the success of Farmar, DC, RW, and even Jrue Holiday, I would have thought we’d be able to lure some top notch point guard talent. That has crippled recent teams, but I also have to lay that at Howland’s feet.
*PG talent = success in NBA
I didn’t mean to insinuate that Holiday performed well at UCLA. He didn’t.
I 100% think he should be gone based on what he's done. You don't get 3 losing seasons at UCLA.
But I am confident that I do not want Dan Guerrero to hire his replacement. I am willing to wait until Guerrero is gone because I am 100% sure that I will be more displeased with Guerrero’s hiring tactics than I am with Howland’s coaching.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
+1
We’re liable to wind up with an often fired NBA coach who never coached in college.
Then, said coach would recruit his buns off, telling prospects that he knows what it takes to get to the NBA. Then, we’d shoot up in the recruiting rankings. Then, Dan would say “See?” and get another five years.
We Need to Wait for Chancellor Block to Take Action?
I have seen no indication that Chancellor Block gives a shit about the debacle that has unfolded at Morgan Center. It is therefore likely, as depressing as this is, that DG could be around a long time. By saying that DG has to go first, we are stuck with the current program for who knows how long (probably until Block moves on).
There is a saying that even a blind pig finds an acorn every now and then. That is probably appropriate in considering the competence in any search by DG. But there is that slim chance through luck that we will improve because we have a better coach. But there is no evidence that we will improve with Howland (otherwise, we wouldn’t be having this discussion with the program in the tank since 2008).
The Oregon game just ended. Anyone want to change his/her vote?
Be honest.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
has Howland earned the right to stay
I was shocked to see this morning that readers of BN felt, by over 20%, that Ben Howland deserves to stay at UCLA. We saw this cognitive dissonance perfectly illustrated by the Neuheisel enablers this past season. Get hammered by AZ on national TV? no problem; Rick should stay. No matter how poorly the team played, we kept hearing, “Rick should get another year.”
I am sick of hearing Ben Howland defenders constantly mention, “he took us to 3 final 4s!” This man has killed UCLA basketball. What we are seeing is a total embarrassment. The players do not have heart. Howland is notorious for playing favorites, and not playing the more deserving player ( A. Stover ). Morale is bad; fundamentals are poor………etc.
Jeremy Pick
+1
It is not only the players who don’t have heart.
I am so sick of the Bruins needing to take one step back to take two steps forward. Just like the 50-0 score in football, it will unfortunately take a lot more weekends like today and last Thursday to end the Howland era. But end it must.
Well consider this
A huge number of lurkers wanted to hire a cheater like Jim Tressell. As BN has grown are also attracting lot of casual “fans” as lurkers who are simply not well versed in the details around our programs. That is why you see these results.
For our part we are going to be discussing issues based on facts based reality not on blind faith from Howlers. We are not going to drive the conversation here based on poll results.
agreed
We should have won in 2008. Kevin Love + Russell Westbrook + experienced teams like Collison and Shipp and we still couldn’t get it done? SMH
68.6% Ben Howland overall (8.5 seasons)
I’m sad that 50% of readers think Howland should stay.
Dude is a couple of ticks ahead of our non-coach, non-player Steve Lavin.
I’ll remind everyone that, while Final Fours are exciting… well… we didn’t win anything with those.
Fact is, when we did get booted, we got our butts kicked.
With NBA SUPERSTARS on our roster.
That’s the best it gets. We’ve seen Ben at his best.
I’m so done.
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins! Go Lakers! Go Dodgers! Go Angels!
Ben Howland empties my passion bucket for UCLA Basketball, and I resent it.
I am unsure
He’s bringing in a good class with Kyle Anderson and Jordan Adams. Even if we don’t get Shabazz, those are 2 very good players. Norman Powell was also very promising. The only thing we need to get is a PG. It’s mind tingling why we can’t recruit a PG.
Ben Howland made a huge mistake from the 2008 class and that really set him back. Ben would have been a “good coach” this year if TH, ML both stayed. Ben could’ve been a good coach if Reeves wasn’t crazy and if Josh Smith wasn’t so fat.
I don’t know. Sometimes it’s the player’s fault too you know. I don’t know if Ben is suppose to be their daddy and tell Josh when it’s time to nap and to eat his vegetables, so I don’t know how much you can blame him for some stuff. It’s clear he can coach though and he’s good at it. I’m just skeptical of his ability to recruit players with good attitudes and his stubborn personality, which makes players hate him.
I can’t pass judgment on him until we give him 1 more year. Next year, all of the players from the 2008 cancer year will finally be gone. Ben will have his chance to make damn sure all this players stay conditioned and don’t get fat and aren’t crazy. That will be a test of his discipline. And lastly, we need Ben to stay so we can keep Kyle Anderson and Jordan Adams.
If some of Ben’s players weren’t fucked up crazy cooks with attitudes (like Drew Gordan), Ben would be a really good coach and we’d be up there with Kentucky, North Carolina, and Duke.
Not just class of 2008
Class of 2009 has turned out to be a disaster b/c of through mismanagement and lack of development by Howland.
Huh?
Ben will have his chance to make damn sure all this players stay conditioned and don’t get fat and aren’t crazy. That will be a test of his discipline.
Have you seen Josh Smith this year? Howland was the coach last year. Smith was out of shape last year. We need to wait until next year to see if Howland can get him motivated?
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
To the Howlers....
…..you are living on past reputation. We are not close to being an elite program. You talk about Shabazz and whoever else making us elite next year….but elite teams are great every year. Winning conference titles and making the NCAA tourney are not even goals…they are expected.
We are now mediocre or piss poor at the sport that put UCLA brand on the global map. Everyone mentions Coach…..he never allowed any of his students to be apathetic or accept mediocrity. They had to reach for THEIR best. Our FB and BB teams have not reached their potential for several years. Tolerating this further under CBH and DG is tantamount to heresy towards the teachings and philosophy of Coach.
Past time for DG to be gone and CBH needs a new start somewhere but not here.
STOP ACCEPTING MEDIOCRITY.
Simple for this geezer
Howland says at least until Donut Man is gone. Don’t want the latter picking another “winner” replacement.
The Mad Bruin
This is why it is absolutely critical that Guerreror go immediately
We have a lot of work to do to fix this athletic department. Ridding it of its current Director is step number one.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Howland gets next year. That's it.
Although I must admit Howland this year has looked way too much like a man who’s given up.
Yesterday probably convinced some people
I don’t typically cite myself, but I posted this yesterday right after the game.
The Oregon game just ended. Anyone want to change his/her vote?
Be honest.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life – BruinsNation.com
by gbruin on Jan 21, 2012 6:22 PM EST
At that time, the yes vote was exactly double the no vote, somewhere around 80 (62%) to 40 (31%) with 10 or so undecideds.
It now seems that anger or frustration or reconsideration after yesterday’s game has affected the poll, which as of this moment shows the Yes vote having276 (45%) and the no vote having 252 (41%).
My hope is that the no votes were not made in reactionary anger, but were made after an intelligent and considered analysis of the arguments made by KS above and by many others. I voted No before the game. I think that’s the right vote. I don’t want emotional post-loss bandwagoners who will flip back as soon as we win a game or 2 next weekend (see the Neubs, and the Chancellor, after the Cal and ASU wins following Arizona). I think it is clear that Howland has lost this team, and this program. And as much as I, and everyone else didn’t want it to go this way, i’s reality. And it’s time we stand up and admit it, and start looking forward to something else.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
