Warning: Southern Cal May Have Better Hoops Future than UCLA
by Achilles on Feb 14, 2012 8:30 AM PST
Email
PrintDC Bruins blogged this morning about Southern Cal being one of the worst programs in D-1. The game tomorrow night should be a walk in the park. It is also a game that presents Ben Howland great opportunity to get his bench players real PT and get them ready for one last charge to the Big Dance (if there is one) in these closing weeks of 2011-12 season. Bruins should be stomping all over the Trojans tomorrow night and it should be another edition of UCLA taking care of business vs JustSC.
But that's the short term picture. The long term picture could become disconcerting for UCLA fans if the Trojans make moves to resuscitate the slim credibility of their hoops program after this season. The frustration is "mounting" among two dozen Trojan fans, who actually care about basketball. Okay, we are kidding here but on a serious note - Trojan honks are not happy at all about the current state of the hoops program. Even though at Southern Cal, everything is around football, it is a reasonable bet that their athletic director Pay Haden will make a move, if they think that the atrocious performance of their hoops teams is hurting the Trojan athletic brand.
So what if Haden decides to make a move after this season? That could potentially spell serious trouble for long term interest of the UCLA basketball program, which currently is leaderless and mired "in the abyss of irrelevance".
There could be huge ramifications in Southern California basketball scene if the Trojans make a move, while the Bruins stay the course during this off-season. Here is how it can potentially play out. UCLA barely gets to the NIT and flames out. Gene Block decides to do nothing and let Chianti hang out. Chianti in turn sits around talking up the incoming recruiting class of Ben Howland, promising a big season.
Assuming Howland somehow gets Shabazz Muhammad and Tony Parker, UCLA could still be saddled with toxic personnel/chemistry issues due to Howland's mismanagement. Bruins may end up winning the conference and then flame out in the Elite Eight, only to find themselves back to their mediocre and irrelevant spot when Muhammad (and others) jump to the NBA.
Meanwhile, if the Trojans fire O'Neill, a very plausible scenario could be Pitt. head coach Jamie Dixon taking over at Southern Cal. Based on what we have heard over the years, there is a good chance Dixon would be very interested in a job like Southern Cal. And if he takes it, it could potentially have dire consequences if UCLA is still stuck with Howland.
Dixon is a good defensive oriented coach like Howland. However, he is a better recruiter and a program manager, who was the key driver of Howland's establishing of Pitt as a factor in the Big East. He is also a much better communicator. He will have a chance to dominate Howland (if Bruins foolishly are still stuck with Ben) in the Southern California recruiting scene.
So Bruin fans ... look out. Tomorrow night may be fun but as we say here always think about the big picture. The scenario of Dixon taking over at USC is another big reason, pressure should be on UCLA to get rid of Guerrero now and set hard expectations and accountability for our basketball program.
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.
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Dixon vs Howland
Dixon makes about between $1.6 to $1.8 mil per year at Pitt. He could be in line for a huge raise if he does have interest in leaving Pitt.
This article is an interesting read:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/640438-ncaa-march-madness-should-jamie-dixon-leave-pitt
It’s funny because it describes how Dixon could win the Big East but can’t take Pitt to the next level in the Big Dance. Then it goes on to describe how Ben Howland was a success and took UCLA to 3 final fours.
Of course that was then & this is now.
This is a real possibility
It would be real alarming to a serious athletic director at UCLA who “gets” how major revenue programs. Unfortunately we don’t have one and it underscores the urgency why we need a new AD soon.
What Haden says (caveat emptor)
I don’t trust Haden but he claims that K.O. will be back next year. Haden told the Times:
Haden likes this about him. He likes his work ethic. He liked his honesty in the wake of last year’s incident. He is going to give him one more season — probably no more — to get this fixed. “This is not what we want USC basketball to be, but we think K.O. is doing all the right things to get this program turned around,” Haden said. “Kevin has inherited a bad hand and we’re going to give him time.”
That being said, when it comes to southern cal, trust no one, suspect everyone.
I bet Lorenzo Romar and Mike Montgomery say the same thing
About DG and CBH.
UCLA is just an easy win for them.
Haden the BB player
Lost in the background noise of his football career, Haden was actually a very good HS BB player at Bishop Amat. He could very want to grab the opportunity to beef up the second choice BB program while our AD flounders.
Interesting possibility
But U$C basketball is just really, really bad. I can’t see a top tier coach wanting to take the job as U$C is so clearly a football school. It is the same reason why basketball schools like Kansas and Duke don’t attract top tier coaches in football. LK makes like 4 million a year, no top basketball coach will go in there to make a quarter of that.
Galen center has even less fans than the sports arena gets now. I think there is the perception that their program might hurt their brand, but once all the pre-season football polls come out with $C ranked number one and Barkley a Heisman favorite trOJans will forget that they even have a basketball team.
As far as Dixon goes, Pitt has a had a very disappointing season so I’m not sold that Dixon is as good as advertised.
Having said that, the mere fact that it is even a possibility that U$C basketball could have a better hoops program that UCLA is a total embarrassment for Howland and most especially strap on. These programs should not even be mentioned in the same sentence as each other.
Mostly agree with you
Trojans don’t care about hoops much and their program historically has been irrelevant. That said as A noted we have heard that Dixon would potentially be very interested in coming back to So Cal even as a coach at Southern Cal. Now Dixon as Trojans coach is not all that worriesome if UCLA had a very good coach in charge of the program who is not just a good teacher but a solid program manager. Howland is not that guy. And if the current dynamic at UCLA doesn’t change Dixon across town would be a worriesome development for Bruin fans.
by Nestor on Feb 14, 2012 3:11 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I think the Kansas comparison
isn’t really a comparison. $c’s football is traditionally at least ranked, if not better. KU basketball is awesome (last night was their 23rd straight year of 21+ wins). $c’s basketball team plays in a reasonably nice arena in the nation’s second-biggest media market where a coach needs 8-10 players to come to LA to create a strong team. KU’s football team plays in a stadium that’s nothing great or awful, where a coach needs 60+ players to come to Lawrence to create a strong team. I like Lawrence, but getting 10 high schoolers to choose LA over locations with other strong basketball teams would be way easier than getting 60 high schoolers to come to Lawrence over other options. It can be done, but it’s a few levels of magnitude of difference, in my mind.
A top-tier coach may not come to $c right now, but a pretty good one could – and, if I’m trying hard to be a disinterested observer, I’d say it would be a pretty good move.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Even next year they should be good and possibly a darkhorse to win the conference
They have three good transfers in JT Terrell, Ari Stewart, and Eric Wise in addition to getting Jio Fontan possibly getting a 6th year of eligibility. They return Maurice Jones, Dewayne Dedmon, and Aaron Fuller plus everybody else. For the first time in a very long time they won’t have people playing 40 minutes a game, which takes away the comedy in how little depth they’ve had for so long.
In regards to firing O’neil and and possibly hiring a good coach like Jamie Dixon, it is a very strong possibility. A few of the players on the team have been clamoring for it for over a year now. USC basketball right now is in a similar place to what UCLA football is in. Recruiting hotbed (although the state has been down as of late in basketball) with a lot of money at the school, and an opportunity to really wake a sleeping giant. As much as we make fun of the Galen Center, recruits love it. Trust me, I’ve heard from a lot of recruits that they think it’s amazing. Being in LA makes it appealing to national recruits as well and if we continue to mess our program up, they could conceivably become the better program.
Southern Cal basketball's program ...
It never experienced equivalent success of UCLA footbamm program. It has never been relevant except for one or two years of aberration. It doesn’t have the analogous history of getting to the Rose Bowls and winning it. However, it has an opportunity to be a factor if it brings someone like Dixon and UCLA sticks with flailing Ben.
by Nestor on Feb 14, 2012 6:00 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
The comparison was more about potential not past success
But to be fair they were the 2nd best team in the country a few years during Wooden’s run, have been to 2 Final Fours, and won the conference about 7 times or so.
If we don’t get Shabazz or Parker, they could be better then us next year. They’ll have athleticism, depth, and scorers which could prove to be a pretty dangerous team.
Tim Floyd was building a good program until he was forced out because of the whole OJ thing. He did this while we were at our peak which showed that their success is independent from ours. He also showed that with a good coach they can be a consistently good team that competes for and could even win the conference. That team with Pruitt, Young, Gibson, Hackett, and Stewart would easily win the conference this year and last year too.
by themichael21 on Feb 14, 2012 6:19 PM PST up reply actions
Floyd "built" a program through cheating
They had some decent years during Wooden years but they have never been consistently a factor like UCLA football. Until Chianti wrecked our football program UCLA football historically has been top 15 program. We documented it on BN. Trojan basketball never achieved that kind of consistent success or were relevant nationally.
And giving credence to Floyd’s effort is silly given he turned out to be a sleazy cheater.
by Nestor on Feb 14, 2012 6:27 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I already said the comparison was based on potential not previous seasons
They may not be identical, but they have similar advantages. Recruit the same area, the less popular of the major sports at their respective schools, both have huge potential, and have had success in the past although it may have been briefly.
And yes, Tim Floyd did build a good program. He cheated with OJ in 2007. The year before that they went to the sweet 16 and beat the best player in the country in Kevin Durant. 3 players on that team went on to play in the NBA with Hackett playing professionally overseas. They were on the rise and showed that USC basketball has the potential to be a Top 25 team year in and year out with a good coach
by themichael21 on Feb 14, 2012 6:47 PM PST up reply actions
He had one sweet 16
And he never won a conference title. If that is your standard of a good program no wonder you standards have been so low for Howland. The bottom line it is ridiculous to compare the history of UCLA football to Southern Cal hoops. It’s not close. There is a reason they are called JustSC. Achilles made the suggestion that they have a chance to be a factor if they hire Dixon and UCLA sticks with Howland. But that doesn’t make SC hoops same caliber program as UCLA football. You don’t seem to grasp that.
by Nestor on Feb 14, 2012 6:52 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
For the 3rd time now
I’m not comparing past success and history. In fact, I stated that I wasn’t comparing the history multiple times.
I am comparing potential. Going to the sweet 16 in your 2nd year as head coach would certainly indicate a bright future considering they went 12-17 the year before he arrived.
If Dixon is hired, they will become a good program capable of being a consistent Top 25 team, but I think that will happen regardless of who our coach is. They have been a good team at the same time we have, which would indicate that our program’s success is not married to their failure
by themichael21 on Feb 14, 2012 7:02 PM PST up reply actions
You specifically brought up history above
To compare the two programs. And as stated Floyd is a bad example as he had one sweet 16 and then some tainted years from OJ and Derozan – whose recruitment was also a shady affair. Floyd was never a threat to Howland when he was actually coaching “Ben Ball.” Dixon example is difference bc he marks a potential of being a threat to UCLA IF Bruins don’t have a decent coach in place. Still it was absurd to bring SC’s pathetic hoop history and compare it to UCLA football. You did that above.
by Nestor on Feb 14, 2012 7:08 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I demonstrated that both schools can be successful at the same time
We were winning titles and #1 in the country. They were going 24-2 and were the #2 team in the country but couldn’t make the tournament because we won the conference. Floyd did go to the sweet 16 in his second year which demonstrates that they have the potential to be a good team if they have a good coach whether it be Dixon or whoever. They have a very talented team next year and will really surprise some people and will be capable of playing with anybody if O’neil is not there next year.
Re: Demar Derozan. As a personal friend, he committed to SC months before it was reported and months before Percy was even talking to Tim Floyd, and I can assure you that he never got any benefits from anybody at SC or in the AAU circuit which is something a lot of kids can’t say.
by themichael21 on Feb 14, 2012 7:19 PM PST up reply actions
There you go again
Keep waving that Steve 16 card. It makes you look silly. I am sure there was nothing weird about Derozan commitment which included what certainly appeared to be a package deal with his buddy. Whatever. And what SC did during Wooden era still doesn’t match what UCLA football did over few decades consistently (you bring that up even after claiming you weren’t bringing up history). If you are this intent on talking up Trojan hoops may as well find some other place where you can find the dozen Trojan hoops who still care about waxing poetic about Timmeh’s epic run to the Steve 16. If you play nice they may even toss you the sweet Pac12 tourney champion tshirt from 3 years ago.
The comparison was more about current states of the program
Both have good potential if given the resources. We just showed that we committed to football financially (kind of; still need facility upgrades but 1 step at a time) as we increased our coaches pay, while they will likely have a new coach next year and have the potential to do the same. Both recruit a generally talent rich area, and given a good coach, both could be good programs.
by themichael21 on Feb 14, 2012 7:28 PM PST up reply actions
I see that point ...
However, I think it will only be in play if they bring in Dixon and UCLA sticks with status quo. However, as mentioned above you can’t really advance a credible argument about their basketball program being at the same level as UCLA football. They are not the same beast.
I would also add
There is no comparison when it comes to level of fan interest/support in UCLA football v. Trojan hoops. There is also the legacy in pro ranks where the two programs are not comparable. The fact that you even went there signals as if you don’t have any appreciation of the tradition of UCLA football. Not a surprise to see a current student having this kind of opinion bc it underscores what a poor job UCLA and its AD have done in making new generation of Bruins appreciate our tradition in two major revenue sports.
Again … You actually tried to argue Floyd’s accomplishments at SF were legit. Just wow.
by Nestor on Feb 14, 2012 6:35 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
They had some very good years in the 70's...
as in #2, and over the last 5 or so years, not bad either. I guess it depends on how one defines aberration, but they have had some very successful seasons.
So Cal basketball will always play second fiddle to their football and yet Haden seems like the kind of guy who would love to build the BB program. I know he understands the dollars involved.
An astute hire could result in a dramatic turn-around and an eventual feather in Haden’s hat. While I don’t believe there will be a change for next season, after that it’s hot seat time.
Trogan basketball
During the majority of Coach’s tenure, just$c* was coached by Forest Twogood (51-66) and Bob Boyd (67-79). I couldn’t find this for sure anywhere, but I don’t think they ever went to the NCAA tournament during those years. Twogood was 21-6 in 1951, 21-8 in 1961 and 20-9 in 1963 for his best records. Boyd was 24—2 in 1971 (both losses to us), 24-5 in 74, and 20-9 in 79.
I disagree with Nestor on “one or two years of aberration.” It was one year – they had the second best team in Los Angeles, but I don’t think they every had any NCAA tournament wins until the field expanded to basically everyone in the world.
Sorry but I don't see it
Pitt fan here. Jamie Dixon absolutely hated the idea of coaching against Howland when the two met up in the Sweet 16. Plus, he’s already turned down several West Coast jobs such as Arizona, Arizona State, and I think USC at one point as well. Dixon likes the East Coast, and I can’t see him leaving to rebuild USC.
Cardiac Hill contributor
That's fine
But we have heard from pretty good sources that Dixon will be interested. Coaching at some place like Arizona is not the same as coaching in LA. It’s a different deal.
No comparisons...
Not sure where you see that I am making comparisons. I certainly didn’t intend anything of the sort.
Am merely saying that they, as much as I hate to say it, have an opportunity to become relevant. Not champions by any stretch, but relevant, by what I consider their standards (read into that).
As far as Floyd’s credence, well, he had some pretty good recruits perform pretty well. Discount the cheaters and it was still a pretty good couple of years.
Now, I’m not suggesting he reached any kind of elite status, far from it, but relevant is fair to say.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
