All Eyes on Dan Guererro

by Ajax on Dec 16, 2007 5:21 PM PST in Football Comment 58 comments

Shortly after the dismissal of Karl Dorrell, UCLA AD Dan Guererro took the podium and discussed the context for the search for Dorrell's replacement. We posted some snippets from the presser at the time. In light of the constantly dissapointing news coming out of the various media outlets, I think its important to keep Dan Guererro's words in the forefront while the "search" for Dorrell's successor seems to be going nowhere:

On expectations for the UCLA football program:

"I believe we can be a national player and you can define that however you want. I believe UCLA could be a program that is in the national rankings every year, that can knock on a BCS door, that can win the Pac-10 Conference. If you win the Pac-10 Conference, you have a chance to play in the Rose Bowl and you maybe have a chance to play in a national championship game. Is it hard here? Yeah, there are some constraints, there's no question about that. But, this is a great institution, a great place to be. And I believe that all of those things are possible; you cannot concede that they are not."

On an "important prerequisite" for the next head coach:

"I think if you were to talk about a prerequisite that's pretty important, it certainly would be [prior head coaching experience]. We will look at a broad array of candidates for this position and obviously someone who has had successful head coaching experience would be an ideal candidate. That being said, you never say never. You can to look at the candidate pool, you have to evaluate what's out there. This is not a place for just any coach as you well know."
"I think it's important that someone understands the West Coast to a certain degree, that's recruited out here. But that's not an absolute. We need to get the best coach that is the right fit for us, that understands our culture, that understands we want things done with integrity, that's just a great fit for our university. UCLA ties are not an absolute."

And finally, Guererro provides some reassurance that money should not be a roadblock to getting the right coach to come to UCLA:

"One of the positives during our tenure here in the last five years is we've really been able to build the resource base in our [athletic] program in a general sense. We raised a budget from $42 million when I first came in here to $60 million and we're still in the black. That tells you that we've done some things that are very positive and will allow us the opportunity to be more competitive in the marketplace as we move forward.
"Our assistant coaching pool is not wanting. Many of you believe that we're on the bottom of the barrel on the assistant coaching pool. We receive salary surveys from various sources; our assistant coaching pool may be second in the conference and I say that only because we don't know what one of the private schools pays their coaches. We built that assistant coaching pool over the course of the last three years to be very, very competitive in the marketplace. Many of you kind of missed that as we did that."

Georgia Tech identifed their ideal candidate, Paul Johnson, and hired him. Michigan was rejected by Miles and Schiano, two top-tier candidates before hitting a grand slam with Rich Rodriguez. Was UCLA's search firm in touch with these two coaches?

Meanwhile, UCLA is interviewing DeWayne Walker, John Harbaugh, Norm Chow, and Rick Neuheisel. Numerous media outlets have reported that Mike Leach has interest in the job, yet no interview has been set up. Steve Mariucci and June Jones have also apparently expressed interest, but no interviews have been set up.

John Harbaugh is not going to cut it.

I don't like what I'm seeing so far, and I am hoping that Guererro is working on something big that has not been leaked thus far. However, I'm not getting my hopes up.

We deserve better than the list that the vaunted "search firm" has produced thus far. We'll continue to stay on top of this "search" with the hopes that it will ultimately result in the hiring of a head coach befitting of UCLA's great tradition and enormous potential.

In the meantime, all eyes are on you Dan Guererro.

Go Bruins.

0 recs | Comment 58 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'm starting to feel sick

"I think if you were to talk about a prerequisite that's pretty important, it certainly would be [prior head coaching experience]."

I can understand how Walker could be an exception to this prerequisite, but why do we have a list with three out of four candidates without HC experience?

While he would be acceptable (to me, at least), and the best of these four, Neuheisel should be one of the WEAKEST candidate on a list of top-notch candidates. We're UCLA, for crying out loud.

I can't believe that this is the best we can do. If so, then the words about experience and compensation are nothing but hollow. Dan?

by Bruinut on Dec 16, 2007 6:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

This search is worse than the last

We can excuse Guerrero a little bit for the last search since he was just hired and it seems that Dorrell was a Carnesale hire. There are NO excuses for Dan Guerrero to botch this hiring process the second time around. So far the names that have reportedly interviewed for the position have been underwhelming to say the least. Until we hear the announcement, I think we should hold off too much judgment on the search. But as it looks right now, Guerrero better start doing whatever it takes to bring in a Rich Rodriguez-type hire. Convince Chris Petersen to come to UCLA and coach big-time football and leave the small fry stuff to someone else.

by UCLA4Life on Dec 16, 2007 6:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

As a current UCLA student

I would be horribly disappointed with any of these guys as our new head coach. Neuheisel....maybe, eh, I guess. Those words describe how I feel about the best prospect on that list. I want a coach who will create a buzz on campus like we experienced after the u$c defeat last year, like trips to the final four. I want a coach who we can be excited about, a coach who will direct a team that we will all enjoy watching, and know going into each game, even if we are underdogs, we have a chance, cuz that guy is our coach. June Jones and Mike Leach man those kinds of teams, in my opinion (especially if we can add defense to their offenses), but we have not even heard of an attempt on them...so disappointing.

by sponkey21 on Dec 16, 2007 6:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Only $60 million?

Why is the athletic budget so low? Ohio State's budget is more than 1.5 times that amount.

by UCLA4Life on Dec 16, 2007 6:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, and how much does tOSU football bring in?

College football is king. Unfortunately, our university is more concerned about the state of it's women's softball program.

by BillyZoom on Dec 16, 2007 7:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ohio State Athletic Budget

Ohio State has 35 sports - UCLA has 22

More sports = more facilities & more student athletes = significantly larger budget

by mr havercamp on Dec 16, 2007 7:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Brace yourselves...

The WSJ puts the 2007 Buckeye athletic budget at $109,382,222. My momma sent that one over a couple months ago asking, "...how anyone (esp. UCLA) could ever hope to compete with that kind of money."

Read It and Weep.

GO BRUIN BLUE.

by theREAL_LOGAN5 on Dec 16, 2007 7:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I've mentioned this before

UCLA's athletic budget is not low. It's more like Ohio State's is so insanely high. Besides, if I remember right, in 2002 Ohio State's budget was about $60 or $70 million. What happened in 2002 I wonder?

They have had a top-3 football program for 5 years with one of the finest college football coaches in the nation. Football is the prime moneymaker in any athletic department, so having a good one means a lot more money. Jim Tressel has paid for himself ten or twenty fold over the years.

by njbruin on Dec 16, 2007 9:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The search has been a joke

The best Guerrero can do is Neuheisel, Chow and JOHN Harbaugh? I heard a guy on Sporting News radio tonight say that UCLA had also spoken to the coach of Temple! Now that's funny.

Just shows you the kind of committment UCLA has in terms of football.

by BillyZoom on Dec 16, 2007 7:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

How about Hostra?

Remember the (very) old bit Bill Cosby used to do about his days of playing football for Temple? Perhaps Guererro should have interviewed the Hofstra coach as well?

by whp68 on Dec 16, 2007 7:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I hope

I hope there is some surprise candidate that we don't know about because the current list is really disappointing. And bad.

The worst part is the news that Leach was dispatched rather quickly. Leach isn't my top choice but amongst this list, he easily is.

by Raisin on Dec 16, 2007 7:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I really, REEEELLYYYY

hope we are wrong. the ONLY remaining hopes at this point are:

a) there is a Surprise Candidate DG has managed to stealthily and surreptitiously meet and negotiate with and/or we

b) won't hear anything final until after the mid-major bowls have played out and the carousel has a chance to stop long enough to get people on and off of it.

Right now it just feels like I'm high though... like hyperventilating into a paper bag, running low on O2 high.

Either way though -- come good ending or bad -- I am definitely going to PASS OUT by the time this is over.

GO BRUIN BLUE.

by theREAL_LOGAN5 on Dec 16, 2007 7:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Candidates Now

So what is our list of candidates now? (in no rank order)

Chow - nothing to get excited about
Neuheisel - brought it up before, mixed reception
Harbaugh - is this some cruel Daily Show joke?
Mora Jr.?
Hill?
Hack?

Who on earth is still out there?

by bruingrad1999 on Dec 16, 2007 7:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

SHOOT

Petersen - spit at the question... but?
Marriucci - NO DATA
Bowden - NO DATA
Mike Leach - foolishly vetoed
June Jones - NO DATA
Pat Hill - laughing his ass off
Lucky #13 - the hire we're bound to get.

GO BRUIN BLUE.

by theREAL_LOGAN5 on Dec 16, 2007 7:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Grain of Salt Alert

I heard this from a completely unreliable source (not saying that the person is lying, but how the hell would I know?). I live in Texas and went to a Starbucks today to buy a gift card. I was wearing my UCLA beanie, and the guy behind the counter (barrista?) commented to me about the possibility of Neuheisel being hired for the UCLA job. I was pretty surprised, as no one around here usually cares about UCLA football. So we started talking about the candidates, and I told him that I personally was not a fan of Mariucci because he lacked that killer instinct with the 49ers, many times playing not to lose (which as we all know does not a successful head coach make). He agreed and told me that a month ago he was in San Francisco and ran into Steve Mariucci, who apparently had just moved back. He claimed Mariucci told him that he was too happy in the Bay Area and wasn't looking to move.

Again, I realize that this is info from a guy at a Dallas Starbucks, but since there are plenty of "I had dinner with wealthy alumni" comments, that I thought I would share, in case anyone cares or wants to use this as a rumor. Personally, I am resigned to the fact that Dan Guerrero is probably not going to ask for my input on the head coaching search, so I am not going to worry about it until a head coach is hired (or at least an offer is made). But I figured if people out there are craving any information that might be remotely related to the coaching search, I might as well pass it on.

GO BRUINS. HOOK 'EM HORNS (well, except on Dec. 2).

by uclawarren on Dec 16, 2007 8:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Bill Cowher

DG sould also throw in a B-Ball scholarship for his high school senior daughter.

by East Coast Bruin on Dec 16, 2007 11:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Glass half full...

If you're going to use Michigan as an analogy you need to read their blogs... Rodriguez came as a complete surprise at a time when the blue & maize faithful were just as bitter with their AD & the search for Carr's replacement as we are. Maybe (hopefully) DG is following the same template.
Example from 12/13: "4 weeks into our search & we have spken to Les (more or less), Ferentz, Shiano, & Brady Hoke. Not much of a selection so far."
"I have zero faith in Martin to find a good coach. Miles is "off-limits" now, according to some. Now granted, maybe Sailboat Bill will pull a rabbit out of... er, hat, but I don't see anyone out there with any legitimate legs. Which leaves us with Hoke, DeBord, and English. To me, DeBord will stay on at OC, English on at DC, and Hoke taking over. Puppetmaster Lloyd getting exactly what he wants in the end - continuity at the expense of legitimacy. Maybe (I hope) I'll be wrong on all this, but I'm skeptical." etc, etc.
Just like these folks concluded, with all the alternatives to the traditional in-person interview it's pretty low probability anyone outside the AD's inner circle really knows who's been talked to - and just as important, who has not.

I also found this DW quote in the LAT article interesting: "They may not want me around here, they may kick me out, but I got to do what I believe in..." Never heard that angle before. Perhaps it dawned on him that if the final selection will be made by the end of the week, his performance in the BYU game will have no bearing on the decision - ergo he must not be a candidate. Furthermore, no more names have been sent his way for vetting (which might also explain why WE haven't heard them either!).

My gut says we're down to RN and a wildcard no one knows about. Why else would the administration insist on conducting its own interview unless the candidate has some skeletons they don't want to see re-emerge?

Go Bruins!

by East Coast Bruin on Dec 16, 2007 8:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Back off of DG Bruinnation

This is the same man you guys were praising for bringing us Howland and Savage. Now youre ready to roast him because of who he has interviewed? Jesus, if you are so passionate about influencing Dan's decisions then go donate and become a top level athletic fund member, then youll have some say. Until then, let the man do his job.

by Callmesenorfresh on Dec 16, 2007 8:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Precisely!

by East Coast Bruin on Dec 16, 2007 8:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If he does his job, we all back off.

If he comes up with another utter stiff like the last football coach he hired, we'll be on him like stink on you know what.

He's got a job to do. It's to do the things he said he was going to do in his press conference. If he does that, great. That's his job, and he's supposed to do it. If he doesn't, he'll have to answer, just as anyone who fails in doing his job has to answer. And if the list we're seeing here is his list, then he should use the same moving service as CTS to clean out his office.

by Fox 71 on Dec 16, 2007 8:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The UCLA Athletics marketing team...

was able to generate more revenue this year then any other year in the history of UCLA sports. There is no doubt that DG missed on Dorrell, he said it himself that he went with his gut when he hired him. Well you know what, he was right about a lot of other choices he made. Including Howland and Savage. Pauley is getting redone, the womens softball team and mens and womens water polo teams have gotten new venues, and there is rumbling that Jackie Robinson stadium is next in line for an ungrade it so sorely needs. The man has done a great job and you all are small minded fans to jump on his back at this juncture.

by Callmesenorfresh on Dec 16, 2007 8:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Word of advice

If you want to stick around here do not insult long term members of this community. Consider it a warning. Thanks.

by Nestor on Dec 16, 2007 8:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Jackie Robinson

FYI my buddy lives in Brentwood Glen near Jackie Robinson stade, and he says the bulldozers are moving even now.

by ocbruin1985 on Dec 16, 2007 8:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Baseball stadium

FYI, on Veterans Day I went by to see an inning of an intrasquad game and there were no bulldozers in sight. Glad to hear they are finally upgrading it.
Bill

BillSouthBay

by BillSouthBay on Dec 16, 2007 8:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Cause and effect

The football team is the revenue generating machine for the athletic department. Someone posted above that tOSU fields 35 teams to our 22. That's because their athletic budget is 1.5 times ours.

Sad to say but upgrades at Pauley and JR Field and great jobs by our water polo teams don't generate enough funds. If DG is doing his job, he'll field a first class football product (which we haven't had in five years). If he won't face the fact that football drives revenue, then he has to go. What part of this is so difficult to understand. We're playing in the fourth place bowl, with guaranteed revenue to the school of peanuts. justsc wins the conference and goes to the Rose Bowl and brings back millions. We have what - 20,000 empty seats per game? A powerful coach building a powerful team fills those seats to the tune of probably $10,000,000 annually. Plus more TV revenue. Plus more food. Plus more gear.

You sound like you're content to have DG go with mediocrity. I'm not. There is no home run hire anywhere in sight. DG's job is to make a home run hire and he's not doing it.

by Fox 71 on Dec 16, 2007 9:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Fair or not

Guerrero deserves criticism for his handling of the interview process thus far. It has been very disappointing.

Of course, he can render this all meaningless by making a good hire, and he will certainly earn our praise for that. But the interview process thus far certainly does not bode well for a successful outcome to all of this.

Like it or not, football is a marquee program, and his legacy will be made not by what he has done for baseball, softball, or even basketball, but what he does for football. To quote our former football coach: "It is what it is"

"This is not a place for just any coach" Dan Guerrero

by godblesstyus95 on Dec 16, 2007 9:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Have I missed something?

I have no idea what the interviewing process has been.

I don't know who's been interviewed and who has not.

I don't know who has been excluded -- with or without an interview.

All I know are the rumors that I read by mostly unreliable "reporters".

I think it is clear who we want and don't want -- and I'm sure that DG has gotten that message.

What he chooses to do with that is up to him. He will have to take responsibility for his decision. A good one will solidify his legacy. A poor choice will make all he does vulnerable -- including fund raising.

DG is not a fool. Vigilence is great. Angst, premature.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 16, 2007 9:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Another perfect post!

by East Coast Bruin on Dec 16, 2007 9:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The voice of reason, as usual

Some of us, or to put it another way, I have an unreasonable expectation that DG will act the way normal people do in normal circumstances. If someone says to me, "Hey, Fox 71, I hear you are petitioning to become an honorary trOJan, and plan to make big contributions over there." I would go crazy with denials.

DG isn't operating where normal rules apply. I hope he's laughing is rear end off as he solidifies his meetings with Leach and Mendenhall while the stupid MSM camps out next to the bloodlines of anyone named Harbaugh.

by Fox 71 on Dec 16, 2007 10:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I sure hope you're right, 66

I hope that this list of serious candidates comes from D'ohn and Walkerbackers (a curious species, indeed), and not from DG, because all the candidates on the list seem to have one thing in common -- a willingness to accept DW.

Chow, because he's an offense-type guy, and he wants a HC job and doesn't have much leverage. Neuheisel because he's an offense-type guy, and he really wants the job, and he doesn't have much leverage, either. Harbaugh because he wants to be a HC and he has no leverage at all.

This list of the Feeble Four seems predestined to include DW. I'd be OK with that, as long as it was the new coach's idea. But, as a condition for hire, it is a crappy way to run a search.

by Bruinut on Dec 16, 2007 10:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The Illustrious Marketing Team.

..had the benefit of a fan base typical of those who either inhabit BN or could care more for what is served up at the tailgate parties outside the Rose Bowl rather than the football that is playied inside the Rose Bowl. But the fans are driven to purchase tickets -- season tickets -- on the expectation of a promising Fall. Your marketing team operate in a market sans a legitimately professional football franchise. USC is professional, they just don't advertise the fact unless there's a tell-all book on the line.

So UCLA's competition on Saturdays are the thugs from Figueroa and whoever is on the tube. Add to the mix that you have a choice of attending a game at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena or one at the Maesoleum in South Central Los Angeles.

The product that these elite of the advertising world are huckstering are a team that was so drenched in mediocrity that two phenomenon occurred to peak interest: the 10-2 season fraught with four miracle come-backs and the 13-9 win over USC coupled with the promise of 20-plus returning starters. Given that fact alone and a fan base starved for success after 3 years of stiltifyingly .500 performances, your checkered-doubkleknit-slacks-and-white-shoe crowd tapped into a "this is finally our year" wave of sentiment that got them the 70,000-plus season tickets you speak of.

Oh, yes, by the way, the fact that Notre Dame was on the schedule didn't hurt either. In another post her approximately one month ago, the point was made that Notre Dame has a HUGE following nationwide and that the best way to get tickets to the game at the Rose Bowl was to buy the season ticket package and eBay the other games. That post asserted that 10-15,000 packages could be attributed to the ND surge.

Ironically, it is this expectation of "our year" (the returning veterans and the 13-9 victory over USC) that probably sunk Dorrell. At least the first leak was sprung in Utah and he took one below the waterline after Notre Dame and Washington State.

..but once you have sold season tickets, your attendance figures (and revenue) are pretty well set.

I am sure a smililar case can be made for memorabelia and product; also, you ever wonder why UCLA appeared on the PAC-10 game of the weak when they were not exactly marquee quality? Probably same reason; you're marketing boys were selling what they thought would be a hot property that turned out to be a dud.

Now my statistics are rusty, having taken Bus Ad 115 in the 60s but, with a little more time and research, I am sure I could tighten up my arguments significantly. But you can see that there was an obvious bulge in 2007 to well above 75,000 average attendance per game and my contention is that this is attributable to the aforementioned ND and "this is our year, 13-9" stuff.

What is apparent from these numbers is that average attendance is very responsive to success or failure from the previous season as well as success or failure in the same season. Let Guerrero announce a mediocre candidate or otherwise fail to get the home-rum hire that is wished for, then I'll bet you will see a rapid deflation of these figures, I am sure. It'll be a harder product to sell to a fan base already jaded with pathetic, .500 football.

From the UCLA Athletics site archives:

UCLA OPP
--------------------------------------------------------
2002 ATTENDANCE.....................392,375.......275,486
Games/Avg Per Game.................6/65,396......6/45,914

2003 ATTENDANCE.....................339,813.......348,300
Games/Avg Per Game.................6/56,636......6/58,050

2004 ATTENDANCE.....................363,092.......304,919
Games/Avg Per Game.................6/60,515......5/60,984
Neutral Site Games.............................1/29,062

2005 ATTENDANCE.....................385,305.......276,452
Games/Avg Per Game.................6/64,218......./55,290
Neutral Site Games...............................1/50,426

2006 ATTENDANCE.....................454,683.......324,643
Games/Avg Per Game.................7/64,955......5/64,929
Neutral Site Games...............................1/40,331

2007 ATTENDANCE (as of 12/1/07).....458,271.......297,360
Games/Avg Per Game.................6/76,378......6/49,560
Neutral Site Games....................................0/0

(Oh, for fixed-point font!)

by whp68 on Dec 17, 2007 8:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Call you "Way the f*** outta line."

Senior Fresh in the-heeeehhhhhhhhhh. Dude please.

That's the same logic that kept Duh-rell in office for 2-years too long.

We let up when we get what we were promised. We ain't waiting to be overcharged for bad food and shitty service before we stand up and demand better.

We learned our lesson... you didn't.

Change the beat:

Fox71 for Pres.

Qualifications?
3727) posts since 11/10/2006 -- beeeeaaaatttchhh.

GO BRUIN BLUE.

by theREAL_LOGAN5 on Dec 16, 2007 9:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

How do you know we are not?*

by Ajax on Dec 16, 2007 9:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Perfect post A*

by Nestor on Dec 16, 2007 8:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Keep your eye on the ball

Michigan--coaching search was a disaster for 4 weeks, then they pull in Rodriguez.

Arkansas-Nothing happeneing for 3 weeks, then they pull in Petrino

Ga Tech-Nobody identifies Johnson as having been interviewed before he was hired

Those are 3 examples of why its too early to be a Monday morning QB on the coaching search. But also consider the following:

(1) DG has not retrenched from the statements quoted in the post. His only other statement was that the search was proceeding and he expects to wrap it up in a week or so. Thus, we have nothing to believe but that DG is seeking those qualities that we all are looking for in this search for a head coach.
(2) This one is critical. Big-name coaches (head coaches from other schools, for example) cannot (CANNOT) let it be known that they are interviewing for another head coaching position. If they do, either (A) their credibility is FOREVER shot with their current school or (B) they only interjected their name for the purpose of getting a better deal with the current school (or by the leak, their only hope was to get a better deal with the current school).

What does #2 mean? Only the coaches that do not have current head coaching gigs can be named in public without dire consequences to the process. Take Les Miles. Had the leak not occurred, he might be the head coach at Michigan. But the leak did occur on the night before an important game, and he had no choice but to tell his team that he was staying. So, when you hear who's been interviewed and who's potentially being interviewed, as reported to the press, you see the common thread: none is a head coach right now. That's true. But given the climate of coaching searches, rumors, and loyalty to current teams, that's what should be expected. If we want to hire someone who's a current coach, the last thing we can do is leak information that the coach is being interviewed. If info does leak, that coach must issue a statement of noninterest and end the dance with us by getting a bigger contract at his current university. This is how the game is played.

Because we don't know what's going on, and because DG has said the criteria and nothing more for us to be concerned about, it's far too early to criticize Guerrero or to put out idle threats that we will call him a "scumbag" based on what we know now. Let the man do his job. If he thinks his job is to choose between the other Harbaugh and Skippy and that everyone will be fine with that, he's wrong, and we can take him on then. Otherwise, until he speaks about who we've hired or who the candidates are, I'm with Class of '66 in saying this whole critique is premature.

by BruinsRule on Dec 16, 2007 9:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Nice job BR

The entry is really not a critique, just more of an expression of hope that certain parameters be followed.

I hope you are right, and that Guererro is working behind the scenes on something big.

I hope I wake up Xmas morning to hear that Chris Peterson, or a similar big name is UCLA's new head coach.

by Ajax on Dec 16, 2007 10:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And...

Much ado has been made on this site about DW's manipulation of the media (your advice in response to a post was to call it "fishwrap") - so why should we put so much emphasis on the media as Guerrero's yardstick? Even the hotseat blog you linked us to bases its assessment of UCLA's search on mainstream media reporting. And oh by the way, for those that didn't follow the link, the #1 screw-up they identified was Michigan! Seems Rodriguez wasn't the guy they were really after.

Love the passion and like the rest of you I don't want to endure another Donahue-esque era - but unless we end up with DW as HC I plan to reserve my judgement until September 2008. It's kind of hard for me to push the "sack" button on the guy that brought us Ben Howland.

by East Coast Bruin on Dec 16, 2007 10:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

"fishwrap"

is what the denizens of BruinsNation use to refer to the LA Times.

by AZBruin on Dec 17, 2007 9:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This continues the tradition of a great Bruin

Jim Healy, a great Bruin, referred to the latimes as "The Fishwrap" on his radio show for years. If you don't know Healy, you are missing some really entertaining stuff. Check out http://whimsicalwill.tripod.com/JimHealy.html. (I don't know how to do links.)

He was one of a kind. And he loved to take shots at the justsc "surgeons".

by Fox 71 on Dec 18, 2007 4:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm.

I guess I do know how to do links.

by Fox 71 on Dec 18, 2007 4:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You all throw insults and judgements

to any one who doesnt fall in line with "long term members of this community" opinions. First of all, the only community im a part of is that of the Bruin Alumni, class of 2002. So i can give a shit about your community. I deserve to voice my opinion just as all of you do. You wanna silence me and ban me from this site then thats your business, and youll all be hypocrites if you do. You all are spending time making countless diaries because youre upset of reports about potential candidates from the press? Give me a break. Lets not forget, the true reason Dorrell got fired is because of his record and the teams performance. Not because you scared DG in to doing it. Get over yourself Bruinnation.

by Callmesenorfresh on Dec 16, 2007 9:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Let me guess...

You are a fan of Dyno-Mite and Chow?

BTW, my entry is titled "All Eyes on DG." We have not come close to being critical of Guererro yet. However, if John harbaugh is hired, all hell will break loose.

You won't be booted as long as you follow the rules. Come with facts, not blind support for the Morgan Center hacks, and it will all be good.

by Ajax on Dec 16, 2007 9:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm a fan of UCLA

The rules are to come with facts? I thought this was an opinion based website? You all shell out critisism yet can take none. I have a hard time believing "all hell will break loose" if Chow is hired. I can say that i wont be happy with the hire, but ill reserve my judgement for when we have results from the football field, like a rational fan would.

by Callmesenorfresh on Dec 16, 2007 10:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What do you mean "we can't take it?"

Please point out to where you are talking about.

You and your ilk brought us Dorrell and Lavin. Forgive us if we don't want to be burned again.

Again, post away. Just follow the rules.

by Ajax on Dec 16, 2007 10:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ahh yes

Me and my kind brought Lavin and Dorrell...and all you geniouses brought Howland and Savage right? Your rules are subjective. When you get something you like you pull from the diary and place it on the main page, when its something you dont like, you delete it. Ive had my diaries deleted before, sensorship at its finest.

by Callmesenorfresh on Dec 16, 2007 10:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

*Censorship

and judging by the combative nature of your comments, it's pretty easy to see why your shit gets deleted. There are plenty of diaries in existence here that are unpopular. They happen to attract the most comments because they get absolutely massacred for lack of intelligent thought. Deleted diaries go beyond this threshold, and since you're quick to insult other members of this community, it's safe to assume that your diaries were deleted for this very reason.

by Tydides on Dec 17, 2007 1:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Dude..

..also, get to be best buds with your spell check, namely Geniuses and Censorship..

by whp68 on Dec 17, 2007 8:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not Quite Right

The long term posters here disagree all the time -- respectfully.

In this thread, I disagreed with some of the most respected long term writers -- without consequence.

You didn't get jumped for disagreeing -- you got jumped for calling the people with who you disagreed "small minded".

That will do it every time.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 16, 2007 10:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You deserve

the heat for coming on here and calling people "small minded." If you anything of that sort one more time, you will be gone. Consider it your final warning. Thanks.

by Nestor on Dec 17, 2007 4:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I second that

I got jumped on in one of my first posts. I learned my lesson. However, if you really think about it, it just doesn't make sense to stand in the middle of a crowd and call them all idiots. Like 66 says, you can disagree with people, but just be logical and nice about it.

by OutOThsWrld on Dec 16, 2007 11:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Don't we need to wait until after bowl season?

If all of the top coaches are preparing their teams for bowl games wouldn't that mean that we need to wait until the 2nd week of January to really start speculating on a new coach? As someone posted above, it's not in the best interest of the coach of another university to make it known he's interested in the UCLA job.

by mark the bruin on Dec 16, 2007 11:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

See

Rich Rodriguez and Paul Johnson.

"This is not a place for just any coach" Dan Guerrero

by godblesstyus95 on Dec 17, 2007 1:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

A Matter of Ethics?

One thing that bothers me most about this current post-season is all the coaches who have jumped ship before completing their obligation to their current team, i.e. coaching them in a the bowl game. I see very little difference between these guys and Petrino abandoning Atlanta mid-season for which he was (justly, in my opinion) roundly vilified by almost everybody outside of Arkansas. For example, how would we feel if right before the NCAA tournament, Ben Howland got a $10 million/year offer to coach the NY Knicks that he felt he couldn't pass up and that required him to immediately resign from UCLA. Now maybe this is not the best example, because we know it would never happen, but I think you get my gist.

Personally, I would have a real problem contributing to this trend by hiring our new coach in such a fashion and I would always wonder whether such a coach might not abandon our team, too, when presented with the next better offer.

Thus, I'm inclined to believe that DG is taking the high road in this search and allowing the likes of Mike Leach, June Jones, Bronco Mendenhall, Chris Petersen, etal. to remain anonymous within the process. I think it is a simple matter of ethics.

by snorkeldorf on Dec 17, 2007 9:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hate to be cynical

But why should we have faith in DG anyways? Sure, he hired Ben Howland and John Savage... but Howland worships at the altar of Coach Wooden and UCLA was his DREAM JOB and took LESS money to come back home. John Savage is a great coach who revived the UCI program but what is Irvine compared to UCLA? It's not like we lured Augie Garrido from Texas or George Horton from Fullerton. Sorry, but it seems more and more like DG was just lucky that great coaches fell into his lap.

by ishXdavid on Dec 17, 2007 2:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Ok

#1, the Howland hire wasn't as easy as it seemed. Yes, Howland wanted to come to Westwood and was willing to take a pay cut, but initially the administration wasn't willing to pay what Howland was asking for. DG had to put together a rather creative contract and convince the administration for more money.

#2, the Savage hire was a GREAT hire. First, DG hired Savage at Irvine and the brought him to UCLA when the job came open here. Was he a big name? No, but I don't think BN requires that UCLA hire a big name football coach. We want someone that can win big and has proper credentials. Paul Johnson is not nearly the name Steve Mariucci is, yet the majority of BN would have preferred Johnson to Mooch. Savage had prior head coaching experience, was considered one of the nation's best specialty coaches (pitching), had proven himself as a recruiter and built UCI from nothing. He may not have had the big name, but he was the perfect guy for the job and he's proving it now.

#3, DG has proven himself with hires in smaller sports like men's soccer, where besides this past disappointing season, the Bruins have finished in the top 10 in every season Salcedo (a DG hire) has been in Westwood. He also hired OD Vincent to coach men's golf where he took a mediocre program to elite before leaving for Duke this summer. DG just hired Derek Freeman to replace him, one of the best young coaches according to Golf Magazine.

When you take a look at all he has done, DG has been a very, very good AD. He has raised the athletic budget by over $10 million and hired numerous good coaches. The one mistake during his tenure was KD and the majority of us on BN have acknowledged he had little to no say in the hire. DG has been exceptional so saying DG was lucky is preposterous. You don't luck into so many good coaches and a $10+ million rise in budget. DG's been great and now I just hope he can do with football what he's done with every other aspect of his job. DG has given us more than enough reason to trust him and with so many conflicting a ridiculous reports coming out on the football search, I'm just going to sit back, trust DG and wait. When he makes his hire I will weigh in, but there isn't enough legitimate evidence to judge the search thus far. DG has proven he knows what he's doing so I suggest we trust him until he gives us a reason not to.

by ryebreadraz on Dec 17, 2007 2:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Touche!

Admittedly, the only non-revenue sport I follow is baseball so I was unaware of the other successes. I've always taken for granted that UCLA was a force to be reckoned with in those sports because of those magical four letters. I'll chalk that up to my own naivete.

After it became apparent that the Lavin era was coming to an end, I figured Howland was a no-brainer considering his Southern California roots and his winning the Coach of the Year in 2002. Thanks for shedding some insight to the behind-the-scenes wrangling DG had to do to get the right man.

I agree that Savage was a great hire, I just presume that UCLA is a step up from UCI in terms of exposure and career advancement, that's all.

Please forgive my anxiety during this rather anxious time. I only want my team to be what I've always expected it to be. My heart can only take so much.

by ishXdavid on Dec 17, 2007 2:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Rye, don't forget the big picture

DG can be acknowledged as a combination of Einstein, Mother Theresa, William Shakespeare and (fill in blank) when it comes to soccer and everthing else. And no question, he was on duty when Coach Howland called and wanted his dream job.

But if DG blows this hire, he will be forever remembered as the guy who pushed the corpse of UCLA football into the grave and started throwing dirt on top of it.

SJH has mentioned this many times - this is his legacy hire, notwithstanding all the Howlands and Savages.

by Fox 71 on Dec 17, 2007 4:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand

the enormity of this hire for both our program and DG. The only point I was making was that to this point, DG has given us no reason to doubt him. Until he does I'm just going to sit back and watch. After this hire, my opinion on DG may change, but I'm not going to start doubting DG based on reports that are wrong 75% of the time. When I have something definitive I will judge DG's work on this hire and overall as an AD.

by ryebreadraz on Dec 17, 2007 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs