Howland to UCLA?!?

MrBug708 · 04-01-2003, 11:21 PM

Seems like its all but signed, sealed, and delivered!

I'll let Rex or Chief link some articles

Dr. Sak · 04-02-2003, 06:15 AM

It was all over the radio yesterday here in Pittsburgh that it was a done deal. Ben supposely had a closed door meeting with his players and the expressions of the players as they left the meeting were ones of disgust. Although no one has been able to confirm it yet, all signs point to him going to UCLA.

MrBug708 · 04-02-2003, 10:45 AM

Yup

I think the players were rather niave though

Anrhydeddu · 04-02-2003, 11:09 AM

Yep, there should be a rule about not having any coach ever change jobs. That should be protect the emotions of the whiny crybabies.

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 11:18 AM

You can't blame Howland for taking the job, although the way he handled was a nightmare and he really screwed Pittsburgh.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
You can't blame Howland for taking the job, although the way he handled was a nightmare and he really screwed Pittsburgh.

Yeah, all he did was take a program with 5 staight losing seasons to 57-11 in the last two years, with stays in the top 10.

He REALLY screwed Pitt.

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 12:38 PM

He flat out lied to his players and fans. He let the UCLA job distract his team and it might have costed them in the NCAA tournament (not to take away from Marq., which is a fine team). They only lost by a couple points, and there was clearly problems in the team chemistry because of the UCLA rumors that he would not squash at the most important time in these kids careers.

He should have taken a page from Roy Williams book. He is handling the situation with UNC perfectly.

There is more to college basketball than a coach's record in the last two years. This is not the NBA.

HornedFrog Purple · 04-02-2003, 12:40 PM

It doesn't matter, they will fire him in 4 or 5 years anyway no matter how he does.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
He flat out lied to his players and fans. He let the UCLA job distract his team and it might have costed them in the NCAA tournament (not to take away from Marq., which is a fine team). They only lost by a couple points, and there was clearly problems in the team chemistry because of the UCLA rumors that he would not squash at the most important time in these kids careers.

He should have taken a page from Roy Williams book. He is handling the situation with UNC perfectly.

There is more to college basketball than a coach's record in the last two years. This is not the NBA.

What should he say? "Yes, I'm condiering the job" You think THAT would've helped the team?

Howland has been rumored to Ucla for OVER a year now.

Again, he took the Pitt program to new heights. Get over it.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HornedFrog Purple
It doesn't matter, they will fire him in 4 or 5 years anyway no matter how he does.

Your basis for that is what?

The Ucla fan base is a lot different that it was when Bartow and Cunningham followed Wooden, and NC's were expected. People just want the team to compete for a Pac-10 title these days, as we all know that winning the conference title is the key to everything. Unfortunately, Ucla hasn't finished any higher than third in the last 6 years, and the two most recent years, Ucla has finished 6th and 8th.

PS - Ucla has only had 2 coaches in the last 15 years (Harrick was fired for NCAA violations, Lavin was fired for consistently inconsistent play, and the worst season @ Ucla in 55 years). Pretty normal, if you ask me.

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rexalllsc
What should he say? "Yes, I'm condiering the job" You think THAT would've helped the team?

Howland has been rumored to Ucla for OVER a year now.

Again, he took the Pitt program to new heights. Get over it.

Don't assume a thing. I do not root for or against Pitt unless they play my favorite team. Don't tell me to get over anything, because I could give a crap about if he stays or if he goes. I am an unbiased observer calling it as I see it.

Howland should have said, "No comment." or "I will not discuss the situation until the season is over." or a hundred other things. Instead he let it be known he would be interviewing for the job and leaving his kids at Pitt high and dry. As a result, they didn't want to play for him in the tourney. Hell, one of his starters took his shoes off and told Ben that he gave up on them, so they are giving up on Ben.

He also just flew off to LA without so much as a goodbye to the guy who hired him or a thank you to the same guy who gave him his first big break.

No doubt he is a good coach, and I will repeat, nobody could blame him for taking the UCLA job, which is his dream job, but he could have handled the situation with much, much more class and tact than he did.

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rexalllsc
Your basis for that is what?

The Ucla fan base is a lot different that it was when Bartow and Cunningham followed Wooden, and NC's were expected. People just want the team to compete for a Pac-10 title these days, as we all know that winning the conference title is the key to everything. Unfortunately, Ucla hasn't finished any higher than third in the last 6 years, and the two most recent years, Ucla has finished 6th and 8th.

PS - Ucla has only had 2 coaches in the last 15 years (Harrick was fired for NCAA violations, Lavin was fired for consistently inconsistent play, and the worst season @ Ucla in 55 years). Pretty normal, if you ask me.

We hashed through this in another thread, and I did some reseach on it, so I am just going by memory now, but they had about 7 or 8 coaches since Wooden. Harrick lasted the longest. 8 seasons including a NC. I know he was ousted for fraud problems, so imagine how fast he would have been out of there if he didn't cheat to become better. Lavin the second longest. Howalnd has not proved he can get past the Sweet 16. His style of play is the exact opposite of what kids these days and fans want to see. He plays a slow down, defensive oriented type fo game. Not exactly the UCLA style. I give him 6 years.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 12:53 PM

And you shouldn't assume that things weren't said between the two that would warrant a goodbye. Pederson left to Nebraska, and Boehm, the interim is a total prick. Who denies a school permission to talk to a coach? It went like this:

Ucla: We're going to talk to Howland

Pitt AD Boehm: No, permission denied.

Ucla: I was asking, not telling.

Pitt is ANGRY at Howland. Throughout the process, Howland said, "I'm happy with my job here. I'm not looking to move" etc. etc.

Pitt fans and the interim AD are angry...waaaaaa

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rexalllsc
And you shouldn't assume that things weren't said between the two that would warrant a goodbye. Pederson left to Nebraska, and Boehm, the interim is a total prick. Who denies a school permission to talk to a coach? It went like this:

Ucla: We're going to talk to Howland

Pitt AD Boehm: No, permission denied.

Ucla: I was asking, not telling.

Pitt is ANGRY at Howland. Throughout the process, Howland said, "I'm happy with my job here. I'm not looking to move" etc. etc.

Pitt fans and the interim AD are angry...waaaaaa

Useless.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
We hashed through this in another thread, and I did some reseach on it, so I am just going by memory now, but they had about 7 or 8 coaches since Wooden. Harrick lasted the longest. 8 seasons including a NC. I know he was ousted for fraud problems, so imagine how fast he would have been out of there if he didn't cheat to become better. Lavin the second longest. Howalnd has not proved he can get past the Sweet 16. His style of play is the exact opposite of what kids these days and fans want to see. He plays a slow down, defensive oriented type fo game. Not exactly the UCLA style. I give him 6 years.

Yes. Howland will be the eighth. So Harrick and Lavin have lasted the longest since Wooden...does that not tell you something?

As far as Howland's style of play, you should check out the style of play he coached @ NAU...much more up-tempo. He seems to adapt to his surroundings fairly well (The Big East is a banger conference).

If any school is crazy w/ coaches, it's UNC (which is repeating what happened when Wooden left Ucla). Guthridge - 3 years. Doherty - 3 years.

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 12:58 PM

We can agree that UNC has become as bad as UCLA.

It won't happen, but I would love to see Pitt hire Lavin as their coach. I think he is a fine coach, and will have success somewhere, someday.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
We can agree that UNC has become as bad as UCLA.

It won't happen, but I would love to see Pitt hire Lavin as their coach. I think he is a fine coach, and will have success somewhere, someday.

Well, I would disagree on the Lavin thing...unless he's learned his lesson from what happened @ Ucla. He got too caught up in being a media darling, and looking good for the camera. Lavin's recruiting tales from the past few seasons are pretty well known. Whereas he was really enthusiastic about his job his first few seasons, the last few, he REALLY packed it in. Last year, Ucla returned 4 starters, and was the unanimous pick to win the Pac-10. They went 21-12 and finished 6th in the Pac-10. Arizona and Stanford both lost 4 starters and finished higher :/

Basically, since Lavin's first run to the Elite 8 in '97, the program has moved slowly downhill...and it really snowballed this year. A lot of the people close to the program saw this coming, as he really hates breaking down tape, hates recruiting anymore (a strong contrast to his first few years), and just really packed it in.

Again, maybe he learned a lesson from all of this...

heybrad · 04-02-2003, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
I think he is a fine coach, and will have success somewhere, someday.

Marm... you know I heat you, but come on. UCLA's slide has been well documented. What exactly makes you think Lavin is a fine coach?

heybrad · 04-02-2003, 01:15 PM

Dola...

Let me add that I read that Howland is leaving Pitt with its best recruiting class in years. It would be just like Lavin to take over a successful program with a good class coming in. Win for a couple of years and have the program slowly erode. Or is that what you were looking for?

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 01:18 PM

brad, I don't have a ton of knowledge on Lavin, but outside of this year, he seemed to have some pretty decent success, and recruited some talented kids, all in a tough place to coach with JW sitting over your shoulder.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
brad, I don't have a ton of knowledge on Lavin, but outside of this year, he seemed to have some pretty decent success, and recruited some talented kids, all in a tough place to coach with JW sitting over your shoulder.

He did recruit some good kids...but the coaching was never there. For example, as a Freshman, Dan Gadzuric averaged 8 ppg and 5 rpg in 20 mpg. As a Senior, he averaged 11 ppg, 7 rpg, in 26 mpg. A 3 ppg and 2 rpg difference. Ugh.

Basically, Ucla had tremendous talent, and would play good about every other game. They'd beat a soup can in the first round, a good team in the second round, and then get blown out in the Sweet 16 (average margin of loss/victory in sweet 16 was -15.4).

BTW, expectations are a bit high, but 55 straight winning seasons @ Ucla...you could pretty much put things on cruise control to win 20+ a year...he did some *bad* things down here (like not coaching @ practice...ask Hassan Adams).

heybrad · 04-02-2003, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
brad, I don't have a ton of knowledge on Lavin, but outside of this year, he seemed to have some pretty decent success, and recruited some talented kids, all in a tough place to coach with JW sitting over your shoulder.

I would suggest you do a little research on Lavin then. He is not a good coach.

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 01:25 PM

I just got dola-quoted!

HornedFrog Purple · 04-02-2003, 01:26 PM

I guess I would start with a .500 record first since Lavin apparently ruined the program.

MrBug708 · 04-02-2003, 02:29 PM

Do you guys remembered what happened with Mike Price at Wazzu this past year? He agreed to go to Bama, but still coach the Rose Bowl game? How wonderful is that?

Howland said everything right to the media.

"I'm happy at Pitt and I plan to fulfill my contract"

"We have a great thing going here and we are competing for a NC"

"The facilities are some of the best in the nation"

Where's the lie? Say I have a gf and she isn't bad looking, we go well together, but Jennifer Gardner comes along and asks me out. What do I say? I never planned on leaving my currant gf, but it's Jennifer Gardner, things come up.

Sounds right, isn't it every coaches goal to win an NC?

No one doubts Pitt has a great Arena

What's Howland going to do? Say No Comment? Yes, that would make things all better. His players are left in the dark during an important time. A time where emotions can destroy your hopes. He also couldnt come out and say I want the UCLA job since no offer was made.

Everyone in Pitt was too naive

Dr. Sak · 04-02-2003, 03:35 PM

Well I have also heard what was said to Ben Howland by Zavascus when he got benched. I guess Ben yelled at him for giving up on a play then Zavascus came back saying "Well why should I not give up when you have given up on us and plan on ditching us to go to UCLA after the season." That was roughly the conversation. It was just shady how this deal was pretty much done in under 48 hrs since they lost. The big problem now is that his top assistant is not going with him to UCLA. It was rumored that he ran a lot of the practices and got some big recruits.

There was an article in todays Pittsburgh paper that I thought was quite interesting. It was about coaches not honoring contracts and it is only penalizing the players. It will be linked at the bottom.

Article

Dr. Sak · 04-02-2003, 03:37 PM

Dola...No way Pitt hires Lavin. The main guy they are looking at is John Callapari. They are trying to lure him back to Pittsburgh, where he is from, like UCLA brought Howland home.

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bsak16
Well I have also heard what was said to Ben Howland by Zavascus when he got benched. I guess Ben yelled at him for giving up on a play then Zavascus came back saying "Well why should I not give up when you have given up on us and plan on ditching us to go to UCLA after the season." That was roughly the conversation. It was just shady how this deal was pretty much done in under 48 hrs since they lost. The big problem now is that his top assistant is not going with him to UCLA. It was rumored that he ran a lot of the practices and got some big recruits.

There was an article in todays Pittsburgh paper that I thought was quite interesting. It was about coaches not honoring contracts and it is only penalizing the players. It will be linked at the bottom.

Article

FYI, You're speaking of Jamie Dixon...and he's probably coming to Ucla as well.

henry296 · 04-02-2003, 03:56 PM

Jamie Dixon is also a finalist to be the head coach at Wright State (where is kingnebwsu) and Illinois State.

Todd

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 03:59 PM

I have also read that Dixon may get a head coaching job of his own.

I know Pitt will not hire Lavin, I just thought it would be cool to see teams switch coaches and observe what happens.

MrBug708 · 04-02-2003, 04:09 PM

Jaime Dixon is from Woodland Hills area, about 20 minutes from UCLA I believe. His wife is from Hawaii. He's rumored to want a West Coast coaching job and would be willing to sit a few more years as the Top Assistant coach at UCLA rather then some rebuilding project back east

rexalllsc · 04-02-2003, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by henry296
Jamie Dixon is also a finalist to be the head coach at Wright State (where is kingnebwsu) and Illinois State.

Todd

That is correct. We shall see if he gets it, but the rumors are he's coming to Ucla...

Chief Rum · 04-02-2003, 05:05 PM

Hey Marmel,

I actually agree with you on it being a crappy situation, and I wouldn't be surprised if the UCLA rumors had a big part in Pittsbourgh losing. I also think and have thought for some time that coaches switching teams so relatively easily, while players have to sit out a year and jump through all sorts of hoops to do it, is just plain wrong.

That said, I never heard Howland once say he was putting in for the UCLA job while his team was still playing. He only said it was his dream job, and this is actually perfectly researchable when he has stated being a UCLA fan since he was a kid--in Cerritos, CA, 20 minutes from downtown LA, I might add. He had probably said it a bunch of times in character pieces when it really was a "dream" job. What's he supposed to do now? Deny it?

Everything these guys have said is true, UCLA fans or not. He said all the right things. He said he really liked it at Pittsburgh. He has a good thing going. He has some great recruits coming in.

From what I can tell, what he could have been more careful with was hiding his enthusiasm behind the scenes. Apparently the idea was out that he would be interested in the UCLA job were it to open up, and anonymous sources kept telling the media this, essentially kept the firestorm going even as Howland flatly denied it all. It wasn't Howland himself, but the swirling media storm that created doubts for those players, but you and I and everyone are way too out of the loop to even begin to tell how much of the fault for that resides with Howland, with these "anonymous sources" and with the vulturish media.

As for UCLA, maybe he will be gone in six years. Who are we to know what's going on in six years? Check something out for me, Marmel. See how many Division I coaches actually last six years or more. I'm betting you're going to find that six years beats the average by quite a bit. So what are you saying? Howland will be here longer than usual? My guess from your tone and diametrically opposed viewpoint is that you actually think that's a short time. I disagree. You seem to be observing that a six-year Howland tenure at UCLA would be a failure. Would it? Throwing out for the moment that there could be numerous reasons why Howland would not be coaching anymore at UCLA besides being fired, if he were to get fired by UCLA after six years, why isn't a longer than normal time at the job justifiable to you? Could it be becasue you yourself are doing the same thing you are accusing UCLA fans of-- that if Howland doesn't become the next Wooden (staying 28 years), he's a failure? And you're telling UCLA fans that they are unrealistic?

Here's a newsflash for ya. Only two UCLA coaches have been fired since UCLA. The last two. One was Harrick, fired for NCAA violations, a situation that has become even more telling given his most recent encounter with the "law". And the other was Lavin, with the team's first losing season in 55 years. More on why Lavin was fired in just a bit.

To save you some research, I'll just tell you what happened to the others. Bartow is the only guy I would say succumbed because of the intense pressure of being at UCLA. And guess what? He was the first coach after Wooden. What would you expect? He resigned after the '77 season and took over the new UAB program, raising it to new heights. Cunningham was next. After two years, he had something of an epiphany about his life direction. Things were fine at UCLA-- Cunningham just decided he didn't want to coach anywhere anymore. He resigned after the '79 season and true to his word and intent, he has not coached organizaed basketball since. Brown was next. You know Larry Brown? The travelling man? Everyone loved Brown and Brown loved UCLA. He left in '82 because of his wandering lust, a chance at the NBA, and a stupid personal feud with our AD back then. He has often said this was the one mistake he made in his life (leaving UCLA). Farmer was next, and promptly took Brown's talent (he went to the F4 in '80), and turned into an NIT team. He resigned in '84. Then Hazzard came, and UCLA was hit by recruiting violations. The program was at its lowest level ever (pre-Lavin). Once we cleared sanctions, Hazzard decided to resign, and we moved on to Harrick.

It should be telling to you also that the two longest tenured coaches have been the last two ones, and that they both stayed a lot longer than the average Division I coach. And one of them wasn't fired for performance issues (Harrick). You want to believe there's this intense fan frenzy here and unreal expectations of an NC every year, but there just isn't. The fact that you don't know this makes me wonder if you have ever been out here (in LA) in the past 10-15 years, or what your big experience is with UCLA fans that leads you to this conclusion. I can only tell you that you have been naively brainwashed by the media, and by your own unreal expectations of what UCLA fans are like, based on--what? Fans from 20-25 years ago?

Nowadays, most UCLA fans just want a consistent team that will have a good shot at the conference title in a given year, and every three or four year put together a team that might reach the Final Four. Sure, we have a rabid few that insist on NCs, but they are no different or more numerous than the same types of fans that can be found at Duke or Kentucky or Michigan State or Kansas or Arizona. I urge you to reassess your take on UCLA fans, because all I can tell you from out here in LA is, you're just flat dead wrong.

As for Lavin, I was going to point out my lengthy post in the last thread which listed 15 reasons, with evidentiary backing, why the guy should be canned. Only one of those reasons (the last one) had to do with UCLA itself. All of the others were reasons which can occur at any Division I school and lead to a coach's firing. But as it turns out-- I WAS RESPONDING TO YOU!

Here it is:

Lavin Fired Thread, With My Long Post Listing Reasons

Please, please, tell me you actually read that post, Marmel. If you did not, I will lose a lot of respect for you. That was addressed primarily at you, and as you can see from its length, I put a LOT of time into it. Why don't you check it out and let me know why Lavin is a good coach?

Trust me, Pitt doesn't want Lavin. I have heard Calipari and Crean tossed out there, and I think both would make fine coaches. I'm hopeful that Lavin has learned some things from his experience at UCLA, but the fact of the matter is that most of the problems he had within the program started within the first three years of his tenure (some even from Day 1), and despite plenty of notification from the media about what he was doing wrong, he refused to change his ways or work on his weaknesses, or seem to learn any one thing about coaching in UCLA.

If the firing will finally open this guy's eyes, and he will finally work on basketball fundamentals, or recruit seriously, or hire a vet coach that has skills in areas Lavin does not, then maybe he can be a good coach. Unfortunately, he showed none of this ability to learn at UCLA, and he had every reason to change his ways. He is the master of delusion, both of himself and the media and "other school fans" who are convinced of his greatness. My long post in the other thread was meant to display the falseness of that myth. Once again, I certainly hope you took (or will take) the time to read it, because it was addressed to you personally and dispels this myth--the myth of the Good lavin, if you will--in many ways.

BTW, no reports I have heard indicate that Dixon is NOT going to UCLA with Howland. The assistants' compensations were the primary reason for the day or two hold up to all this, while Howland and Guerrero worked out the deal. Do you really think it would take that long if Dixon weren't a part of the picture? The only way Dixon is leaving Howland, wherever he goes, is for a head coaching job (which, yes, could happen this year).

Oh and lastly, creaky old Pauley Pavillion. Well, okay it's not a new building. How's that Carrier Dome? Anyway, Pauley is just fine. Somehow I don't think you have visitied it, but I could be wrong. It's still a fine place to watch a game, and creaky or not, it also is home to a lot of history. And there's value in that, too.

Chief Rum

MrBug708 · 04-02-2003, 08:27 PM

Go Chief Go
See Chief Post

Marmel · 04-02-2003, 09:25 PM

Chief, I was waiting for your response for a while, and I guess I missed it. I will read it now. I was truly interested.

MylesKnight · 04-02-2003, 09:28 PM

Howland, what are you doing? "The grass is not greener", my friend.

tucker342 · 04-02-2003, 11:24 PM

Big mistake by Howland. He had something good going at Pitt. Now he enters a very high pressure situation at UCLA... Of course he would be living in Southern California, so ya nevermind, I can see why he left.

MrBug708 · 04-03-2003, 12:29 AM

Go West Young man!

Marmel · 04-03-2003, 10:31 AM

Chief, I think you would agree that stability at the head coaching position is almost a requirement for a team to be dominant for (let's say) 10 years. Kentucky may be an exception, but otherwise, teams who change coaches every 7 years on average are not your dominant teams.

Chief Rum · 04-03-2003, 11:59 AM

I'll agree with the general premise with regards to dominant, although I think you'll find that a turnaround is surprisingly fast in college basketball, given that complete roster turnover is necessitated every four years.

My point on that is that UCLA's hiring/firing history of its coaches is not indicative of intense fan frenzy or unreal expectations, but a normal program going through the usual bumps in the road that most programs do. The lengthening tenures of the latest coaches is just further indication that UCLA is not following some hallowed example of John Wooden, but is making rational decisions that would made at any other higher level Division I program, regardless of history. The myth of this intense pressure at UCLA is overblown--the fans want to win, but we're not expecting what everyone not in LA seems to think we are. We just want a good coach and a good team (and one leads to the other, in most opinions).

UCLA is a very good basketball power, but it is no longer dominant, and hasn't really been since the late 70s, with the /95 championship season being the one real blip on the radar.

Chief Rum

Marmel · 04-03-2003, 04:31 PM

It is now being reported that Ben Howland had his assistant tell his Pitt players that he was leaving. Class Act.

Like I said above, he screwed Pitt in the way that he conducted himself over the last week, and possibly costed those kids a trip to the Final 4.

rexalllsc · 04-03-2003, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marmel
It is now being reported that Ben Howland had his assistant tell his Pitt players that he was leaving. Class Act.

Like I said above, he screwed Pitt in the way that he conducted himself over the last week, and possibly costed those kids a trip to the Final 4.

Howland said today at his press conference that when he accepted the job last night, he called each of his players (at midnight EST) and either spoke with them or left a message. He's also going to Pittsburgh on Sunday to meet with the team and have exit meetings with them.

Marmel, you're looking like a jilted lover over this.

rexalllsc · 04-03-2003, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chief Rum
I'll agree with the general premise with regards to dominant, although I think you'll find that a turnaround is surprisingly fast in college basketball, given that complete roster turnover is necessitated every four years.

My point on that is that UCLA's hiring/firing history of its coaches is not indicative of intense fan frenzy or unreal expectations, but a normal program going through the usual bumps in the road that most programs do. The lengthening tenures of the latest coaches is just further indication that UCLA is not following some hallowed example of John Wooden, but is making rational decisions that would made at any other higher level Division I program, regardless of history. The myth of this intense pressure at UCLA is overblown--the fans want to win, but we're not expecting what everyone not in LA seems to think we are. We just want a good coach and a good team (and one leads to the other, in most opinions).

UCLA is a very good basketball power, but it is no longer dominant, and hasn't really been since the late 70s, with the /95 championship season being the one real blip on the radar.

Chief Rum

Chief, there was an interesting stat on ESPN today. 5 of the last 7 coaches Ucla had hiored, post-Wooden had NO PREVIOUS HEAD COACHING EXPERIENCE.

I was shocked. I was awed. I was shocked and awed.

Marmel · 04-03-2003, 08:01 PM

From what I have seen, the only people who do not have a problem with the way Ben handled this are UCLA fans. Makes sense, since they would ignore the facts as long as they got their man.

Again, I have no rooting interest in this either way, just observing the situation, which interests me since I am a fan of a Big East team.

MrBug708 · 04-03-2003, 08:37 PM

Most UCLA fans think that it could have been done better, but is it UCLA's fault or Howlands fault for burning Bridges. He did nothing illegal, unethical, or ill advised.

If Howland had told his players he was leaving, they would have went straight to the media. Howland was in a no win situation because of the media.

Marmel, place blame where blame should lie

Chief Rum · 04-03-2003, 08:38 PM

I have a big problem with the way he handled things. I don't like what he did. And I am a UCLA fan. In fact, I made that clear before. Of course, I'll allow that your comment is not aimed at UCLA fans in general but against specific UCLA fans here in this thread. Of course, I am also a member of that smaller group, though, so maybe next time you should name names to clarify.

And, BTW, while you denigrate these UCLA fans about the Lavin situation and on the UCLA situation and on UCLA fans and what not and you talk about them not using facts, I find that odd, since you have made an awful lot of suppositions about other aspects surrounding the program, and yet you ahve not once brought any facts to bear. I, in turn, and others here, have brought an immense amount of facts and logical discussion to the fray.

Would you at least care to respond more to those, or maybe bring same actual facts of your own to bear to support your own allegations?

There's no doubt in my mind that us UCLA fans can be subjective and biased about the program, and I'll give you that some aren't crying as much as they should about how Howland left the program. But rexallsc is right in that your entire tone and approach to this has really come off like the jilted lover like he claims. And this extends to your entire stance on the UCLA situation, not just the way Howland handled his departure from Pitt.

Chief Rum

rexalllsc · 04-07-2003, 04:45 PM

http://espn.go.com/ncb/news/2003/0407/1535128.html

Quote:

At first hurt and confused by Ben Howland's decision to take the UCLA job, Pittsburgh players and their outgoing coach will part on good terms after one-on-one exit meetings Sunday.

Howland on Thursday officially ended ties with Pittsburgh, a program he took to national prominence, for a chance to lead the Bruins, whom he idolized growing up in Santa Barbara.

"I feel way better now," point guard Carl Krauser told the Pittsburgh Post Gazette after his nearly hour-long session with Howland on Sunday. "I'm happy with coach's decision. He's been a real big help for me. I wish him the best of luck."

Some players felt abandoned in the three days Howland was negotiating with UCLA. The announcement that he had agreed to take the job came late Wednesday night from Los Angeles, which didn't sit well with the Panthers. According to the Post Gazette, Howland attempted to reach most of the players by phone at that time and early Thursday morning.

Earlier Wednesday, they expressed their anger in a meeting with associate head coach Jamie Dixon.

"I wish he could have told the team the first time," center Torree Morris told the Post Gazette, referring to a meeting a week ago when Howland briefly -- and superficially -- addressed that the UCLA opportunity existed for him. "The way we heard about it wasn't right.

"Overall, it's coach Howland's decision to better himself and his family," Morris added. "Nobody should fault the guy."

Dixon is being endorsed by the players and Howland as Howland's successor. Dixon was scheduled to meet with Pittsburgh chancellor Mark Nordenberg on Sunday, but it doesn't mean the school will promote him. Meanwhile, Memphis coach John Calipari still hasn't heard from the administration, and Wake Forest's Skip Prosser would likely listen. Prosser and Calipari are Pittsburgh natives.

Howland, 45, signed a seven-year contract with a base guarantee of $900,000-plus per year. It includes bonuses for graduation rate, being selected national coach of the year, reaching the Final Four and winning national and Pac-10 Conference titles that could push his salary over $1 million.

Point guard Brandin Knight said he knew what to expect earlier in the week, when he happened to be in Los Angeles attending a Lakers-Grizzlies game involving his brother, Grizzlies guard Brevin Knight.

According to the newspaper, Howland phoned Brandin Knight on his cell and inquired: How's the weather? Do you think somebody could recruit easily there ... ?

Knight figured Howland-to-UCLA was a done deal then.

"I think the guys, the way they found out, the situation could have unfolded better," Knight told the Post Gazette. Knight reportedly was the only one of Pittsburghs three seniors to attend the meeting.

"I think our guys, for the most part, understood his move," Knight said.

Morris, a junior with one season of eligibility remaining, told the paper none of the players have seriously taled about transferring.

"Most people are going to weigh their options," Morris . I'm going to look at things realistically. I don't see any reason to transfer. I want to stay here. I'd like to stay and be an important part of this team."

Information from ESPN.com senior writer Andy Katz and The Associated Press was used in this report.

rexalllsc · 04-07-2003, 11:41 PM

bump for the naysayers

04-02-2003, 11:18 AM	#5
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	You can't blame Howland for taking the job, although the way he handled was a nightmare and he really screwed Pittsburgh. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-02-2003, 12:38 PM	#7
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	He flat out lied to his players and fans. He let the UCLA job distract his team and it might have costed them in the NCAA tournament (not to take away from Marq., which is a fine team). They only lost by a couple points, and there was clearly problems in the team chemistry because of the UCLA rumors that he would not squash at the most important time in these kids careers. He should have taken a page from Roy Williams book. He is handling the situation with UNC perfectly. There is more to college basketball than a coach's record in the last two years. This is not the NBA. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-02-2003, 12:40 PM	#8
HornedFrog Purple Hattrick Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Fort Worthless, Tx	It doesn't matter, they will fire him in 4 or 5 years anyway no matter how he does. __________________ King of All FOFC Media!!! IHOF: Fort Worthless Fury- 2004 AOC Deep South Champions (not acknowledged via conspiracy)

04-02-2003, 12:58 PM	#16
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	We can agree that UNC has become as bad as UCLA. It won't happen, but I would love to see Pitt hire Lavin as their coach. I think he is a fine coach, and will have success somewhere, someday. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-02-2003, 01:18 PM	#20
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	brad, I don't have a ton of knowledge on Lavin, but outside of this year, he seemed to have some pretty decent success, and recruited some talented kids, all in a tough place to coach with JW sitting over your shoulder. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-02-2003, 06:15 AM	#2
Dr. Sak Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA	It was all over the radio yesterday here in Pittsburgh that it was a done deal. Ben supposely had a closed door meeting with his players and the expressions of the players as they left the meeting were ones of disgust. Although no one has been able to confirm it yet, all signs point to him going to UCLA.

04-02-2003, 10:45 AM	#3
MrBug708 Head Coach Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Whittier	Yup I think the players were rather niave though

04-02-2003, 11:09 AM	#4
Anrhydeddu Resident Curmudgeon Join Date: Oct 2002	Yep, there should be a rule about not having any coach ever change jobs. That should be protect the emotions of the whiny crybabies.

04-02-2003, 12:53 PM	#13
rexalllsc Banned Join Date: Feb 2003	And you shouldn't assume that things weren't said between the two that would warrant a goodbye. Pederson left to Nebraska, and Boehm, the interim is a total prick. Who denies a school permission to talk to a coach? It went like this: Ucla: We're going to talk to Howland Pitt AD Boehm: No, permission denied. Ucla: I was asking, not telling. Pitt is ANGRY at Howland. Throughout the process, Howland said, "I'm happy with my job here. I'm not looking to move" etc. etc. Pitt fans and the interim AD are angry...waaaaaa

04-02-2003, 01:15 PM	#19
heybrad Norm!!! Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Manassas, VA	Dola... Let me add that I read that Howland is leaving Pitt with its best recruiting class in years. It would be just like Lavin to take over a successful program with a good class coming in. Win for a couple of years and have the program slowly erode. Or is that what you were looking for?

04-02-2003, 01:25 PM	#23
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	I just got dola-quoted! __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-02-2003, 01:26 PM	#24
HornedFrog Purple Hattrick Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Fort Worthless, Tx	I guess I would start with a .500 record first since Lavin apparently ruined the program. __________________ King of All FOFC Media!!! IHOF: Fort Worthless Fury- 2004 AOC Deep South Champions (not acknowledged via conspiracy)

04-02-2003, 02:29 PM	#25
MrBug708 Head Coach Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Whittier	Do you guys remembered what happened with Mike Price at Wazzu this past year? He agreed to go to Bama, but still coach the Rose Bowl game? How wonderful is that? Howland said everything right to the media. "I'm happy at Pitt and I plan to fulfill my contract" "We have a great thing going here and we are competing for a NC" "The facilities are some of the best in the nation" Where's the lie? Say I have a gf and she isn't bad looking, we go well together, but Jennifer Gardner comes along and asks me out. What do I say? I never planned on leaving my currant gf, but it's Jennifer Gardner, things come up. Sounds right, isn't it every coaches goal to win an NC? No one doubts Pitt has a great Arena What's Howland going to do? Say No Comment? Yes, that would make things all better. His players are left in the dark during an important time. A time where emotions can destroy your hopes. He also couldnt come out and say I want the UCLA job since no offer was made. Everyone in Pitt was too naive

04-02-2003, 03:35 PM	#26
Dr. Sak Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA	Well I have also heard what was said to Ben Howland by Zavascus when he got benched. I guess Ben yelled at him for giving up on a play then Zavascus came back saying "Well why should I not give up when you have given up on us and plan on ditching us to go to UCLA after the season." That was roughly the conversation. It was just shady how this deal was pretty much done in under 48 hrs since they lost. The big problem now is that his top assistant is not going with him to UCLA. It was rumored that he ran a lot of the practices and got some big recruits. There was an article in todays Pittsburgh paper that I thought was quite interesting. It was about coaches not honoring contracts and it is only penalizing the players. It will be linked at the bottom. Article

04-02-2003, 03:37 PM	#27
Dr. Sak Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA	Dola...No way Pitt hires Lavin. The main guy they are looking at is John Callapari. They are trying to lure him back to Pittsburgh, where he is from, like UCLA brought Howland home.

04-02-2003, 03:56 PM	#29
henry296 College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Pittsburgh, PA	Jamie Dixon is also a finalist to be the head coach at Wright State (where is kingnebwsu) and Illinois State. Todd __________________ "It's a great day for hockey" - "Badger" Bob Johnson

04-02-2003, 03:59 PM	#30
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	I have also read that Dixon may get a head coaching job of his own. I know Pitt will not hire Lavin, I just thought it would be cool to see teams switch coaches and observe what happens. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-02-2003, 04:09 PM	#31
MrBug708 Head Coach Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Whittier	Jaime Dixon is from Woodland Hills area, about 20 minutes from UCLA I believe. His wife is from Hawaii. He's rumored to want a West Coast coaching job and would be willing to sit a few more years as the Top Assistant coach at UCLA rather then some rebuilding project back east

04-02-2003, 05:05 PM	#33
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	Hey Marmel, I actually agree with you on it being a crappy situation, and I wouldn't be surprised if the UCLA rumors had a big part in Pittsbourgh losing. I also think and have thought for some time that coaches switching teams so relatively easily, while players have to sit out a year and jump through all sorts of hoops to do it, is just plain wrong. That said, I never heard Howland once say he was putting in for the UCLA job while his team was still playing. He only said it was his dream job, and this is actually perfectly researchable when he has stated being a UCLA fan since he was a kid--in Cerritos, CA, 20 minutes from downtown LA, I might add. He had probably said it a bunch of times in character pieces when it really was a "dream" job. What's he supposed to do now? Deny it? Everything these guys have said is true, UCLA fans or not. He said all the right things. He said he really liked it at Pittsburgh. He has a good thing going. He has some great recruits coming in. From what I can tell, what he could have been more careful with was hiding his enthusiasm behind the scenes. Apparently the idea was out that he would be interested in the UCLA job were it to open up, and anonymous sources kept telling the media this, essentially kept the firestorm going even as Howland flatly denied it all. It wasn't Howland himself, but the swirling media storm that created doubts for those players, but you and I and everyone are way too out of the loop to even begin to tell how much of the fault for that resides with Howland, with these "anonymous sources" and with the vulturish media. As for UCLA, maybe he will be gone in six years. Who are we to know what's going on in six years? Check something out for me, Marmel. See how many Division I coaches actually last six years or more. I'm betting you're going to find that six years beats the average by quite a bit. So what are you saying? Howland will be here longer than usual? My guess from your tone and diametrically opposed viewpoint is that you actually think that's a short time. I disagree. You seem to be observing that a six-year Howland tenure at UCLA would be a failure. Would it? Throwing out for the moment that there could be numerous reasons why Howland would not be coaching anymore at UCLA besides being fired, if he were to get fired by UCLA after six years, why isn't a longer than normal time at the job justifiable to you? Could it be becasue you yourself are doing the same thing you are accusing UCLA fans of-- that if Howland doesn't become the next Wooden (staying 28 years), he's a failure? And you're telling UCLA fans that they are unrealistic? Here's a newsflash for ya. Only two UCLA coaches have been fired since UCLA. The last two. One was Harrick, fired for NCAA violations, a situation that has become even more telling given his most recent encounter with the "law". And the other was Lavin, with the team's first losing season in 55 years. More on why Lavin was fired in just a bit. To save you some research, I'll just tell you what happened to the others. Bartow is the only guy I would say succumbed because of the intense pressure of being at UCLA. And guess what? He was the first coach after Wooden. What would you expect? He resigned after the '77 season and took over the new UAB program, raising it to new heights. Cunningham was next. After two years, he had something of an epiphany about his life direction. Things were fine at UCLA-- Cunningham just decided he didn't want to coach anywhere anymore. He resigned after the '79 season and true to his word and intent, he has not coached organizaed basketball since. Brown was next. You know Larry Brown? The travelling man? Everyone loved Brown and Brown loved UCLA. He left in '82 because of his wandering lust, a chance at the NBA, and a stupid personal feud with our AD back then. He has often said this was the one mistake he made in his life (leaving UCLA). Farmer was next, and promptly took Brown's talent (he went to the F4 in '80), and turned into an NIT team. He resigned in '84. Then Hazzard came, and UCLA was hit by recruiting violations. The program was at its lowest level ever (pre-Lavin). Once we cleared sanctions, Hazzard decided to resign, and we moved on to Harrick. It should be telling to you also that the two longest tenured coaches have been the last two ones, and that they both stayed a lot longer than the average Division I coach. And one of them wasn't fired for performance issues (Harrick). You want to believe there's this intense fan frenzy here and unreal expectations of an NC every year, but there just isn't. The fact that you don't know this makes me wonder if you have ever been out here (in LA) in the past 10-15 years, or what your big experience is with UCLA fans that leads you to this conclusion. I can only tell you that you have been naively brainwashed by the media, and by your own unreal expectations of what UCLA fans are like, based on--what? Fans from 20-25 years ago? Nowadays, most UCLA fans just want a consistent team that will have a good shot at the conference title in a given year, and every three or four year put together a team that might reach the Final Four. Sure, we have a rabid few that insist on NCs, but they are no different or more numerous than the same types of fans that can be found at Duke or Kentucky or Michigan State or Kansas or Arizona. I urge you to reassess your take on UCLA fans, because all I can tell you from out here in LA is, you're just flat dead wrong. As for Lavin, I was going to point out my lengthy post in the last thread which listed 15 reasons, with evidentiary backing, why the guy should be canned. Only one of those reasons (the last one) had to do with UCLA itself. All of the others were reasons which can occur at any Division I school and lead to a coach's firing. But as it turns out-- I WAS RESPONDING TO YOU! Here it is: Lavin Fired Thread, With My Long Post Listing Reasons Please, please, tell me you actually read that post, Marmel. If you did not, I will lose a lot of respect for you. That was addressed primarily at you, and as you can see from its length, I put a LOT of time into it. Why don't you check it out and let me know why Lavin is a good coach? Trust me, Pitt doesn't want Lavin. I have heard Calipari and Crean tossed out there, and I think both would make fine coaches. I'm hopeful that Lavin has learned some things from his experience at UCLA, but the fact of the matter is that most of the problems he had within the program started within the first three years of his tenure (some even from Day 1), and despite plenty of notification from the media about what he was doing wrong, he refused to change his ways or work on his weaknesses, or seem to learn any one thing about coaching in UCLA. If the firing will finally open this guy's eyes, and he will finally work on basketball fundamentals, or recruit seriously, or hire a vet coach that has skills in areas Lavin does not, then maybe he can be a good coach. Unfortunately, he showed none of this ability to learn at UCLA, and he had every reason to change his ways. He is the master of delusion, both of himself and the media and "other school fans" who are convinced of his greatness. My long post in the other thread was meant to display the falseness of that myth. Once again, I certainly hope you took (or will take) the time to read it, because it was addressed to you personally and dispels this myth--the myth of the Good lavin, if you will--in many ways. BTW, no reports I have heard indicate that Dixon is NOT going to UCLA with Howland. The assistants' compensations were the primary reason for the day or two hold up to all this, while Howland and Guerrero worked out the deal. Do you really think it would take that long if Dixon weren't a part of the picture? The only way Dixon is leaving Howland, wherever he goes, is for a head coaching job (which, yes, could happen this year). Oh and lastly, creaky old Pauley Pavillion. Well, okay it's not a new building. How's that Carrier Dome? Anyway, Pauley is just fine. Somehow I don't think you have visitied it, but I could be wrong. It's still a fine place to watch a game, and creaky or not, it also is home to a lot of history. And there's value in that, too. Chief Rum __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

04-02-2003, 08:27 PM	#34
MrBug708 Head Coach Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Whittier	Go Chief Go See Chief Post

04-02-2003, 09:25 PM	#35
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	Chief, I was waiting for your response for a while, and I guess I missed it. I will read it now. I was truly interested. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-02-2003, 09:28 PM	#36
MylesKnight College Benchwarmer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Neptune Beach, Florida	Howland, what are you doing? "The grass is not greener", my friend. __________________ IT'S ALL ABOUT THE BLACK & GOLD!! Last edited by MylesKnight : 04-02-2003 at 09:28 PM.

04-02-2003, 11:24 PM	#37
tucker342 Pro Starter Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Iowa City, IA	Big mistake by Howland. He had something good going at Pitt. Now he enters a very high pressure situation at UCLA... Of course he would be living in Southern California, so ya nevermind, I can see why he left.

04-03-2003, 12:29 AM	#38
MrBug708 Head Coach Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Whittier	Go West Young man!

04-03-2003, 10:31 AM	#39
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	Chief, I think you would agree that stability at the head coaching position is almost a requirement for a team to be dominant for (let's say) 10 years. Kentucky may be an exception, but otherwise, teams who change coaches every 7 years on average are not your dominant teams. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-03-2003, 11:59 AM	#40
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	I'll agree with the general premise with regards to dominant, although I think you'll find that a turnaround is surprisingly fast in college basketball, given that complete roster turnover is necessitated every four years. My point on that is that UCLA's hiring/firing history of its coaches is not indicative of intense fan frenzy or unreal expectations, but a normal program going through the usual bumps in the road that most programs do. The lengthening tenures of the latest coaches is just further indication that UCLA is not following some hallowed example of John Wooden, but is making rational decisions that would made at any other higher level Division I program, regardless of history. The myth of this intense pressure at UCLA is overblown--the fans want to win, but we're not expecting what everyone not in LA seems to think we are. We just want a good coach and a good team (and one leads to the other, in most opinions). UCLA is a very good basketball power, but it is no longer dominant, and hasn't really been since the late 70s, with the /95 championship season being the one real blip on the radar. Chief Rum __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

04-03-2003, 04:31 PM	#41
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	It is now being reported that Ben Howland had his assistant tell his Pitt players that he was leaving. Class Act. Like I said above, he screwed Pitt in the way that he conducted himself over the last week, and possibly costed those kids a trip to the Final 4. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-03-2003, 08:01 PM	#44
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	From what I have seen, the only people who do not have a problem with the way Ben handled this are UCLA fans. Makes sense, since they would ignore the facts as long as they got their man. Again, I have no rooting interest in this either way, just observing the situation, which interests me since I am a fan of a Big East team. __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-03-2003, 08:37 PM	#45
MrBug708 Head Coach Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Whittier	Most UCLA fans think that it could have been done better, but is it UCLA's fault or Howlands fault for burning Bridges. He did nothing illegal, unethical, or ill advised. If Howland had told his players he was leaving, they would have went straight to the media. Howland was in a no win situation because of the media. Marmel, place blame where blame should lie

04-03-2003, 08:38 PM	#46
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	I have a big problem with the way he handled things. I don't like what he did. And I am a UCLA fan. In fact, I made that clear before. Of course, I'll allow that your comment is not aimed at UCLA fans in general but against specific UCLA fans here in this thread. Of course, I am also a member of that smaller group, though, so maybe next time you should name names to clarify. And, BTW, while you denigrate these UCLA fans about the Lavin situation and on the UCLA situation and on UCLA fans and what not and you talk about them not using facts, I find that odd, since you have made an awful lot of suppositions about other aspects surrounding the program, and yet you ahve not once brought any facts to bear. I, in turn, and others here, have brought an immense amount of facts and logical discussion to the fray. Would you at least care to respond more to those, or maybe bring same actual facts of your own to bear to support your own allegations? There's no doubt in my mind that us UCLA fans can be subjective and biased about the program, and I'll give you that some aren't crying as much as they should about how Howland left the program. But rexallsc is right in that your entire tone and approach to this has really come off like the jilted lover like he claims. And this extends to your entire stance on the UCLA situation, not just the way Howland handled his departure from Pitt. Chief Rum __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

04-07-2003, 11:41 PM	#48
rexalllsc Banned Join Date: Feb 2003	bump for the naysayers

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)