for Howland? Clean program, good results, respects other teams, down this year but the year’s not over. he’s not likely to end up being fired unless the losing continues into next year or unless UCLA fails to make the tournament a few times running, which is pretty unlikely given Howland’s track record.

yeah, I get it you don’t like UCLA’s offense under Howland, but he AFAIK has never trashed or said anything even remotely disrespectful about the USC program. Sheesh, you’re going just a tad overboard, no?

but, I really respect Howland as a coach. He has always been most respectful to USC. I thought it was cool how friendly Ben and Timmy were. I think Ben is a great coach.

But, it appears that his style of play may not be evolving with the game these days, or at least the kids expectations. And, I think that UCLA may throw him under the bus.

But, Ben is a good man. His final four streak was amazing.

So I saying even though Ben is very successful he still can’t sleep at night, do you think that is good for ones life. And the BN boys are start to say it is OK to boo his team. You got to understand Ben came from programs that he put together and there was no pressure to do anything other than get to the tournament.

yes ben made programs with no pressure to get into the tournament. what i think the problem is that a lot of people expect him to be the next john wooden. what john did for UCLA back in the day is great. but this is a 2009 and i don’t think there will be another john wooden any time soon, no 88 game win streak etc.

but what i do hope is that ben turns this team around and gets some wins.

ps
my apoligies if my comments make no sense, been drinking a lot of egg nog

merry christmas to all

It is sad because until this guy finally passes on he will forever hang out at ucla, why because THAT IS ALL HE HAS GOT.

the problem with having Wooden as a standard is that his level of success will never be met again in a marquee sport in Division I athletics. it’s not an unnaturally high standard, it’s a standard that cannot be met in this age, where to win more than one national title in men’s basketball in a half-century makes a program elite.

that being said, with the resources and tradition at their disposal, it’s about as acceptable for ucla to miss the ncaa tournament as it for USC to have a losing record in football.

KO DEE is the best Gerrity and Washington will beat you down, Nicola, Alex S and Johnson look out Pac-10 he come the judge.

then you don’t really get it at all. I am assuming that you were implying that UCLA had/has such ridiculously high expectations that even a coach with Steve Lavin’s seemingly impressive record couldn’t please the fans in Westwood. If that is so, then you really don’t get it. I don’t know how many of Lavin’s games you watched, but I watched all of them and the UCLA fans who despise Lavin probably watched most of them as well. He wasn’t a good coach. What he was was a man who had great talent (first the leftovers from Harrick and then the ones he was able to recruit in his early years, still riding the coattails of Harrick and his National Championship team). However, because he wasn’t a competent coach, the players were running the show. IF they wanted to, they made an effort and won games. They were always up for the big games but floundered in what should’ve been gimmes. From people who worked for the team and others I knew who spent time around Steve Lavin, he was like a parent who was more concerned with his kids liking him then being a disciplinarian. And for anyone who has ever taught children or raised them, it is most important that they respect you, not “like” you. in time, if you have been consistent and fair, the consequences of that respect will be fondness.

I think of Lavin as someone who probably watched the film “Mr. Holland’ Opus” and dreamed of his own golden years being filled with players returning to let him know how his influence in their lives allowed for their successes in life. Unfortunately for him, he is remembered for exactly what he wasn’t: a coach (no need to even include the word “good” before the word coach). Baron Davis has made comments about how much success his UCLA team could’ve had if they actually “had a coach.” And by all accounts while he was at UCLA, he liked Lavin. Can you imagine anyone saying that about Ben Howland?

Believe me, I could go on and on about Lavin (how he even became the “coach,” how his players never developed at UCLA, him asking Wooden to be the best man at his wedding, etc., etc.) but my time on the LifeCycle is over which means so is my time on the computer.

By all means, continue to spend hours dissecting UCLA’s basketball team over here on a USC site (which I find odd , but whatever) but don’t insult every college basketball fan’s intelligence by using Steve Lavin to support your thesis.

I can’t understand how anything I wrote could have been interpreted as being stuck there; I wrote nothing about his coaching in my post.

And it is not just me. I know a lot of UCLA fans and not one of them ever talks about needing a coach who can win national titles every year. I just don’t know where these accusations come from. Just because UCLA fans have great fondness for John Wooden doesn’t mean they expect the basketball program to ever resemble what it was during his tenure. It’s pretty hard to get into UCLA and so the students are very intelligent and definitely smart enough to realize that the college basketball scene is very different from what it was in the 60’s and 70’s. Furthermore, the “one and done” situation is going to make it even harder for teams to even just be consistent contenders year in and year out.

And since you mentioned it, I don’t think the jury is still out and I do count three consecutive Final Four appearances as proof of Howland’s coaching ability. I think three trips to the Final Four can tell a lot more about a coach than one National Championship because you can win one championship by having the best team in any given season. Although Howland had some very good players, he did not have the best team in any of those years and yet he figured a way to get those teams to the FF

My goal is not to get into a pissing match here but John McKay is not John Wooden. I say that because whether you like him or not, and whether you agree with this or not, John Wooden has become an icon in American basketball history. A lot of that has to do not only with how well his teams did but also because of the kind of person he is and, in large part, to the fact that Americans respond very positively to people who are 1) successful and 2) don’t disappoint the public with crude or disgraceful behavior. Case in point: the favorability rating of Tiger Woods before Thanksgiving Day 2009.

And shrines are erected all over this country for sporting heroes. To act as if it is absurd that UCLA would celebrate someone who has meant so much to the school and to college basketball in general, to me, just seems ridiculous.

http://wearesc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108311 this one is from Lono

how long till they call for Bens head 6 or9 more losses?

The day after another humiliating and dispiriting loss, this is what is bothering me the most about our basketball program. There is no passion and intensity in Howland’s basketball program: