Ok, so that’s a misleading headline; in a game where UCLA spent the entirety chasing after the Cal Berkeley Golden Bears of all teams, finding interesting things to talk about was always going to be a challenge. And yet, I found some things to point out, so here’s a list of them before I go scream into a pillow for a bit.
Let’s address something that I’ve been seeing in the comments before anything else: the idea that Cronin bullies his players and throws them under the bus at every given opportunity. I am going to assume a lot of this has to do with the fact that the team is losing games currently that they should not be, and thus there is a lot of nitpicking of the head coach for any real or perceived slights. That said: no, he is not bullying the players, get that out of your head and stop being obtuse. Nothing Mick Cronin is saying this year is any different than what he has said in years past while at UCLA; the only difference is the team has been awful and has not responded in the way past teams have. A lot of coaches use the media as a tool to talk to their players, and a lot of championship-winning basketball coaches have been demonstrative on the sidelines. None of this is disqualifying of Cronin as a coach for UCLA, and frankly, I’m annoyed that I have to even discuss this.
To that end, let’s also quickly discuss recruiting, and this weird idea that Mick Cronin cannot recruit. Uh, guys, who recruited Amari Bailey? And Jaylen Clark? And even Johnny Juzang, who was the knockdown shooter that people say Cronin is incapable of recruiting. Cronin is capable of recruiting very well, the problem is the game changed this past year and Cronin tried to zag instead of zig. We need to be clear-eyed about a few things: UCLA did not miss out on recruits because Cronin is a bad recruiter, but rather because UCLA is not operating with the resources of other schools and thus missed out on several impact recruits because they were unable to throw the NIL bag at them the way anyone else was able to. UCLA’s NIL operation is not at the level where they can throw million-dollar deals at impact transfers, especially when they had to spend a chunk of their funds just to retain Adem Bona. And it’s hard to blame Cronin for the NIL issues - he’s constantly trying to promote the Men of Westwood to get people to donate. The logical thing that will happen is that Cronin leaves for Louisville, which has always been more than happy to play ball as far as paying for talent and will get a bunch of recruits that he wants and win a ton of games while naysayers throw up their hands and wonder why that happened.
That said, I alluded to how he zagged instead of zigged, and that’s about the influx of Euro players this year. The idea was sound enough in theory: UCLA would go heavy on bringing in a group of Euro players who have played at a professional level for a few years and are less interested in big NIL deals because they are looking for a place to develop, and in return those players would be able to keep UCLA afloat while some other players took longer to develop, creating a “rebuilding” year where UCLA was competitive but not expected to be nationally-relevant until the following year. Unfortunately, the Euro players have not nearly lived up to the billing, especially Aday Mara who was sold as a potential lottery pick due to his size and skill set. To be sure, Berke Buyuktuncel looks to be a good rotation piece, and Illane Fibleuil has some intriguing potential, but these guys were not ready to carry the load, and so Cronin went bust on his gamble. It happens, and I assume if Cronin stays the plan will be to go heavy on the transfer portal for this next year to supplement the developing players with actual veteran skill.
Ok, all that said, how about the game?
There was speculation after the Stanford game that Cronin was referring to Illane Fibleuil with some comments he made about players not doing what they’re supposed to do when put in the game, especially because Fibleuil was making a habit of entering games, immediately making a mistake, and then getting pulled. So it was encouraging to see Fibleuil enter this game and do the things he is supposed to do, and get rewarded with playing time as a result. It seems clear that the coaching staff does not expect Fibleuil to be an offensive threat but to simply make smart decisions on that end, instead focusing on defense. Outside of a bad offensive goaltending late in this game, that’s essentially what happened; Fibleuil was UCLA’s best defender and tied for the team lead in rebounds with six. That’s exactly what you want to see in these situations: a player responding to what his coach says with improved play, and now you hope he can continue to improve going forward.
Similarly, Adem Bona just looks so much better these days. There was a point early in the second half where he just took over defensively, grabbing two steals for breakaway baskets, which is not something anyone should reasonably expect from their center. He also had a block late in the second half that made me gasp in the stands, as he jumped early yet somehow was quick enough to recover and jump a second time to block the shot. Bona likely looks much better if there were any other consistent offensive threats to keep double- and triple-teams off him, but all of the focus early in the season is paying off here.
On the flip side, I think we’re starting to see the moment where Lazar Stefanovic finally loses favor with Cronin. There’s simply no excuse for his play anymore, and I think Mick Cronin is recognizing that with how often he gave Stefanovic the hook. Stefanovic’s 25 minutes in this game was his least played all season, and it was completely deserved. If anything, I probably would have benched him the entirety of the second half after watching him get backdoored twice to start the half. I was thinking about a quote Cronin made back during his first season about how some guys were getting minutes that they did not deserve simply because the players behind him were not showing enough, and I think that’s what we’re getting with Stefanovic, a player that Cronin likely saw as a bench piece but is being forced to throw into the starting lineup just because he has experience. Hopefully, this is the start of the shift away from Stefanovic as a key cog going forward because UCLA is not good enough to have him sit around and occupy space on the floor.
Outside of Bona and Fibleuil, the UCLA defense was not great, and a lot of what we saw reminded me of Cronin’s first year when guys would overhelp on drives and allow open looks from outside as a result. UCLA lacks solid on-ball defenders at the moment, with too many guys gambling or being lackadaisical on the defensive end, thus compromising the defensive integrity. And it all leads to people being out of position for rebounds as well (UCLA was outrebounded 39-29, including a disgusting 14-6 offensive rebounding advantage). Defense is as much about effort as anything else and can take time for younger players to develop.
Offensively, I feel a lot of the issues came down to execution. Yes, this team struggles to shoot, but beyond that, the offense is getting open looks, but players are processing things too slow, or not throwing good passes, or not looking to make the extra pass and bogging things down again. I think we were spoiled a bit by how good players like Jaime Jaquez, Tyger Campbell, and others ended up developing because this team is not doing anything crazy different offensively than in years past beyond going inside a bit more often. Offensive development can come with time (see the UCLA women’s team as an example of players just getting better from their freshman to sophomore years) so this will be something to monitor going forward. The season is basically over anyway, you gotta take something from it.
As far as rotations are concerned, I think I’m at the point where I don’t care who is performing in practice and who is not. If there’s a major change I’d want to see from Cronin for the rest of the year, it’s that he gives some of the younger guys some run just to see what they can do. Aday Mara has not looked great this season, but I would much rather watch him struggle than watch more of Kenneth Nwuba at this point. That’s not a slight to Nwuba, who has been an exemplary Bruin and will always hold a special place in my heart for how he entered an Elite Eight game cold and ruined Hunter Dickenson’s draft stock for years, but I know who he is and what he provides at this point. Similarly, I would much rather watch Fibleuil and Brandon Williams get live rounds to work through their mistakes than watch Stefanovic be useless. And after six minutes of largely fine basketball, I’d like to see Jan Vide get more run just to see what he can do. These changes would not improve the team overnight, but we are past the point of believing this team can go on a major run to make the NCAA Tournament, and instead, we’re seeing what we have going into next year and what improvements can be made.
One last thing: I’ve been at pretty much every UCLA home game this year, and I have to say the UCLA in-game experience is just abysmal. There’s no energy, little engagement, and the whole thing just screams uncool in a way that can’t be helping attract either recruits or future donors from the students (who, as usual, are not catered to in the slightest, because why would the athletic department want to engender goodwill from current students and get them to donate in the future?). The amount of times my group found ourselves just browsing on our phones was borderline ridiculous, and I would hope someone in the athletic department can figure out some improvements here.
Go Bruins.
Thanks again for supporting The Mighty Bruin. Your paid subscriptions make this site possible. Questions, comments, story ideas, angry missives and more can be sent to @TheMightyBruin on Twitter.
Nothing public, but rumors were multiple programs (including Duke iirc) were ready to throw million-dollar deals at him to transfer instead of enter the draft. Bona did not want to go NBA immediately, so UCLA put the money together for a competitive-enough offer to keep him.
Exactly… these are all just excuses that somebody told somebody about so and so that got all these millions because of donors. I don’t doubt that ucla is lacking in nil, but it’s because there aren’t enough fans that support a dying breed of basketball that Cronin is into
UCLA literally won the Pac-12 and would have been a #1 seed had they not had two catastrophic injuries in the final week of the season just last year. If that's a dying breed of basketball that UCLA fans won't support then this program and fanbase deserves absolutely nothing and should be relegated to the dust bin of history.
Read the article posted by the expert below… like it or not, it’s a dying breed of basketball, especially in LA. Fans showed up for the lonzo ball sho$)t show season because it was entertaining. Alford wasn’t a good coach by any stretch, but he sure as hell recruited some good teams, and fans showed up the year that the ball was in town. The fanbase doesn’t deserve anything, but if you don’t provide the fans what they’re asking for, they’ll find a product that does, it’s really as simple as that
I’d wager the author of that article is more reputable than anyone here. And you being one of stats champions in these chats should point out the flaws in that article for me… specifically around stats. The offensive tempo issue is clearly the most obvious indicator of cronins biggest flaw. Nobody wants to be all defense anymore. It’s why the nba keeps changing the rules. It’s why the “best” and highest paid nba players are offensive minded and don’t play defense anymore. There’s minimal entertainment value in the defensive game
Houston, Villanova, MSU, and UConn all play with almost the same tempo as UCLA this year. Only 1 of the Final Four teams last year were in the top 150 in adjusted tempo.
I by no means think that you have to play slow to win, but they idea you can't win or recruit while playing slow is ridiculous.
A random guy with 4000 followers who writes for a gambling website is more reputable about UCLA basketball than the basketball expert on the preeminent UCLA sports site?
There are many basketball fans that don’t like the 3 point line and believe it’s made basketball worse. That may be true, but the change happened and those that moved on made the best of it. Steph curry adapted and moved on and look what he did for basketball around the world. He changed it forever, some say for the good (most fans) while others stopped watching and got relegated to the dust bins.
Fast forward to the ncaa and today. Ask yourself what are they selling? I’d say they are in the market of entertainment. It’s what makes them gobs of money. The NIL is going to make them and the players gobs of money because it brings entertainment. The girl with the massive college basketball NIL deal is making gobs of money and rightfully so because people are actually watching women’s college basketball for the first time in history. The ncaa is happy because they are making money hand over fist. The players are happy because they’re getting paid for the entertainment they bring. The institutions that are adapting are happy because they are bringing in more money.
UCLA needs to adapt to what is being created, because we’re not going backward. UCLA needs to provide the entertainment that the majority of fans want. If they continue to serve the minority and refuse to adapt the way that all the other schools are, then yes, ucla athletics is headed right where you said… it might even be there already because they refuse to adapt. If they continue to draw this line in the sand and won’t evolve with the rest of the world, the money will dry up and it will indeed be relegated to the dust bin of history. The ncaa doesn’t give a rats ass about academics, UCLA needs to step up, or stop the bleeding and do something different
Down 9-0 after 5 minutes Pauley was dead all night... Andrews had a good 1st half and disappeared in the 2nd on offense while Mack and especially Bona stepped up and played hard to try to drag us back and yet - Cal's big, even with 4 fouls, had a double-double and out rebounded Bona by 10! And those three scored all but 11 of our 57 points... Ugh.
It did seem like Andrews, Mack, Bona, and some combination of 2 of Berke/B.Williams/Fibleuil were on the floor together whenever we did close the gap to 8 or once to 6... That might be the best rotation this group can muster even if none of them are an actual point guard or outside shooter - since we don't have any of those anyway... It's at least a stronger defensive rotation for a team that has to struggle so hard to score 60 without sacrificing whatever offensive potential this roster has.
Ben Bolch on 12/19/23: I asked Mick Cronin if a loss like this makes him question roster construction and he said, alluding to NIL challenges: "We did what we could do. Is your question, ‘Did we try to get older transfers?’ Absolutely. So did the Reds, but the Dodgers get them."
So you're saying that the NIL is why Bruins basketball is in the shape it's in? Then NIL has been detrimental to college athletics. "U$C" used to be a pejorative term, whereas now it's a compliment. Duke willing to pay megabucks for Bona? The entire landscape is one of mercenaries.
The poor performance by the Bruins sure made Coach "Mad Dog" Madsen look like Coach K. This season's hopelessness feels worse than when the Bruins were 8-9 (1-3 in Pac-12) almost exactly 4 years ago. Coach Cronin started proving his worth back then by turning the program around from that point on. But he has his work cut out for him this time around because his team has apparently lost all confidence in themselves. They had been fairly competitve in their non-conference games against ranked opponents, so this continuous regression is perplexing.
The nil talk is just a lame excuse for all you cronin lovers. And the reason nobody goes to games is because they aren’t entertaining.
I fully disagree on recruiting but have spoken my piece as hominem… next year will be cronins last at ucla as his brand doesn’t fit what LA wants to watch and what LA players want to play. I won’t watch anymore this season as I’d rather watch something else more entertaining
This article is stellar, and thanks so much for sharing the link. We have talent on our team, but Cronin is so full of himself, he can't see his own flaws.
There were so many runs that opposing teams made against us last season, when our offense completely dried up, and eventually these droughts caught up to us (yes, I realize injuries played a role for sure, but we were leading the Zags, and let them overtake us).
Tyger, JJJ, Clark and Singleton were all great and experienced leaders in their own way, and mostly brought us back in the waning minutes. But the offensive schemes and screams of Cronin are destroying our present team.
Every team has opposing teams make runs against them, give up leads, and lose. Arizona was outscored 18-4 by Princeton last year, going scoreless in the last 5 minutes. Kansas was up 46-34 with 15 minutes to go against Arkansas. Houston gave up a 19-4 run to Miami to get bumped from the tournament. Most losses have something like that.
Last years offense was the 21st most efficient in the country. If the lulls were that significant, that means the offense had to be as efficient as any one in the country the rest of the time. Why did Cronin choke the life out of the offense at times, but it was among the best in the country the rest of the time?
Also, the fact that an at home, uninspiring loss, to Cal, is just being brushed off!?!? Would you all listen to what you’re saying? When’s the last time ucla fans started brushing off losses and expecting throw away seasons? I actually can’t remember… sad that the fan base has fallen this far.
The reason there are no donors is because there are a lot more fans out there like myself that won’t support a boring brand of basketball. We will spend our money on more entertaining options. For those that keep brushing me off, you should really get out of Westwood and watch some other college basketball teams play. There are much better options at this point in time
I was wondering what happened to that predicted "guaranteed victory" against Cal. The loss was so embarassing that Coach Cronin had his assistant Rod Palmer do the postgame press interview instead.
And, when asked what it will take for the Bruins to break out of their morass, he replied with a Dorrellian, "We need to play harder." But even that was better than CMC, who couldn't face the music.
you are right, but a reason is not an excuse. And the reason we got swept is not because of bad coaching, it is because of bad roster construction. Mick is responsible for the roster construction, but that does not mean he is doing a bad game coaching his crappy roster.
The reason is bad offense. Especially turning the ball over. They're never going to shoot lights out, but they definitely can play smarter with the ball.
it's not that we are expecting throw away seasons. It's that this roster was not what we thought and now this IS a throw away season. You cannot change the roster mid-year. This team's ceiling is 17-18 wins.
honestly wouldn't argue with that. But we have 8 road and 8 home games left. 2-6 on road and 4-4 at home? That's 12 wins then maybe pick off a win on day 1 of the conf tourney?
Dmitri, according to On3, Bona's current NIL valuation is $73,000 annually. It was recorded as high as $224,000 back in November 2023, why it's dipped $151,000 is not explained, but because On3's valuations are highly speculative, it probably isn't worth investigating. But getting to your report that the Men of Westwood dropped a big chunk of change on Bona is IMO very alarming.
Adem Bona is ranked #121 in NIL money among college basketball players. There are 84 high school boys basketball players and 20 NCAA women college basketball players earning more NIL money than Adem Bona. If the Men of Westwood emptied their coffers in order to keep Bona in school, the question that has to be asked is how much money does the Men of Westwood have in their collective? It can't be very much.
On3 shows Angel Reese makes $1.7 million dollars per year. Does the Men of Westwood have that type of funny money?
I first learned about the Men of Westwood back in late 2021 or early 2022. If I remember correctly, their mission at that time was to collect $100,000 from donors which was a trivial amount of money then, and in today's world, it's a tiny speck of dust. I could write 20 pages on why collectives, like the Men of Westwood, do not work because they provide no payback to their donors who need something in return (i.e. perks) to remain loyal donors. If you look at the SEC, their collectives work because they're tied to the schools and the alumni associations, and their donors receive kickbacks in the form of tickets, merchandise, opportunities to attend team events, etc. If and when the NCAA ever decides to get off their ass and put in the guard rails, these types of collective activities will be banned.
But in the meantime, UCLA, who is not going to entertain any notion of allowing those types of collectives to be created on their behalf, will remain behind the 8-ball. They are going to remain at the bottom, looking up, when it comes to using NIL money as the dangling carrot for recruiting purposes.
But the reality is, collectives, both legal or illegal, have a limited shelf life because the NIL has already fallen under the control of major corporations and professional sports agencies. We're already seeing Nike, Gatorade, Adidas, Underarmour, Klutch Sports, Roc Nation, Creative Artists, Lee Steinberg, Drew Rosenhaus, and all the other major players signing kids left and right, all the way down to the high school freshman level because they are the future faces of their businesses.
Mick Cronin and Martin Jarmond are merely spectators in this crazy situation. They can't get involved in anything that has to do with money. Any NIL deals has to occur outside of their official sphere of control. Certainly, there are some backroom deals that can be done, but impropriety is not tolerated at UCLA. If it does occur, we might as well change the school initials to USCLA.
You made the point that Cronin landed Juzang, Clark, Amari Bailey, and Peyton Watson, so yes, the man can indeed recruit domestically. But that was then. The NIL situation has changed so dramatically. When those guys committed to UCLA, the collectives were forming and corporations and sports agents were just beginning to explore the NIL market. Fast forward to now and we're seeing the collectives getting pushed aside by the big boys.
History tells us collectives usually get trampled by big business when there is big money to be made. But in the case of the Men of Westwood, how exactly do they expect the money to keep coming in from individual donors when the two most watched programs, football and basketball, are non-competitive? If the donors are fans of UCLA sports, they have to be fatigued by the losses, just like me.
Somebody, please tell Rich Paul we'll name a building on campus after him and the team will switch to New Balance shoes if he can bring us players.
ON3 valuations are quite literally just a made up number. It's an algorithm that uses "brand value" and "roster value" to create an NIL projection. It has zero to due with actual NIL deals, which don't have to be disclosed.
As I said, the On3 valuations are rooted in speculation. But to say that they are literally made up numbers isn't entirely accurate. When they can validate deal amounts, they do. When they can't, they'll generate an estimate based on prior history. So yes, the numbers can be considered unsubstantiated estimates, but to what degree? Are the confidence intervals reasonable? If the rankings are 80% accurate, does that indicate the ranking is useful as a tool?
Let's not downplay the influence of the On3 ranking and reporting. Young athletes, along with their parents, guardians, and advisors, will be using the On3 data as a decision-making tool as they move forward in their athletic careers. On3 is a legitimate website, created by Shannon Terry who has a considerable amount of skin in the game when it comes to detailing high school and college sports.
not sure i would put any stock whatsoever into that algorithm. Bona's NIL valuation is determined based on what he demands and what UCLA was willing to pay.
I agree the NIL situation is out of control and has fundamentally changed the game. But I also agree that is a poor excuse for this team. We didn't lose to Kentucky and Purdue. We lost to Stanford and Cal. Does anyone think those programs are paying out big NIL money??
It’s not a hard idea to understand. UCLA went after bigger names and lost out mainly due to NIL. There’s a question of whether Cronin should have recognized that he did not have the resources to compete in that market, but had he gone the Stanford and Cal route, he gets pilloried for not recruiting to the UCLA standard (which is in its own way stupid, but UCLA fans are a special breed).
There’s an underrated aspect of this roster building where I point out that Cronin failed to backfill the roster the past few years with developmental guys because he was too busy trying to maximize the Jaquez era. UCLA had an unprecedented lack of roster turnover during that time, so the few scholarships available went to guys that were supposed to come in and contribute immediately. It’s not great that the last guys on the bench (think Etienne, Canka, etc.) never developed here and are gone, because those guys would have been the older players now that would have theoretically carried more of the load and meant less youth.
9 players graduating or going pro in the last 2 years does kind of matchup with the maximizing the championship window theory.
I don't think it was the intention, but as I said above, I do think that this recruiting class will act as a bit of a rebooot for the depth component, with no mass exodus at the end of this season and a hopefully solid core to build on with higher profile recruits.
No, that is evading the question which was, does Cal and Stanford have that much more NIL money that got them to beter players than UCLA to justify the ugly losses at home the last two games?
I didn’t evade the question, though? I explained what UCLA did, which was different than Stanford and Berkeley. All three schools reportedly operate in similar NIL spaces, they just took different approaches to how they utilized their resources. UCLA tried something different that clearly isn’t working this year.
Thank you Dimitri. for the clarification. So from what I understand you agree that Cal and Stanford had the same NIL "disadvantages" as UCLA but were able to work around the problem by "taking different approaches" to the problem. If we buy that, then who is that big mistake on--Cronin, the UCLA name, UCLA administration?
Also, you mentioned you were "annoyed" at the bullying comments. Regardless what you call the Cronin personal actions as described in the LA Times articles by Bloch and Plaschke, do you think what he did was acceptble?
What are you talking about Cal and Stanford working around their NIL disadvantage? Stanford is 7-7 and Cal is 5-10. All three programs are in serious trouble.
you are doing a phenomenal job at explaining this. It's not even that the other commenters are having trouble understanding your explanation, they cannot even identify the problem. This must have been a very frustrating day for you.
I think this Mick quote says it all: “Is your question, ‘Did we try to get older transfers?’” he told reporters earlier this season. “Absolutely. So did the Reds, but the Dodgers get them.”
UCLA is basically the Reds. We are what a small market team is in professional sports. We never had a shot at signing Shohei. Gotta focus on bargain hunting.
A big problem I see is UCLA as an institution, which let's face it has always been uber conservative, other than the Medical school, has become stuck in the past. The transfer portal and NIL have fundamentally changed how the NCAA functions, and the Athletic Department seems not to have noticed.
I'm sure they have noticed but what can they do? I just don't think we gave an alumni base that is going to raise millions each year to pay athletes. So it will be hard to compete for national championships. But that is not an excuse to be (tied for) last in the conference. We have enough talent that we should not lose to Cal at home.
And the fact that we're in the process of searching for and hiring a new one might have a lot to do with the stasis the overall athletic program seems to be in and that we're all so frustrated with...
You’re describing a problem that has metastasized over the past 20 years. I have a running theory that any success UCLA has had in athletics has come in spite of the athletic department and school support, and that creates consistency issues across all sports, not just a football or men’s basketball.
First and foremost, thank you as always for the time and dedication you give to each and every piece you write. I am a writer as well, and to do what you do without compensation is so appreciated.
Yes, I have made several comments about Cronin's behavior and I etand by them. It is likely true that this has always been Cronin but it seems to be much more pronounced this season due to the losses and to whom we are losing to as well.
With that said, I stand by my position that Cronin has degraded and treated his players in a way that remains unacceptable to me. And just because many other coaches use similar tactics, it does not make this behavior acceptable in my opinion. That's like saying, all the teachers call their students stupid so it is ok to do so.
We disagree and that is ok and this community remains great because we can disagree.
But... I am just counting the minutes or seconds until Evan attacks me again. But I digress as we at least have freedom of speech in the confines of this valued place. And I am truly grateful for that.
I don't have a problem with Cronin doing what it takes (within reason) to get the most out of his team. My problem is, whatever he is doing, it is not working. The team is regressing. The hallmark of a good coach is he/she pushes the right buttons to get the team to excel. Cronin is struggling in that department. I am not saying he should be fired--he has demonstrated he knows how to coach. But, like the rest of the team, he as had a very bad season.
she still won't say exactly the specific behavior that Cronin considers unacceptable. I've counted about 8 or 9 times people have asked in various threads and no response. Just this mysterious "unacceptable" because. Kinda sad.
Actually Evan your accusation is false. Why don't you see the quote I posted from Bolch and the Plaschke article link. Why don't you read the Bolch article and see all the degrading remarks from Cronin. Why don't you take time to read Plaschke's piece. I agree with their assessment of Cronin.
As I anticipated you would attack me. Your behavior toward me is not warranted.
If he weren't involved in basketball, Coach Cronin could make a good drill sergeant. His angry, in-your-face, military/dojo style of coaching is probably what makes most of his teams so competitive and resilient. I can see how his demeanor and handling of his players and the press might offend some folks, but it's his halting, plodding, iso-ball-oriented offense that is often so ugly and agonizing to watch, particularly when his team is unable to score.
Thank you for a very honest assessment of the team. These were my takeaways from attending last nights game. (Thank you Bruin Varsity Club for the invite). MC never called his players dumb or stupid. He said their aptitude was lacking, meaning their basketball IQ. I agree that MC should play all of freshmen to get more experience. Mara should get all of Nwuba’s minutes.
Quoting Ben Bolch... 'No, bottom came about 15 minutes later when Mick Cronin suggested he wasn’t coaching a smart basketball team and wasn’t sure things would get better anytime soon for the struggling freshmen.'
Quoting Cronin: “The most important thing for a teacher is for his students to have aptitude or they can’t learn, they can’t apply, so your rate of progress and development is way too slow,” Cronin said Wednesday night after his team made only six shots and scored 23 points during the second half of a 59-53 loss to Stanford at Pauley Pavilion. “So if a team makes adjustments, we struggle to adjust to instruction on the fly.”
So Ben Bolch summarizes Cronin's statement by stating that Cronin is suggesting his team is not smart. Cronin is saying that his players lack aptitude and therefore can't learn and can't apply... In my opinion, Cronin is calling his players dumb - not a good look and Cronin should be looking at himself. So, I disagree with you.
I was referring to the girl from Iowa who is the true reason women’s college basketball was entertaining for some last year. Again, not a women’s college basketball fan so don’t know her name, but she seems more like the reason women’s basketball was watched for all of last season, not just the tournament… I could be mistaken
Caitlan Clark is rated the top basket ball player by many but there are many top player's that are highlighted in the media like Angel Reese, Paige Beuckers, Cameron Brink, UCLA' Charisma Osborne and so on. Saying Caitlan is the "reason women's basketball was watched for all of last season" is like saying that Zach Edey or Jaime Juaquez was the reason people watched men's basketball last season. And BTW, UCLA ladies are up 6 over a good Oregon State team at the half as I type--give a watch and maybe you will learn something about the game.
She’s certainly not the only reason… but she was the only player on espn during iowas run last year during the regular season and all everyone talked about in the tournament outside of lsu who had a magical tournament run… she’s still the biggest thing women’s college basketball promotes.
Again, I can appreciate the sell, but most good aau boys high school teams would compete with women’s college basketball programs… as someone else said, I’d still rather watch men’s high school ball because at least they can dunk…
Actually, Angel Reese was the one in the news every day and featured by SI. Your comment about the UCLA/USC game being on national TV and nobody watched (they were on Pac 12N) and now your backtracking after saying Caitlan is "the reason women's basketball was watched" as if the fans from all the other teams, including the champion So Carolina team fans and the other teams in the tournament.would not have otherwise watched is ridiculous.
there's no need to defend yourself. Kaitlyn Clark is THE reason women's college basketball had an uptick in viewership last march. To women's college basketball fans, sure there's dozens other to support. But to say that Edey and Jaquez are the reason fans watched the men's game last year is just ignorant. As much as I love Jaime, he didn't do anything extraordinary last season that hundreds of players before have not done.
It's really bizarre how offended a few people get when you point out the truth that women's basketball is just not that popular. Has nothing to do with gender. College baseball, men's swimming, and men's tennis are not popular either.
Thanks for the writeup. Not very knowledgeable on NIL but know it's now the biggest factor. Maybe a more comprehensive post of how it works and where we stand is in the cards.
i'm hoping the transition for Stef going to being a 6th man or bench player happens sooner than later. he does see the writing on the wall and didn't shoot much this past game, hoping it keeps him on the court. if he leaves in the next portal, I don't think anyone would miss him. Andrews has been atrocious too but at least he has some potential. Stef has maxed out his ability.
Maybe someone could swap Stefanovic's UCLA jersey for his old Utah jersey and have him suit up on the Utes bench for the Bruins' road game against them this Thursday? As the transfer "veteran" of this year's squad, he's been given the benefit of the doubt by playing a lot of minutes as a starter, but he still hasn't been productive. Coach Cronin desperately needs to land another Juzang next season. Can't blame just Stefanovic, though--besides the poor shooting, the entire team has no experience, no chemistry, no leadership, and after the latest embarrassing performances and coaching meltdowns, no confidence.
no, wasn't blaming only Stefanovic. it's just that you have to prune the bad branches. if that means you have a bare tree in the end, so be it. Stefanovic is definitely a bad branch.
Yep. And Stefanovic even had a great opportunity at the Utah game to show his former team what they had lost, but he couldn't do much of anything for the Bruins.
I'm breaking a new year resolution not to beat a dead horse. I'm encouraged to do so because the back-and-forth mostly has been civil to date. So.
Arizona lost 4 starters from last year's Pac12 Tournament winning team, and were rated #4 preseason.
UCLA similarly was viewed as an end of an era and a reload, yet were unranked preseason. CMC was insulted and enraged that his coaching and incoming talent were so dismissed.
But now he says of his coaching and of his recruited talent that it's a fallacy that freshmen improve over the course of their season (Oh? Really?), and that those very recruits have low game IQ.
My how his tune has changed.
Also, not to speak for Baskets, but speaking for Baskets and others, I think the objection to CMC is not the perceived pace of play (which has been highly efficient generally), but where and how the shots are created. It's like pulling teeth to score--so many lengthy droughts! This has been true of his offense for decades. And now we have the controversy of his conduct.
you gotta look at his entire quote about freshmen. it's not wrong...in any sport or at any level. The rest of the quote is: "It's a fallacy because forget the one percentile. For the rest of 'em, it's harder as the year goes on, 'cause it gets harder to win, 'cause there's scouting reports."
This is absolutely correct. It might get easier for freshmen like Amari Bailey, or Jaime Jaquez, or the few that are really going to be stars. But that's the point....very few freshman have that level of talent. They are going to hav to deal with upper classmen who are also getting better, and yes, scouting reports. It does get harder to win as the season goes on. The spotlight gets brighter. The pressure of conference games is greater than the pressure of early non conf games against cupcakes. March pressure is even greater.
As for Arizona, they were ranked #4 coming into the season because they had a stacked roster coming back. We did not and therefore were correctly unranked. Mick's failure this season is the roster he brought back. Dimitri has correctly pointed out how NIL caused him to turn to the Euro market....a risky strategy that has not panned out at least not yet. Everything you said about the offense is true, but the problem is no level of coaching can solve that. This team just does not have the talent to consistently run an efficient offense.
100% as I mentioned, there have been lengthy droughts for a long time, but we had the kind of players like JJJ, Tyger, Singleton and Clark, who could come back and win those games with their calm leadership, experience and polished talent.
I believe Cronin heard the backlash about his conduct, as he took responsibility for the team's struggles, and admitted his behavior was wrong - all in the latest Ben Bolch story. I respect his honesty, as he was losing his team and the support from fans, and I think he knew it.
Evan, it's really too bad that you continue to take every opportunity to take your little stabs. You and I disagree on most things, but you can't seem to engage with me in a respectful manner. I wish you well but will focus in interacting with others in this great community who are kind and reapectful.
I will continue to call you out when you misstate facts. Cronin did not "admit his behavior was wrong." He apologized for not attending a post game press conference. But let's be honest -- that's not your problem with him. Your problem with him is his alleged treatment of his players (which is phenomenal btw). He did not, not should he, apologize for that. UCLA is very lucky to have this man as our coach and I'm going to call you and anyone else out who gas lights about him.
This season is a watershed year, and marks the decline of Bruin basketball
(and athletics). The advantages of a top public university and blue blood, great location, beautiful campus, and stellar weather are no longer valued by recruits. They are entirely uninterested in the Four Letters, but have their sights on only the 6 figures. UCLA cannot be a player unless the Administration recognizes the importance of NIL, or if NIL is modified with guardrails. Both scenarios are doubtful. What happened last recruiting round where CMC did not land a single of two dozen offers, and was forced into the international crapshoot will be the future of Bruin basketball, and possibly sports. It doesn't matter how good a recruiter is CMC. Argument over his style of coaching (which I have been a participant) is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. What players have UCLA in their sights? Evan says that the best the Bruins can hope for next year is to get lucky in the portal. Some strategy. UCLA will be relegated to the dustbin of history not because the fans are undeserving, as DD has suggested, but because it is irrelevant. UCLA meets Loyola IL and USF. And it has ramifications beyond the current coaches. Future coaching prospects no longer will be enticed by having a backyard of talent. They will want a big purse to distribute the funds. The NIL has inverted the power dynamic between coach and player. I've lost interest in the NBA exactly because of that (and rule changes and officiating). Embrace mediocrity.
But returning to the moot discussion, holding teams to under 40% fg only then to have a chance of winning, and then praying that someone gets hot is not a blueprint for success.
Agree with most of what you said with two exceptions. First, yes, our only hope of success next year is to get lucky in the portal. And by lucky I don't mean some top transfer is going to select UCLA because NIL basically precludes that. By lucky I mean get a transfer or three who are undervalued. But that is not my long term prognosis of the program. CMC (or whoever is our coach once he leaves for greener pastures) has to build rosters with guys like David Singleton, Tyger Campbell, and Jules Bernard who are going to stick around 3-4 years. Those guys are not going to command 7 figure NIL deals as freshmen. Those guys are going to value the 4 letters, care about the location and coaching staff of whatever program they select, etc. It's already too late to do that for next year -- thus, transfer portal. Second, the strategy you articulate in your last sentence of praying that someone gets hot is only a strategy because of a talent lite roster. The strategy needs to be holding teams under 40% shooting having consistent offense. But, yeah -- NIL has destroyed college basketball and UCLA is one of its foremost victims.
"Undervalued transfers" are as hard to identify as those "up and coming coaches" that TMB posters angle for with every coaching vacancy. Up to 3 of the current Euros were tagged as one-and-done, so evaluating talent is no easy task.
"Leaves for greener pastures." I remember the good ol' days when UCLA was THE top destination. Unless you were kidding with that. Even so.
"Pray someone gets hot," ie can anyone make a layup?!?
I keep thinking of a comment someone said elsewhere--why would anyone want to come to UCLA, when they could take the payola (formerly illicit) and go to SC or UK etc and skip classes, have no homework and live the life.
Exactly how much did it cost to retain Bona? Is that public or leaked?
Also what does that mean? He was intending to transfer, but there was an NIL bucket of money?
he would have gone to the NBA. Got paid to stay.
Nothing public, but rumors were multiple programs (including Duke iirc) were ready to throw million-dollar deals at him to transfer instead of enter the draft. Bona did not want to go NBA immediately, so UCLA put the money together for a competitive-enough offer to keep him.
and this begs the next question that i cringe to ask: How much NIL money want to get Stefanovic to transfer in? Hopefully zero.
Was he promised a minimum number of minutes?
I would say 36 mpg is inexplicable....but look what he would be replaced with. In any event, he's terrible but NIL has dealt us this hand.
Again… I’m sorry, but unless you’re having bona over for bbq’s, it’s all just smoke to save cronins ass for another season
Exactly… these are all just excuses that somebody told somebody about so and so that got all these millions because of donors. I don’t doubt that ucla is lacking in nil, but it’s because there aren’t enough fans that support a dying breed of basketball that Cronin is into
UCLA literally won the Pac-12 and would have been a #1 seed had they not had two catastrophic injuries in the final week of the season just last year. If that's a dying breed of basketball that UCLA fans won't support then this program and fanbase deserves absolutely nothing and should be relegated to the dust bin of history.
Read the article posted by the expert below… like it or not, it’s a dying breed of basketball, especially in LA. Fans showed up for the lonzo ball sho$)t show season because it was entertaining. Alford wasn’t a good coach by any stretch, but he sure as hell recruited some good teams, and fans showed up the year that the ball was in town. The fanbase doesn’t deserve anything, but if you don’t provide the fans what they’re asking for, they’ll find a product that does, it’s really as simple as that
Well as long as an SB Nation blog says so. Not like anyone else here who disagrees has written for one of those.
I’d wager the author of that article is more reputable than anyone here. And you being one of stats champions in these chats should point out the flaws in that article for me… specifically around stats. The offensive tempo issue is clearly the most obvious indicator of cronins biggest flaw. Nobody wants to be all defense anymore. It’s why the nba keeps changing the rules. It’s why the “best” and highest paid nba players are offensive minded and don’t play defense anymore. There’s minimal entertainment value in the defensive game
Houston, Villanova, MSU, and UConn all play with almost the same tempo as UCLA this year. Only 1 of the Final Four teams last year were in the top 150 in adjusted tempo.
I by no means think that you have to play slow to win, but they idea you can't win or recruit while playing slow is ridiculous.
A random guy with 4000 followers who writes for a gambling website is more reputable about UCLA basketball than the basketball expert on the preeminent UCLA sports site?
can't tell if you are being serious.
There are many basketball fans that don’t like the 3 point line and believe it’s made basketball worse. That may be true, but the change happened and those that moved on made the best of it. Steph curry adapted and moved on and look what he did for basketball around the world. He changed it forever, some say for the good (most fans) while others stopped watching and got relegated to the dust bins.
Fast forward to the ncaa and today. Ask yourself what are they selling? I’d say they are in the market of entertainment. It’s what makes them gobs of money. The NIL is going to make them and the players gobs of money because it brings entertainment. The girl with the massive college basketball NIL deal is making gobs of money and rightfully so because people are actually watching women’s college basketball for the first time in history. The ncaa is happy because they are making money hand over fist. The players are happy because they’re getting paid for the entertainment they bring. The institutions that are adapting are happy because they are bringing in more money.
UCLA needs to adapt to what is being created, because we’re not going backward. UCLA needs to provide the entertainment that the majority of fans want. If they continue to serve the minority and refuse to adapt the way that all the other schools are, then yes, ucla athletics is headed right where you said… it might even be there already because they refuse to adapt. If they continue to draw this line in the sand and won’t evolve with the rest of the world, the money will dry up and it will indeed be relegated to the dust bin of history. The ncaa doesn’t give a rats ass about academics, UCLA needs to step up, or stop the bleeding and do something different
Are you taking about Angel Reese and the Kim Mularkey/LSU circus? Even if they win it all this year, that program is a disaster.
Down 9-0 after 5 minutes Pauley was dead all night... Andrews had a good 1st half and disappeared in the 2nd on offense while Mack and especially Bona stepped up and played hard to try to drag us back and yet - Cal's big, even with 4 fouls, had a double-double and out rebounded Bona by 10! And those three scored all but 11 of our 57 points... Ugh.
It did seem like Andrews, Mack, Bona, and some combination of 2 of Berke/B.Williams/Fibleuil were on the floor together whenever we did close the gap to 8 or once to 6... That might be the best rotation this group can muster even if none of them are an actual point guard or outside shooter - since we don't have any of those anyway... It's at least a stronger defensive rotation for a team that has to struggle so hard to score 60 without sacrificing whatever offensive potential this roster has.
Ben Bolch on 12/19/23: I asked Mick Cronin if a loss like this makes him question roster construction and he said, alluding to NIL challenges: "We did what we could do. Is your question, ‘Did we try to get older transfers?’ Absolutely. So did the Reds, but the Dodgers get them."
So you're saying that the NIL is why Bruins basketball is in the shape it's in? Then NIL has been detrimental to college athletics. "U$C" used to be a pejorative term, whereas now it's a compliment. Duke willing to pay megabucks for Bona? The entire landscape is one of mercenaries.
NIL is out of control.
Hey you scribes: When was the last time the Bruins were swept at home? Opened Conference play 1-3?
Exactly! Cal isn’t making any excuses about nil money at the moment…
The poor performance by the Bruins sure made Coach "Mad Dog" Madsen look like Coach K. This season's hopelessness feels worse than when the Bruins were 8-9 (1-3 in Pac-12) almost exactly 4 years ago. Coach Cronin started proving his worth back then by turning the program around from that point on. But he has his work cut out for him this time around because his team has apparently lost all confidence in themselves. They had been fairly competitve in their non-conference games against ranked opponents, so this continuous regression is perplexing.
The nil talk is just a lame excuse for all you cronin lovers. And the reason nobody goes to games is because they aren’t entertaining.
I fully disagree on recruiting but have spoken my piece as hominem… next year will be cronins last at ucla as his brand doesn’t fit what LA wants to watch and what LA players want to play. I won’t watch anymore this season as I’d rather watch something else more entertaining
Did you help write this article? :-)
https://dknetwork.draftkings.com/2024/1/4/24025749/ucla-college-basketball-mick-cronin-head-coach-record-pac-12-standings-recruiting
Hey look! There’s other professionals out there that are now saying what I’ve been for YEARS! Imagine that
Plashke wrote a pretty scathing article today in the LAT. I tend to agree with most of what he wrote.
Cronin appears to be falling into the same trap as Howland. I just hope the end result is not the same.
Plaskhe also in a span of 3 weeks called for Chip to be retained, then fired, then retained. I consider him a reporter, not an expert.
This article is stellar, and thanks so much for sharing the link. We have talent on our team, but Cronin is so full of himself, he can't see his own flaws.
There were so many runs that opposing teams made against us last season, when our offense completely dried up, and eventually these droughts caught up to us (yes, I realize injuries played a role for sure, but we were leading the Zags, and let them overtake us).
Tyger, JJJ, Clark and Singleton were all great and experienced leaders in their own way, and mostly brought us back in the waning minutes. But the offensive schemes and screams of Cronin are destroying our present team.
Who exactly is the talent on this team? How many guys on this roster would have started on Cronin's previous teams?
Every team has opposing teams make runs against them, give up leads, and lose. Arizona was outscored 18-4 by Princeton last year, going scoreless in the last 5 minutes. Kansas was up 46-34 with 15 minutes to go against Arkansas. Houston gave up a 19-4 run to Miami to get bumped from the tournament. Most losses have something like that.
Josh and Tracy talked about the lulls in offense a lot last season. This wasn't just a game or two occurrence.
Last years offense was the 21st most efficient in the country. If the lulls were that significant, that means the offense had to be as efficient as any one in the country the rest of the time. Why did Cronin choke the life out of the offense at times, but it was among the best in the country the rest of the time?
bingo
Told you--you should be watching the ladies UCLA basketball team.
Thank goodness gracious for the women's team! Even the commentaries on this post are more entertaining than this year's men's team... LoL!
Also, the fact that an at home, uninspiring loss, to Cal, is just being brushed off!?!? Would you all listen to what you’re saying? When’s the last time ucla fans started brushing off losses and expecting throw away seasons? I actually can’t remember… sad that the fan base has fallen this far.
The reason there are no donors is because there are a lot more fans out there like myself that won’t support a boring brand of basketball. We will spend our money on more entertaining options. For those that keep brushing me off, you should really get out of Westwood and watch some other college basketball teams play. There are much better options at this point in time
I was wondering what happened to that predicted "guaranteed victory" against Cal. The loss was so embarassing that Coach Cronin had his assistant Rod Palmer do the postgame press interview instead.
And, when asked what it will take for the Bruins to break out of their morass, he replied with a Dorrellian, "We need to play harder." But even that was better than CMC, who couldn't face the music.
He did? LMAO.
No excuse for getting swept by Stanford and Cal at home.
you are right, but a reason is not an excuse. And the reason we got swept is not because of bad coaching, it is because of bad roster construction. Mick is responsible for the roster construction, but that does not mean he is doing a bad game coaching his crappy roster.
The reason is bad offense. Especially turning the ball over. They're never going to shoot lights out, but they definitely can play smarter with the ball.
it's not that we are expecting throw away seasons. It's that this roster was not what we thought and now this IS a throw away season. You cannot change the roster mid-year. This team's ceiling is 17-18 wins.
What's the floor? 10 wins?
honestly wouldn't argue with that. But we have 8 road and 8 home games left. 2-6 on road and 4-4 at home? That's 12 wins then maybe pick off a win on day 1 of the conf tourney?
Dmitri, according to On3, Bona's current NIL valuation is $73,000 annually. It was recorded as high as $224,000 back in November 2023, why it's dipped $151,000 is not explained, but because On3's valuations are highly speculative, it probably isn't worth investigating. But getting to your report that the Men of Westwood dropped a big chunk of change on Bona is IMO very alarming.
Adem Bona is ranked #121 in NIL money among college basketball players. There are 84 high school boys basketball players and 20 NCAA women college basketball players earning more NIL money than Adem Bona. If the Men of Westwood emptied their coffers in order to keep Bona in school, the question that has to be asked is how much money does the Men of Westwood have in their collective? It can't be very much.
On3 shows Angel Reese makes $1.7 million dollars per year. Does the Men of Westwood have that type of funny money?
I first learned about the Men of Westwood back in late 2021 or early 2022. If I remember correctly, their mission at that time was to collect $100,000 from donors which was a trivial amount of money then, and in today's world, it's a tiny speck of dust. I could write 20 pages on why collectives, like the Men of Westwood, do not work because they provide no payback to their donors who need something in return (i.e. perks) to remain loyal donors. If you look at the SEC, their collectives work because they're tied to the schools and the alumni associations, and their donors receive kickbacks in the form of tickets, merchandise, opportunities to attend team events, etc. If and when the NCAA ever decides to get off their ass and put in the guard rails, these types of collective activities will be banned.
But in the meantime, UCLA, who is not going to entertain any notion of allowing those types of collectives to be created on their behalf, will remain behind the 8-ball. They are going to remain at the bottom, looking up, when it comes to using NIL money as the dangling carrot for recruiting purposes.
But the reality is, collectives, both legal or illegal, have a limited shelf life because the NIL has already fallen under the control of major corporations and professional sports agencies. We're already seeing Nike, Gatorade, Adidas, Underarmour, Klutch Sports, Roc Nation, Creative Artists, Lee Steinberg, Drew Rosenhaus, and all the other major players signing kids left and right, all the way down to the high school freshman level because they are the future faces of their businesses.
Mick Cronin and Martin Jarmond are merely spectators in this crazy situation. They can't get involved in anything that has to do with money. Any NIL deals has to occur outside of their official sphere of control. Certainly, there are some backroom deals that can be done, but impropriety is not tolerated at UCLA. If it does occur, we might as well change the school initials to USCLA.
You made the point that Cronin landed Juzang, Clark, Amari Bailey, and Peyton Watson, so yes, the man can indeed recruit domestically. But that was then. The NIL situation has changed so dramatically. When those guys committed to UCLA, the collectives were forming and corporations and sports agents were just beginning to explore the NIL market. Fast forward to now and we're seeing the collectives getting pushed aside by the big boys.
History tells us collectives usually get trampled by big business when there is big money to be made. But in the case of the Men of Westwood, how exactly do they expect the money to keep coming in from individual donors when the two most watched programs, football and basketball, are non-competitive? If the donors are fans of UCLA sports, they have to be fatigued by the losses, just like me.
Somebody, please tell Rich Paul we'll name a building on campus after him and the team will switch to New Balance shoes if he can bring us players.
So what to do?
Have Cronin read Wooden's books.
?
ON3 valuations are quite literally just a made up number. It's an algorithm that uses "brand value" and "roster value" to create an NIL projection. It has zero to due with actual NIL deals, which don't have to be disclosed.
As I said, the On3 valuations are rooted in speculation. But to say that they are literally made up numbers isn't entirely accurate. When they can validate deal amounts, they do. When they can't, they'll generate an estimate based on prior history. So yes, the numbers can be considered unsubstantiated estimates, but to what degree? Are the confidence intervals reasonable? If the rankings are 80% accurate, does that indicate the ranking is useful as a tool?
Let's not downplay the influence of the On3 ranking and reporting. Young athletes, along with their parents, guardians, and advisors, will be using the On3 data as a decision-making tool as they move forward in their athletic careers. On3 is a legitimate website, created by Shannon Terry who has a considerable amount of skin in the game when it comes to detailing high school and college sports.
i don't understand how the estimates can be considered anything other than speculation when the NIL deals themselves are not public.
and it literally factors in instagram followers.
not sure i would put any stock whatsoever into that algorithm. Bona's NIL valuation is determined based on what he demands and what UCLA was willing to pay.
I agree the NIL situation is out of control and has fundamentally changed the game. But I also agree that is a poor excuse for this team. We didn't lose to Kentucky and Purdue. We lost to Stanford and Cal. Does anyone think those programs are paying out big NIL money??
Good question that should be addressed by Dimitri.
It’s not a hard idea to understand. UCLA went after bigger names and lost out mainly due to NIL. There’s a question of whether Cronin should have recognized that he did not have the resources to compete in that market, but had he gone the Stanford and Cal route, he gets pilloried for not recruiting to the UCLA standard (which is in its own way stupid, but UCLA fans are a special breed).
There’s an underrated aspect of this roster building where I point out that Cronin failed to backfill the roster the past few years with developmental guys because he was too busy trying to maximize the Jaquez era. UCLA had an unprecedented lack of roster turnover during that time, so the few scholarships available went to guys that were supposed to come in and contribute immediately. It’s not great that the last guys on the bench (think Etienne, Canka, etc.) never developed here and are gone, because those guys would have been the older players now that would have theoretically carried more of the load and meant less youth.
9 players graduating or going pro in the last 2 years does kind of matchup with the maximizing the championship window theory.
I don't think it was the intention, but as I said above, I do think that this recruiting class will act as a bit of a rebooot for the depth component, with no mass exodus at the end of this season and a hopefully solid core to build on with higher profile recruits.
No, that is evading the question which was, does Cal and Stanford have that much more NIL money that got them to beter players than UCLA to justify the ugly losses at home the last two games?
I didn’t evade the question, though? I explained what UCLA did, which was different than Stanford and Berkeley. All three schools reportedly operate in similar NIL spaces, they just took different approaches to how they utilized their resources. UCLA tried something different that clearly isn’t working this year.
Thank you Dimitri. for the clarification. So from what I understand you agree that Cal and Stanford had the same NIL "disadvantages" as UCLA but were able to work around the problem by "taking different approaches" to the problem. If we buy that, then who is that big mistake on--Cronin, the UCLA name, UCLA administration?
Also, you mentioned you were "annoyed" at the bullying comments. Regardless what you call the Cronin personal actions as described in the LA Times articles by Bloch and Plaschke, do you think what he did was acceptble?
What are you talking about Cal and Stanford working around their NIL disadvantage? Stanford is 7-7 and Cal is 5-10. All three programs are in serious trouble.
I think there is more than just NIL going on here. 8/11 of Stanfords players with more than 10 mpg are upperclassmen. 6/9 for Cal. For UCLA it's 1/8.
also where did this idea come from that Cal and Stanford are winning in spite of NIL? They are also having terrible seasons.
you are doing a phenomenal job at explaining this. It's not even that the other commenters are having trouble understanding your explanation, they cannot even identify the problem. This must have been a very frustrating day for you.
I think this Mick quote says it all: “Is your question, ‘Did we try to get older transfers?’” he told reporters earlier this season. “Absolutely. So did the Reds, but the Dodgers get them.”
UCLA is basically the Reds. We are what a small market team is in professional sports. We never had a shot at signing Shohei. Gotta focus on bargain hunting.
For the record, Etienne is averaging 1.6 points at DePaul and Canka has yet to score in 8 games for Wake Forrest this year.
Thanks you!
A big problem I see is UCLA as an institution, which let's face it has always been uber conservative, other than the Medical school, has become stuck in the past. The transfer portal and NIL have fundamentally changed how the NCAA functions, and the Athletic Department seems not to have noticed.
I'm sure they have noticed but what can they do? I just don't think we gave an alumni base that is going to raise millions each year to pay athletes. So it will be hard to compete for national championships. But that is not an excuse to be (tied for) last in the conference. We have enough talent that we should not lose to Cal at home.
It starts with the Chancellor. Young I think was the last one that paid attention to Athletics.
And the fact that we're in the process of searching for and hiring a new one might have a lot to do with the stasis the overall athletic program seems to be in and that we're all so frustrated with...
yes.
You’re describing a problem that has metastasized over the past 20 years. I have a running theory that any success UCLA has had in athletics has come in spite of the athletic department and school support, and that creates consistency issues across all sports, not just a football or men’s basketball.
Dimitri...
First and foremost, thank you as always for the time and dedication you give to each and every piece you write. I am a writer as well, and to do what you do without compensation is so appreciated.
Yes, I have made several comments about Cronin's behavior and I etand by them. It is likely true that this has always been Cronin but it seems to be much more pronounced this season due to the losses and to whom we are losing to as well.
With that said, I stand by my position that Cronin has degraded and treated his players in a way that remains unacceptable to me. And just because many other coaches use similar tactics, it does not make this behavior acceptable in my opinion. That's like saying, all the teachers call their students stupid so it is ok to do so.
We disagree and that is ok and this community remains great because we can disagree.
But... I am just counting the minutes or seconds until Evan attacks me again. But I digress as we at least have freedom of speech in the confines of this valued place. And I am truly grateful for that.
Go Bruins! 💙💛
I don't have a problem with Cronin doing what it takes (within reason) to get the most out of his team. My problem is, whatever he is doing, it is not working. The team is regressing. The hallmark of a good coach is he/she pushes the right buttons to get the team to excel. Cronin is struggling in that department. I am not saying he should be fired--he has demonstrated he knows how to coach. But, like the rest of the team, he as had a very bad season.
she still won't say exactly the specific behavior that Cronin considers unacceptable. I've counted about 8 or 9 times people have asked in various threads and no response. Just this mysterious "unacceptable" because. Kinda sad.
Actually Evan your accusation is false. Why don't you see the quote I posted from Bolch and the Plaschke article link. Why don't you read the Bolch article and see all the degrading remarks from Cronin. Why don't you take time to read Plaschke's piece. I agree with their assessment of Cronin.
As I anticipated you would attack me. Your behavior toward me is not warranted.
THAT is the unacceptable behavior?!?!?!
How about making ugly faces and scowling on the sidelines when a player makes a mistake?
Now THAT is unacceptable. Fire for cause. Don't even pay the buyout. What a mean guy!
LOL.
If he weren't involved in basketball, Coach Cronin could make a good drill sergeant. His angry, in-your-face, military/dojo style of coaching is probably what makes most of his teams so competitive and resilient. I can see how his demeanor and handling of his players and the press might offend some folks, but it's his halting, plodding, iso-ball-oriented offense that is often so ugly and agonizing to watch, particularly when his team is unable to score.
One can always take lessons and learn from the best (thank you Coach!):
https://www.thewoodeneffect.com/character-is-speaking-kindly-about-others-no-matter-what/
Thank you for a very honest assessment of the team. These were my takeaways from attending last nights game. (Thank you Bruin Varsity Club for the invite). MC never called his players dumb or stupid. He said their aptitude was lacking, meaning their basketball IQ. I agree that MC should play all of freshmen to get more experience. Mara should get all of Nwuba’s minutes.
Quoting Ben Bolch... 'No, bottom came about 15 minutes later when Mick Cronin suggested he wasn’t coaching a smart basketball team and wasn’t sure things would get better anytime soon for the struggling freshmen.'
Quoting Cronin: “The most important thing for a teacher is for his students to have aptitude or they can’t learn, they can’t apply, so your rate of progress and development is way too slow,” Cronin said Wednesday night after his team made only six shots and scored 23 points during the second half of a 59-53 loss to Stanford at Pauley Pavilion. “So if a team makes adjustments, we struggle to adjust to instruction on the fly.”
So Ben Bolch summarizes Cronin's statement by stating that Cronin is suggesting his team is not smart. Cronin is saying that his players lack aptitude and therefore can't learn and can't apply... In my opinion, Cronin is calling his players dumb - not a good look and Cronin should be looking at himself. So, I disagree with you.
I know it's linked below, but this piece by Plaschke is pretty spot on...
https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/story/2024-01-07/mick-cronin-ucla-meltdown-take-responsibility
I mean.....neither the LA Times nor Plaschke should have much credibility with UCLA fans.
He demeans the aptitude of the very athletes he recruited.
100%, Sea.
They are not playing smart basketball.....is he supposed to just say they are trying their darnedest and to keep on trying? Good lord.
he's not wrong
I was referring to the girl from Iowa who is the true reason women’s college basketball was entertaining for some last year. Again, not a women’s college basketball fan so don’t know her name, but she seems more like the reason women’s basketball was watched for all of last season, not just the tournament… I could be mistaken
Caitlan Clark is rated the top basket ball player by many but there are many top player's that are highlighted in the media like Angel Reese, Paige Beuckers, Cameron Brink, UCLA' Charisma Osborne and so on. Saying Caitlan is the "reason women's basketball was watched for all of last season" is like saying that Zach Edey or Jaime Juaquez was the reason people watched men's basketball last season. And BTW, UCLA ladies are up 6 over a good Oregon State team at the half as I type--give a watch and maybe you will learn something about the game.
She’s certainly not the only reason… but she was the only player on espn during iowas run last year during the regular season and all everyone talked about in the tournament outside of lsu who had a magical tournament run… she’s still the biggest thing women’s college basketball promotes.
Again, I can appreciate the sell, but most good aau boys high school teams would compete with women’s college basketball programs… as someone else said, I’d still rather watch men’s high school ball because at least they can dunk…
Actually, Angel Reese was the one in the news every day and featured by SI. Your comment about the UCLA/USC game being on national TV and nobody watched (they were on Pac 12N) and now your backtracking after saying Caitlan is "the reason women's basketball was watched" as if the fans from all the other teams, including the champion So Carolina team fans and the other teams in the tournament.would not have otherwise watched is ridiculous.
You are right that I don’t know anything about women’s college basketball… so I’ll stop sticking my foot in
there's no need to defend yourself. Kaitlyn Clark is THE reason women's college basketball had an uptick in viewership last march. To women's college basketball fans, sure there's dozens other to support. But to say that Edey and Jaquez are the reason fans watched the men's game last year is just ignorant. As much as I love Jaime, he didn't do anything extraordinary last season that hundreds of players before have not done.
It's really bizarre how offended a few people get when you point out the truth that women's basketball is just not that popular. Has nothing to do with gender. College baseball, men's swimming, and men's tennis are not popular either.
Thanks for the writeup. Not very knowledgeable on NIL but know it's now the biggest factor. Maybe a more comprehensive post of how it works and where we stand is in the cards.
i'm hoping the transition for Stef going to being a 6th man or bench player happens sooner than later. he does see the writing on the wall and didn't shoot much this past game, hoping it keeps him on the court. if he leaves in the next portal, I don't think anyone would miss him. Andrews has been atrocious too but at least he has some potential. Stef has maxed out his ability.
Maybe someone could swap Stefanovic's UCLA jersey for his old Utah jersey and have him suit up on the Utes bench for the Bruins' road game against them this Thursday? As the transfer "veteran" of this year's squad, he's been given the benefit of the doubt by playing a lot of minutes as a starter, but he still hasn't been productive. Coach Cronin desperately needs to land another Juzang next season. Can't blame just Stefanovic, though--besides the poor shooting, the entire team has no experience, no chemistry, no leadership, and after the latest embarrassing performances and coaching meltdowns, no confidence.
Amen on Juzang. Unfortunately our NIL situation is going to make that tough. Hopefully we will get lucky.
And I think you hit the nail on the head with your last sentence. The fact that Sefanovic plays so much just shows what is behind him on the bench.
no, wasn't blaming only Stefanovic. it's just that you have to prune the bad branches. if that means you have a bare tree in the end, so be it. Stefanovic is definitely a bad branch.
Yep. And Stefanovic even had a great opportunity at the Utah game to show his former team what they had lost, but he couldn't do much of anything for the Bruins.
Off topic, but. 2🏈24.
The line play, tackling, pursuit, speed and athleticism (at every position!).
I don't think that even the genius of Chip Kelly and the nutrient-dense training table are enough to meet the challenges that await. Call me crazy.
fortunately we don't play them next year. Would be a 60-0 defeat. But congrats to Jim Harbaugh. Well deserved.
UCLA and Michigan both play football in name only. Michigan is playing a completely different game than the Bruins. We are in trouble in the B1G.
putting it mildly. We are at the cellar of an 18 team conference.
hey we got a long snapper in the portal. things are looking up.
I'm breaking a new year resolution not to beat a dead horse. I'm encouraged to do so because the back-and-forth mostly has been civil to date. So.
Arizona lost 4 starters from last year's Pac12 Tournament winning team, and were rated #4 preseason.
UCLA similarly was viewed as an end of an era and a reload, yet were unranked preseason. CMC was insulted and enraged that his coaching and incoming talent were so dismissed.
But now he says of his coaching and of his recruited talent that it's a fallacy that freshmen improve over the course of their season (Oh? Really?), and that those very recruits have low game IQ.
My how his tune has changed.
Also, not to speak for Baskets, but speaking for Baskets and others, I think the objection to CMC is not the perceived pace of play (which has been highly efficient generally), but where and how the shots are created. It's like pulling teeth to score--so many lengthy droughts! This has been true of his offense for decades. And now we have the controversy of his conduct.
you gotta look at his entire quote about freshmen. it's not wrong...in any sport or at any level. The rest of the quote is: "It's a fallacy because forget the one percentile. For the rest of 'em, it's harder as the year goes on, 'cause it gets harder to win, 'cause there's scouting reports."
This is absolutely correct. It might get easier for freshmen like Amari Bailey, or Jaime Jaquez, or the few that are really going to be stars. But that's the point....very few freshman have that level of talent. They are going to hav to deal with upper classmen who are also getting better, and yes, scouting reports. It does get harder to win as the season goes on. The spotlight gets brighter. The pressure of conference games is greater than the pressure of early non conf games against cupcakes. March pressure is even greater.
As for Arizona, they were ranked #4 coming into the season because they had a stacked roster coming back. We did not and therefore were correctly unranked. Mick's failure this season is the roster he brought back. Dimitri has correctly pointed out how NIL caused him to turn to the Euro market....a risky strategy that has not panned out at least not yet. Everything you said about the offense is true, but the problem is no level of coaching can solve that. This team just does not have the talent to consistently run an efficient offense.
100% as I mentioned, there have been lengthy droughts for a long time, but we had the kind of players like JJJ, Tyger, Singleton and Clark, who could come back and win those games with their calm leadership, experience and polished talent.
I believe Cronin heard the backlash about his conduct, as he took responsibility for the team's struggles, and admitted his behavior was wrong - all in the latest Ben Bolch story. I respect his honesty, as he was losing his team and the support from fans, and I think he knew it.
el oh el
Evan, it's really too bad that you continue to take every opportunity to take your little stabs. You and I disagree on most things, but you can't seem to engage with me in a respectful manner. I wish you well but will focus in interacting with others in this great community who are kind and reapectful.
I will continue to call you out when you misstate facts. Cronin did not "admit his behavior was wrong." He apologized for not attending a post game press conference. But let's be honest -- that's not your problem with him. Your problem with him is his alleged treatment of his players (which is phenomenal btw). He did not, not should he, apologize for that. UCLA is very lucky to have this man as our coach and I'm going to call you and anyone else out who gas lights about him.
Good luck Evan.
defeat.
"and admitted his behavior was wrong" Wut?
This season is a watershed year, and marks the decline of Bruin basketball
(and athletics). The advantages of a top public university and blue blood, great location, beautiful campus, and stellar weather are no longer valued by recruits. They are entirely uninterested in the Four Letters, but have their sights on only the 6 figures. UCLA cannot be a player unless the Administration recognizes the importance of NIL, or if NIL is modified with guardrails. Both scenarios are doubtful. What happened last recruiting round where CMC did not land a single of two dozen offers, and was forced into the international crapshoot will be the future of Bruin basketball, and possibly sports. It doesn't matter how good a recruiter is CMC. Argument over his style of coaching (which I have been a participant) is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. What players have UCLA in their sights? Evan says that the best the Bruins can hope for next year is to get lucky in the portal. Some strategy. UCLA will be relegated to the dustbin of history not because the fans are undeserving, as DD has suggested, but because it is irrelevant. UCLA meets Loyola IL and USF. And it has ramifications beyond the current coaches. Future coaching prospects no longer will be enticed by having a backyard of talent. They will want a big purse to distribute the funds. The NIL has inverted the power dynamic between coach and player. I've lost interest in the NBA exactly because of that (and rule changes and officiating). Embrace mediocrity.
But returning to the moot discussion, holding teams to under 40% fg only then to have a chance of winning, and then praying that someone gets hot is not a blueprint for success.
💯 Sea. Very well said.
Agree with most of what you said with two exceptions. First, yes, our only hope of success next year is to get lucky in the portal. And by lucky I don't mean some top transfer is going to select UCLA because NIL basically precludes that. By lucky I mean get a transfer or three who are undervalued. But that is not my long term prognosis of the program. CMC (or whoever is our coach once he leaves for greener pastures) has to build rosters with guys like David Singleton, Tyger Campbell, and Jules Bernard who are going to stick around 3-4 years. Those guys are not going to command 7 figure NIL deals as freshmen. Those guys are going to value the 4 letters, care about the location and coaching staff of whatever program they select, etc. It's already too late to do that for next year -- thus, transfer portal. Second, the strategy you articulate in your last sentence of praying that someone gets hot is only a strategy because of a talent lite roster. The strategy needs to be holding teams under 40% shooting having consistent offense. But, yeah -- NIL has destroyed college basketball and UCLA is one of its foremost victims.
"Undervalued transfers" are as hard to identify as those "up and coming coaches" that TMB posters angle for with every coaching vacancy. Up to 3 of the current Euros were tagged as one-and-done, so evaluating talent is no easy task.
"Leaves for greener pastures." I remember the good ol' days when UCLA was THE top destination. Unless you were kidding with that. Even so.
"Pray someone gets hot," ie can anyone make a layup?!?
I keep thinking of a comment someone said elsewhere--why would anyone want to come to UCLA, when they could take the payola (formerly illicit) and go to SC or UK etc and skip classes, have no homework and live the life.
Greener Pastures = money.