UCLA had to let Steve Alford go. Here’s who the Bruins should hire
By Seth Davis Dec 31, 2018 / The ATHLETIC
In the spring of 1975, Gene Bartow was named the men’s basketball coach at UCLA. Having worked most recently at Memphis State and Illinois, Bartow arrived with a reputation as a fine teacher and a skilled tactician, as well as a reputation for moral probity that earned him the nickname “Clean Gene.” It did not turn out to be a happy experience. Bartow struggled under the enormous pressure that came with following John Wooden. Despite leading the Bruins to a 52-9 record over two seasons, he skipped town to take a job at UAB, which to that point didn’t even have a basketball program.
The circumstances were a lot different on Sunday, when Bartow’s 57-year-old son, Murry, was named UCLA’s interim coach following the dismissal of Steve Alford. After having just four coaches in its first 55 years of existence, UCLA basketball has now had 10 in the past 43, with an 11th to come when the school names a permanent replacement at the end of this season. Whenever UCLA fires a coach, it is usually blamed on unrealistic standards that trace to the Wooden era, but that narrative does not hold in this case. It may have been the case when UCLA got rid of Ben Howland, even though he had just won a Pac-12 regular-season title and had in the past taken the team to three consecutive Final Fours, but the truth is, Alford did not give athletic director Dan Guerrero any choice. The only thing more disruptive than replacing Alford in December would have been to allow him to continue when everyone knew he wasn’t going to make it to next season.
The record is not pretty. In his previous five seasons, Alford had not taken UCLA beyond the Sweet 16, and this season had already become an unmitigated disaster. The coup de grace arrived on Saturday night, when the Bruins lost by 15 points at home to Liberty. It was their fourth consecutive loss, a string that also included a two-point defeat at home to Belmont as well as embarrassing losses to Cincinnati and Ohio State by a combined 43 points. UCLA’s other defeats, to Michigan State and North Carolina, came by 20 and 16 points, respectively.
The losses were mystifying considering the level of talent. UCLA has two very capable, experienced sophomores in point guard Jaylen Hands and 6-foot-8 forward Kris Wilkes, the latter of whom was on the Pac-12’s all-freshman team last year and almost left for the NBA. Alford brought in a highly regarded freshman class spearheaded by Moses Brown, a 7-foot-2 McDonald’s All-American from Queens, N.Y. The Bruins were dealt some bad luck in the preseason when two of those freshmen, 6-foot point guard Tyger Campbell and 6-10 forward Shareef O’Neal, were lost for the season because of health issues, but the team was still ranked No. 17 in the AP poll heading into those games against Michigan State and North Carolina. Alford took more than his share of criticism in previous stops at Iowa and New Mexico, but he has never had a team play so far under its potential than this one. He had to go, full stop.
So here we are again, with UCLA looking for a coach. Over the next few months, we will be told all of the reasons why this is such a tough job. It doesn’t pay well, the team doesn’t charter flights, the fans don’t show up, the school is reluctant to admit transfers and the cost of living in L.A. is obscene. Then there’s the whole Wooden thing, which never seems to go away. But the truth is, this is still one of the truly plum gigs in college basketball, and there will be no shortage of quality candidates. Given Guerrero’s spotty track record of coaching hires, in football and basketball, it’s fair to say this is the most important hire he has ever made, because if this one doesn’t work out, he could be the next one out the door. (It’s worth pointing out that Golden State Warriors GM Bob Myers, a UCLA alum, is advising Guerrero in this search.)
Where will UCLA turn? The first, most obvious place is toward Fred Hoiberg, if for no other reason than he is unemployed after the Chicago Bulls let him go on Dec. 3. Hoiberg’s NBA pedigree, both as a player and a coach, would be a huge boon on the recruiting circuit, and his NBA-friendly offense, not to mention his laid-back, affable personality, would be a good fit in Westwood. Then again, Hoiberg’s teams at Iowa State were heavily dependent on transfers who had problems at their previous schools. His hands-off approach to discipline could be an odd cultural fit in a buttoned-up place such as UCLA.
The home-run hire would be Billy Donovan. Unlike Hoiberg, however, Donovan has a job, and with the Oklahoma City Thunder sitting in third place in the Western Conference standings, he is unlikely to be let go between now and March. The Thunder could be playing well into May. Guerrero can ill afford to wait that long.
If Guerrero turns toward the college ranks, he most likely will encounter the same challenges that led him to settle for Alford the last time around. All the men who would “win the press conference” are already in really good jobs. Mark Few has made Gonzaga a destination. Jay Wright isn’t going anywhere. Tony Bennett is not the Hollywood type. Chris Holtmann could be a possibility, but it’s not like UCLA can outbid Ohio State when it comes to paying a coach. Guerrero tried to hire Shaka Smart when he let Howland go. Smart makes $3 million at Texas, and he has yet to win an NCAA Tournament game in his first three seasons.
Then there are the Duke guys – Jeff Capel, Chris Collins, Bobby Hurley and Steve Wojciechowski. None is a layup, but I’m sure all would take Guerrero’s call. Jamie Dixon is a great coach by any standards, but he has close ties to Howland. Mick Cronin is a great coach too, but UCLA fans, who are already notorious for their high expectations and minimal investment, have long made it clear that they want an entertaining, up-tempo style of play. Cronin can say he would instill that system at UCLA, but it might be a tough sell.
Rick Pitino? Non-starter. So let’s not even go there.
I imagine Hoiberg will be considered the frontrunner for a while, and I have little doubt he would take the job. But if Guerrero goes the college route, I believe the choice is pretty obvious: Eric Musselman. At 54, he is well-worn but far from old. He has extensive experience not just in the NBA, where he has worked for several franchises, including two as head coach, but also overseas. Most of all, he is doing a remarkable job at Nevada, which has been to the last two NCAA Tournaments, reached the Sweet 16 last year and could very well enter this year’s tournament as an undefeated No. 1 seed. With five fifth-year seniors in his starting lineup, Musselman could leave Reno with a clear conscience and before having to undertake a big rebuilding job. Most of all, he has the kind of hyperkinetic, media-friendly personality that would wear well in Westwood – as long as his teams are winning big, that is.
It is unfortunate that such a proud program should find itself in this situation again, but at this point, we should expect nothing less from UCLA. Guerrero has a big decision ahead, and springtime feels like a long ways away.
