In Reply to: UH's Sampson has UH #8 in the AP poll... posted by ClockBlocker on February 05, 2026 at 13:04:10
I feel compelled to comment on this. I don’t think coaches do themselves—or the program—any favors by making statements like this publicly. Yes, Cronin has done something similar in the past and it may have helped spur donor involvement the following year, but I also think it does real damage to the brand.
I listen to a lot of national college basketball podcasts, and the narrative has clearly shifted. We’ve gone from being viewed as a blue blood with slightly less spending power than the Dukes of the world to a program that “can’t compete with the big dogs.” That perception isn’t just out there nationally—it’s taken hold on this board as well. We even saw echoes of it during the football coaching search, where the hiring committee had to push back against similar assumptions.
The reality doesn’t support that narrative. Cronin’s extension puts him among the top five highest-paid coaches in college basketball. UCLA has no shortage of billionaire donors. Are they as obsessively engaged as donors at some other schools? Maybe not. But why lean into a message that risks becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy?
UCLA is not Houston. UCLA has every structural advantage imaginable to be elite in both football and basketball: a major conference, national visibility, strong TV ratings, a massive and wealthy alumni base, an unparalleled recruiting footprint, elite academics, and arguably the best weather and most beautiful campus in the country. Programs would kill for that foundation.
I know someone will inevitably list all the disadvantages, but that mindset misses the point. Constantly focusing on limitations or assigning blame has never moved any program—or any person—forward. Leadership should be about reinforcing belief, not lowering expectations.
Anyway, sorry for the vent. I just had to get that off my chest