Quote from espn on Nit semi final game tonight

A dig?

TheSouseFamily said:

---

---

Randy Bennett would be hilarious. That would destroy two programs

LOL, when I was hearing "Bennett" in connection with UCLA, I was thinking it must be Tony, not Randy. Could you see Randy Bennett in Westwood, trotting out some 6-10 plodding Aussie onto the court?

Apparently UCLA is going to hire Jamie Dixon whose team just lost in the NIT on Tuesday night.

Is Dixon (7-11 in conference this year) even a better hire than Fox? At least Cal didn't have to pay a buyout to get unemployed Fox. UCLA will pay $8 million to buyout Dixon's contract.

BearSD said:

---

Apparently UCLA is going to hire Jamie Dixon whose team just lost in the NIT on Tuesday night.

Is Dixon (7-11 in conference this year) even a better hire than Fox? At least Cal didn't have to pay a buyout to get unemployed Fox. UCLA will pay $8 million to buyout Dixon's contract.

---

Um, yes, by far better. Took Pitt to the NCAA tournament 11 of 13 years and won the Big East twice and made an Elite Eight. Were you being ironic?

Sluggo

Dixon is much better than Fox. He had Pitt at an Top 15 level for most of his tenure there. And he's gotten 3 straight 20 win seasons at TCU, which hadn't been done in 20 years.

Is he an "elite" coach? Not quite, but he'd be at least #1-3 in the PAC-12 depending on how you feel about Altman and Miller.

UCLA just needs a competent coach to be high-level, and Dixon's track record suggests he's capable.

BearSD said:

---

Apparently UCLA is going to hire Jamie Dixon whose team just lost in the NIT on Tuesday night.

Is Dixon (7-11 in conference this year) even a better hire than Fox? At least Cal didn't have to pay a buyout to get unemployed Fox. UCLA will pay $8 million to buyout Dixon's contract.

---

Yes Dixon is a better coach than fox

But considering where UCLA is in the world of college b-ball compared to cal, Dixon is arguably a worse hire

Yeah, I get UCLA isn't UCLA anymore, but still.....

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Dixon is much better than Fox. He had Pitt at an Top 15 level for most of his tenure there. And he's gotten 3 straight 20 win seasons at TCU, which hadn't been done in 20 years.

Is he an "elite" coach? Not quite, but he'd be at least #1-3 in the PAC-12 depending on how you feel about Altman and Miller.

UCLA just needs a competent coach to be high-level, and Dixon's track record suggests he's capable.

BearSD said:

---

Apparently UCLA is going to hire Jamie Dixon whose team just lost in the NIT on Tuesday night.

Is Dixon (7-11 in conference this year) even a better hire than Fox? At least Cal didn't have to pay a buyout to get unemployed Fox. UCLA will pay $8 million to buyout Dixon's contract.

---

---

When he was at Pitt, I considered him elite and I believe during the search when we hired Monty, I had been hoping we could somehow pull Dixon. I was flabbergasted last year when I found out he had left Pitt for TCU and I still have no idea what happened there.

But I gotta say this: much of the consternation on Fox this week has been his sub-.500 conference record at Georgia. Well, at TCU, Dixon's conference record over 3 seasons has been 22-32. Woof.

GMP said:

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Dixon is much better than Fox. He had Pitt at an Top 15 level for most of his tenure there. And he's gotten 3 straight 20 win seasons at TCU, which hadn't been done in 20 years.

Is he an "elite" coach? Not quite, but he'd be at least #1-3 in the PAC-12 depending on how you feel about Altman and Miller.

UCLA just needs a competent coach to be high-level, and Dixon's track record suggests he's capable.

BearSD said:

---

Apparently UCLA is going to hire Jamie Dixon whose team just lost in the NIT on Tuesday night.

Is Dixon (7-11 in conference this year) even a better hire than Fox? At least Cal didn't have to pay a buyout to get unemployed Fox. UCLA will pay $8 million to buyout Dixon's contract.

---

---

When he was at Pitt, I considered him elite and I believe during the search when we hired Monty, I had been hoping we could somehow pull Dixon. I was flabbergasted last year when I found out he had left Pitt for TCU and I still have no idea what happened there.

But I gotta say this: much of the consternation on Fox this week has been his sub-.500 conference record at Georgia. Well, at TCU, Dixon's conference record over 3 seasons has been 22-32. Woof.

---

Dixon's record at TCU looks a lot like Tad Boyle's record at Colorado. So if we're hypothetically ranking Dixon amongst Pac-12 head coaches, IMO Altman is a clear first, Miller is 2nd only because he recruits well enough to compensate for so-so coaching, and then Hopkins is 3rd. Hurley might be 4th. Dixon might be on the next level with Boyle and Krystkowiak. And, if you believe Jim Knowlton's favorite search firm, Fox is on that level or higher. Heh.

BearSD said:

---

GMP said:

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Dixon is much better than Fox. He had Pitt at an Top 15 level for most of his tenure there. And he's gotten 3 straight 20 win seasons at TCU, which hadn't been done in 20 years.

Is he an "elite" coach? Not quite, but he'd be at least #1-3 in the PAC-12 depending on how you feel about Altman and Miller.

UCLA just needs a competent coach to be high-level, and Dixon's track record suggests he's capable.

BearSD said:

---

Apparently UCLA is going to hire Jamie Dixon whose team just lost in the NIT on Tuesday night.

Is Dixon (7-11 in conference this year) even a better hire than Fox? At least Cal didn't have to pay a buyout to get unemployed Fox. UCLA will pay $8 million to buyout Dixon's contract.

---

---

When he was at Pitt, I considered him elite and I believe during the search when we hired Monty, I had been hoping we could somehow pull Dixon. I was flabbergasted last year when I found out he had left Pitt for TCU and I still have no idea what happened there.

But I gotta say this: much of the consternation on Fox this week has been his sub-.500 conference record at Georgia. Well, at TCU, Dixon's conference record over 3 seasons has been 22-32. Woof.

---

Dixon's record at TCU looks a lot like Tad Boyle's record at Colorado. So if we're hypothetically ranking Dixon amongst Pac-12 head coaches, IMO Altman is a clear first, Miller is 2nd only because he recruits well enough to compensate for so-so coaching, and then Hopkins is 3rd. Hurley might be 4th. Dixon might be on the next level with Boyle and Krystkowiak. And, if you believe Jim Knowlton's favorite search firm, Fox is on that level or higher. Heh.

---

The only comparable coaches are Altman and Miller.

And even with Altman, save for better postseason success his tenure at Oregon hasn't been as dominant as Dixon's run with Pitt was. Dixon had 9 seasons where Pitt finished in KenPom's Top 25 (Efficiency Margin). Altman has had 2 teams at Oregon in that same vein.

Conference record can be misleading, since the Big 12 has been much better than the PAC-12 recently (which I hate to say, but it's the truth).

And judging the first 3 seasons of a coach's tenure can be misleading to certain extent. Tony Bennett had 1 NCAA in his first 3 seasons at UVa. Same with John Beilein at Michigan. Larry K didn't make it until his 4th season.

During these last 3 seasons (all of Dixon's tenure at TCU), TCU has had KenPom ratings of 29, 24, and 43. None of UW, ASU, Colorado, or Utah have had higher KenPom ratings than TCU in that time span.

Dixon made the Tourney last season and was on the bubble this season. Colorado and Utah have not made the NCAA in 3 seasons.

Hopkins has 2 years of experience. You can't compare that to Dixon. Boyle, Hurley, and Kyrstkowiak don't have Dixon's track record. Boyle's won 1 game in the Tournament. Hurley has 2 First 4 appearances. Larry K has 2 tournament appearances in 8 seasons.

The fact is that the coaching quality in the PAC-12 is not good, which is why the PAC-12 has been bad the last couple of seasons. Take a look at the other conferences and you see they do a much better job with their hires. The SEC even created a committee that has to approve their basketball hires, which has improved their conference to where they had 7 teams in the Big Dance. That's why it's infuriating when we flub our hire 2 times in row.

We'll have to agree to disagree on Dixon. But, here's a Utah fan who agrees with you.

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Dixon is much better than Fox. He had Pitt at an Top 15 level for most of his tenure there. And he's gotten 3 straight 20 win seasons at TCU, which hadn't been done in 20 years.

Is he an "elite" coach? Not quite, but he'd be at least #1-3 in the PAC-12 depending on how you feel about Altman and Miller.

UCLA just needs a competent coach to be high-level, and Dixon's track record suggests he's capable.

BearSD said:

---

Apparently UCLA is going to hire Jamie Dixon whose team just lost in the NIT on Tuesday night.

Is Dixon (7-11 in conference this year) even a better hire than Fox? At least Cal didn't have to pay a buyout to get unemployed Fox. UCLA will pay $8 million to buyout Dixon's contract.

---

---

I am trying to wrap my head around whether the PAC 12 will EVER work its way back. Right now the gap is so huge, I can't imagine what would need to change to shrink that.
Larry Scott being fired?

BearSD said:

---

We'll have to agree to disagree on Dixon. But, here's a Utah fan who agrees with you.

---

Look where he puts Fox.

Look where he puts Haase!