Athletic Director Search Advisory Committee

I've been meaning to address this for a while since it's been awhile since Gary Cunningham stepped down. Now that I've got a free moment, I wanted to address something that provides the perfect microcosm for why things at UCSB can never be simple.

Take a look at the Search Advisory Committee in the search for UCSB's new Athletic Director. For those of you too lazy to click the link, there are 22 members in the committee by my count. Here is a list of the committee members, along with their relationship to UCSB:

Janis Ingham, NCAA Faculty Athletics Representative, Co-Chair
George Thurlow, Executive Director, UCSB Alumni Association, Co-Chair
Marty Davis, Head Coach, Men’s Tennis
Elizabeth Downing, University Physician; Director, Student Health Services
Rune Eliasen, Community Member
Mark French, Head Coach, Women’s Basketball
Jay Glazer, Community Member
Tsuyochi Hasegawa, Professor of History; Member, Intercollegiate Athletics Policy Board
Amy Jacobs, Staff Representative; Member, Intercollegiate Athletics Policy Board
Bethany Nickless, Student-Athlete Representative; Co-Chair, Student-Athlete Advisory Board
Fyl Pincus, Professor of Materials and Physics
Lynn Reitnouer, UCSB Foundation Trustee; Former Men’s Basketball Team Member
Cedric Robinson, Professor of Black Studies
James Romeo, Lecturer, Exercise and Sports Studies
Denise Segura, Professor of Sociology
Associated Students Representative, TBA
Graduate Students Association Representative, TBA

Ex-Officio Representatives
Ricardo Alcaino, Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity
Bobby Castagna, Associate Athletic Director
Todd Lee, Assistant Chancellor for Budget and Planning; Chair, NCAA Self-Study Group
Diane O’Brien, Associate Athletic Director; Senior Women’s Administrator
Paula Rudolph, Sexual Harassment Officer; Title IX Coordinator

Talk about too many cooks in the kitchen. Or too many chiefs and not enough indians. You get the point, but Dr. Yang did not. I have no idea what he was thinking, but I wonder if he really believes that 22 people in a room can come to a consensus on the one man or woman who can lead UCSB's Athletic Department. You can't please everyone Henry. Unfortunately, in your quest to appease everyone, you've left one big clusterf***.

Not that Yang would have asked me, but I could have pared this list down extensively for him.

1. Why do we need two community members on this list? I know we're trying to reach out to the community and all, but the only team (besides the "smaller" sports) that seem to have a problem attracting people is the Men's Basketball Team. I think one member, if any, would suffice.

2. Um, the University physician? I didn't even know we had such a position. Why does the physician need to assist in the choosing of the AD? Not sure about this one.

3. There are five professors on the committee. Do we really need five (really? five?) professors? My guess is that two professors would have done the trick. Jim Romeo will be good and Professor Hasegawa due to Hasegawa's position on the Intercollegiate Athletics Policy Board.

4. Really though, the ex-officio members would have done just fine, along with one student representative and one current coach.

This is ridiculous. I cannot imagine how on earth these people will come to some sort of general consensus as to their choice.

The ultimate problem with this is that, just like the search committee, we're going to get a new AD who amounts to nothing more than the status quo (i.e. Gary Williams). The new AD will have to please 22 people, so they're not going to pick the best candidate (i.e. the one most likely to fire/not renew the under-achieving Bob Williams) who will make tough decisions (is that a tough decision?), but they're going to pick the AD who keeps things the same.

The bottom line is that it's a shame because UCSB deserves someone who can give our school national recognition through our sports programs. Having a visible sports program increases knowledge about UCSB and, in my opinion, opens more doors in the career search of a UCSB graduate. If we go with another plain vanilla AD, we can expect some of the same old shit. The coaches with the drive and fire (Vom Steeg) will continue to succeed, while the coaches who are content to wallow in mediocrity and collect a paycheck perform on a .500 basis year-in, year-out.

Like I said, that would be a shame.

Don't Worry

For those of you who actually believed that Bob Williams got hired by Cal, don't worry, he's not going anywhere. It was just a little April Fools fun by The Gaucho Manifesto.

Didn't mean to give anyone a heart attack that our beloved and sage-like coach was leaving.

Bob Williams Hired by Cal!

There is an rumor going around that the University of California, at Berkeley has settled on UCSB coach Bob Williams as their new head coach. I will try to confirm, however, I've heard that Cal was impressed by his game management, superb conference record and his conference tournament success. Oh yeah, and he's won a Division II National Championship. The Cal Bears will now be able to experience a level of success that the UCSB Gauchos have been able to enjoy for the last 10 years.

Billy Packer Sucks

Since UCSB's season is over, I haven't had much to write about. Yesterday that changed. While listening to the Stanford-Texas game, I was forced to listen to Billy Packer. After listening to Packer I'm pretty sure that I would rather hit myself with a hammer than listen to Packer.

I've always felt this way, but yesterday's performance by Mr. Packer threw lighter fluid and a match onto the pile of logs accumulating in my mind.

In Packer's opinion, everything (and I mean everything) DJ Augustin did drew incredible amounts of praise from Packer. Everything from jump shots to a pass to a wide open teammate were all "great plays." It was so ridiculous. Almost as if he wants to make out with Augustin. DJ is a phenomenal player, no doubt. However, when you're complimenting a point guard for passing to the open man, that's a bit silly. Isn't that what a point guard is supposed to do?

On the other hand, Stanford drew nothing but criticism from Packer. They did nothing right in his eyes. In fact, Packer's distaste for all things Stanford gave way to the funniest non-comment of the game. Early in the second half, Taj Finger drove to the basket and drew a foul call. It was a nice drive by Finger and a good job of getting to the line. After Jim Nantz was done with the play-by-play there was awkward silence for the next minute or so while Finger shot the free throw. Either Packer didn't want to give credit for getting to the line or he just couldn't think of any negative spin.

With that being said, I really want Packer to retire or get fired. Unfortunately, just like Bob Williams, Billy Packer will be back next year and the year after that.

Looking Back at the Schedule

It's not secret that the Gauchos played an extremely strong weak out-of-conference schedule. Combine that with the mighty mighty Big West strength and you have one hell of a whopper schedule. Add to that a few losses to teams that the Gauchos have all no business losing to and you've got no chance at an at-large bid.

With that being said, I got to thinking in my post-March Madness hangover (can't wait for Thursday) about the Gauchos out-of-conference schedule. Yes, it was soft. However, the Gauchos only two out-of-conference losses (except Utah State and Mississippi) during the true OOC "season" came at the hands of Stanford (a Brook Lopez-less Stanford) and UNC.

Considering that these are two of the Sweet 16 contestants, they are looking like much better losses at this point in the season. To digress for a moment - one thing the readers don't know about me is that I grew up near the Stanford campus, went to their games and watched them as a kid so I consider myself a Stanford fan, as well. I was at the Anaheim venue on both Thursday and Saturday and Stanford looks very dominant.

In fact, in my tournament bracket, I have Stanford beating Texas and making it to the Final Four. Unfortunately, I have UNC losing to Tennessee in the Elite 8. If my bracket holds up, as my extremely accurate picks are known to, UCSB will have lost to two of the final 8 teams left in the country.

By the way, if Tyler Hansbrough stays at UNC for his senior year, is he not going to eat any UCSB post player alive? Hope Bob Williams brings the exact same complete opposite philosophy/strategy that caused him to lose to Irvine 3 times in a season. It's just not the same as Stanford losing to UCLA (one by a very bad call) three times in a season.

With that, I'm out.

Check back for updates. I'm planning on reviewing the season, position by position after the tournament is over.

Academics and Basketball Success

One of the things that I meant to study, although not as comprehensive as this, was the effect that having an NCAA Tournament Men's Basketball team would effect the admissions and applicants at UCSB.

When I was younger, I remember hearing about the phenomenon that Michael Vick had created for the Virginia Tech football team. Because of Vick, I remember hearing that Virginia Tech had seen a large increase in the number of applicants. Additionally, I remember the Dean being quoted in the article about how the VT student body used to wear the logos of different schools around campus, but that since Vick, they only wear VT gear.

I've always felt that UCSB should put some more effort into having a men's basketball team that dominates the Big West, much like the women's team already does. One of the benefits is that the school should get increased exposure from sporting events on television. This should lead to a higher number of applicants which leads to more money.

The study seems to prove what I've long suspected:

• All 64 schools in the NCAA basketball tournament had a 1 percent increase in applicants each year.
• Sweet Sixteen schools had a 3 percent application increase.

How do we get this party started? Fire Bob Williams and his decade-long track record of mediocrity.

Of course, the people with their heads up their asses naysayers love to point out that UCSB isn't in the Big East and that Bob is just a great coach. Logic doesn't work with these folks. However, I would point to Gonzaga and other mid-major schools (Xavier, etc...) with good basketball programs and I would bet that their schools experienced a similar effect. As to the Bob argument, I ask this: if you worked for the same company 10 years in a row and your department had the same mediocre numbers year after year and you failed to gain any ground on your competitor would your company keep you around? If they did, your company probably won't be around much longer, but you should keep that job because they're rewarding mediocrity. Why should basketball coaching be the same? I expect a return on my tax dollars and Bob doesn't deliver. Enough of the rant for today, enjoy the study.

NIT 1st Round Game: UCSB at Ole' Miss

UCSB Gauchos (22-8, 12-4) at University of Mississippi Runnin' Rebels (21-10, 7-9)
Oxford, MS 5:00 pm (PST)
ESPNU



Tonight, the Gauchos take on the Ole' Miss Runnin' Rebels (land of Eli and Archie) in their first round match-up of the NIT (the Gauchos "reward" for choking in Anaheim). It's going to be a tough match-up for the boys of UCSB. The Rebels average about 6-8 across their front line and outweigh them by a lot.

Ole' Miss plays at a pace of about 70 possessions per game, compared to UCSB's 66. While this seems insignificant at face value, remember that the Gauchos play the pace their opponent tells them to play (hopefully that's the only thing they allow their opponent to do). In this case, the Rebels are extremely effective at keeping the pace within a range they want. Almost all of their games have been played in the high 60s to mid 70s. Look for the Gauchos to play faster than they're used to.

From an efficiency standpoint, the Rebels kill UCSB with an adjusted rating of 114.3. UCSB's adjusted rating (Can't believe I didn't notice this before) is a paltry 99.7. Anything below 100 sucks. The good news is that of all the times that Mississippi has been held under an efficiency rating of 100, they've lost all but one of those games. The bad news is that they've been held under 100 only 6 times (out of 31 games).

Let's get onto what could be the last analysis of the season.

Effective Field Goal %
UCSB: 52.2%
Miss: 51.5%

UCSB needs to hit their shots, especially their 3 point shots in this game because the Rebels have some beef on a front line that shoots over 50% from inside the arc. That number only figures to increase when the Rebels face the Gauchos because of their weak inside presence.

Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 26.0
Miss: 19.2

This is about UCSB's only true advantage in this game and it hinges on a big IF. IF the Gauchos don't choke at the line like they did in Anaheim, this could keep them in the game. In each televised game they've played, the Gauchos have had a less than average free throw shooting performance. As homerish as I am, that doesn't bode well for the Gauchos.

Offensive Rebounding %
UCSB: 28.4%
Miss: 39.3%

Oh lordy. This is going to be a problem. To summarize one USCB message board poster after this most recent loss to UCI, these guys better come out "breathing fire" if they stand a chance. Seriously, our rebounding percentage puts at 300th of 314 DI teams. That's bad. UCSB needs to man up, box up and prevent Mississippi from getting any offensive rebounds. They're big and they're beefy, but if you go in their pissed off, you can outrebound even the biggest guy on the block.

Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 21.1%
Miss: 18.0%

Mississippi does a great job of protecting the ball. This doesn't mean that UCSB can't get them to turn it over, all it means is that it's going to be harder. Play some pressure defense in the form of a press and get a few turnovers.

UCSB's mission is difficult, but it can be done. Let's go Gauchos. I'll be watching. Do us proud.