• Welcome to The Valparaiso Beacons Fan Zone Forum.
 

UCLA targets Brad Stevens

Started by valpo04, March 28, 2013, 06:58:23 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

valpo04

QuoteButler coach Brad Stevens is the top target in UCLA's search for a basketball coach, according to sources with knowledge of the situation.


http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9109731/butler-brad-stevens-top-target-ucla-search-new-coach

VULB#62

#1
One step forward (BIG East); one (or maybe more) step backwards (Bye bye Brad) if he is seduced by La La Land.  Big kick in the face if it happens.  I hope he stays at Butler.

Here's the USAToday take on  it so it's getting a lot of play:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2013/03/28/butler-coach-brad-stevens-quiet-amid-ucla-speculation/2029461/

StlVUFan

The part about negotiations has since been redacted, in what I like to call "business as usual" at the 4-letter network.

valpotx

That's because ESPN and the larger schools think that it is easy to pluck away the mid-major talent/coaches, whenever they want, just because they are who they are.  I really hope that he stays at Butler, to shove it in the face of such schools, like Shaka has done  :)
"Don't mess with Texas"

valpopal

Stevens tweeted the following this morning, which doesn't sound like something a person contemplating moving would go out of his way to write:

Brad Stevens@BUCoachStevens  Love walking thru Hinkle in the morning... Anxious to get started on our spring workouts next week.


StlVUFan

Yeah, I love the "up yours" aspect of this, even if it's not the main reason.

wh

Reportedly, UCLA was prepared to pay Stevens between $3-3.5 Million a year and give him a multi-year contract.  He supposedly makes a million at Butler.  A million dollars is a lot of money, but 3.5 is like hitting the lottery every year. No one would turn that down.  Until I learn otherwise, I have to believe UCLA didn't actually make that offer.     

valpotx

#8
I would take $1.2 million to live in IN versus $3.5 million in CA any day of the week.  You have the large cost of living difference to start with, so your current salary is probably closer to $2.5-$2.8 million in CA dollars.  Also, it is such a dirty, nasty state to travel through, outside of the ocean views.  They have no money to maintain their highways, so there is trash everywhere!  I lived in Orange County for a few years when I was in elementary school, and it was great back then.  I went back last year for my cousin's wedding, and was disgusted by everything I saw from Los Angeles to San Diego
"Don't mess with Texas"

vuweathernerd

Quote from: valpotx on March 29, 2013, 11:50:40 PM
I would take $1.2 million to live in IN versus $3.5 million in CA any day of the week.  You have the large cost of living difference to start with, so your current salary is probably closer to $2.5-$2.8 million in CA dollars.  Also, it is such a dirty, nasty state to travel through, outside of the ocean views.  They have no money to maintain their highways, so there is trash everywhere!  I lived in Orange County for a few years when I was in elementary school, and it was great back then.  I went back last year for my cousin's wedding, and was disgusted by everything I saw from Los Angeles to San Diego

It gets better as you go north on the pch. Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo are actually decent places. But with the high cost of living and taxes, I don't think I could live there long term. But I certainly didn't mind the five months I was stationed at Vandenberg.

FWalum

My current favorite podcast: The Glenn Loury Show https://bloggingheads.tv/programs/glenn-show

LaPorteAveApostle

Quote from: FWalum on March 30, 2013, 02:24:52 PMI would not have thought of that in 50 years.

Really?  He's the absolutely perfect choice for them to maintain their streak of early early tourney flameouts.

I only suppose John Thompson III wasn't available.
"It is so easy to be proud, harsh, moody and selfish, but we have been created for greater things; why stoop down to things that will spoil the beauty of our hearts?" Bl. Mother Teresa

vuweathernerd

Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on March 30, 2013, 02:29:25 PM
Quote from: FWalum on March 30, 2013, 02:24:52 PMI would not have thought of that in 50 years.

Really?  He's the absolutely perfect choice for them to maintain their streak of early early tourney flameouts.

I only suppose John Thompson III wasn't available.

Nor frank haith... (And I'm a Mizzou fan)

covufan

Quote from: FWalum on March 30, 2013, 02:24:52 PM
Steve Alford.... are you kidding me.  I would not have thought of that in 50 years.
I was shocked as well.  If I were UCLA I would have gone hard at Stevens as well.  I admire Stevens and Smart for staying where they are happy, and not pursuing the bigger paycheck.  UCLA moved quickly to wrap up Alford, as the news came out just one morning after these other stories.  Had I been Stevens, it would have been a difficult decision with UCLA, as that is one program that would be very enticing.  But, as valpotx pointed out, Stevens already has a very high quality of life in Indy.  I can't blame Alford - it is UCLA.  Although having all of his starters back next year could have been special.  I was shocked that UCLA would look to Alford - he was almost ran out of Iowa, and although done well at New Mexico, hasn't done anything in the tournament.  I'm guessing 5-7 years for Alford.

valpotx

I imagine that Stevens is getting a raise from his $1.2 million.  If he is given $1.5 million, that is the same as $3 million in LA.  Alford was given the equivalent of what Stevens currently makes at $1.2 million ($2.4 million).
"Don't mess with Texas"