In Reply to: The vagaries and machinations of not being a very good recruiter posted by Rubik543 on December 09, 2025 at 00:16:37
I feel it too. It would be nice if UCLA had so many recruits lined up that they had to turn down 5 stars because there just wasn't any room. The reality is that there are just a few universities in that position. It would be nice also if UCLA had so much money that they could buy 3 to 5 top ranked transfers every year. The reality here also is that there are just a few universities in that position.
Every year UCLA (and Cronin) appear on numerous highly regarded recruits' final lists. Why is that? Some would say because they consider UCLA and not the coach. That's absurd. Of course they consider the coach as they do with every school included on their lists.
Every coach probably fails more than they succeed with recruits - even the Dukes and St. John's of the college basketball world. Most schools probably start out with target list of 12 to 20 high school players (maybe even more) and the most successful end up getting 3 to 5 at most. The reasons for this are varied and myriad. That's where the vagaries and machinations of recruiting come in and most everyone is not privy to what those are.
You (and most fans) are taking their frustrations and coming to conclusions based on speculations that are tainted by those frustrations. You might be right about recruits not wanting to play for Cronin, but then why do some include him and UCLA on their lists and sometimes their final lists? It makes absolutely no sense to speculate that they do this just because of the school and not the coach or his program.
Everybody wanted Dent and many wanted Booker but they both decided to come to UCLA and be coached by Cronin. People say Dent came because he wanted to come back to southern California. That probably was a huge factor in his decision but he had other choices. He probably also factored in what and where would be good or better for his development as a player. It's hard to avoid Cronin in that equation and yet there still persists these inane opinions that nobody wants to play for Cronin.
In terms of players improving - the fact is that almost every player under Cronin improves. I would say every player but I don't like absolutes. We saw quite clearly Mara improved. Booker, in his short time under Cronin, has improved. That's also quite clear. Kyle improved. Nwuba improved. Jamerson has improved. Bona improved. We can go on down the line and mention almost, if not, all players improving under Cronin. Again, the inane argument fueled by frustration, is that the players who have improved do so on their own in spite of Cronin. Absurd. Just like the notion of those players who choose to come to UCLA come in spite of the coach. Only at other universities do recruits choose to go there because of the coach but not at UCLA. It's all so absurd.