Our good players are 6'2" and 6"4". Their good players are 6'2", 6'5", 6'8" and 6'10".
So what ? Is it the stated mission of UCD to field an elite basketball team with a mix of only players that satisfies the peanut gallery of posters on a message board ? He gets quite a few wins for having such a disadvantaged short team. What would the excuse be if they had some additional tall players and didn't play significantly better ? I trust he is playing to his coaching strengths by prioritizing guards, and that is fine because he knows so much more about coaching basketball (and playing it too) than any of us. He is the expert. We are not.
False. I'm told Bobby Steinberg was terrific. Football gets recruits. We don't need 'a lot', we need 2-3 key recruits. We're not Bako, we have a GREAT campus and town. Try recruiting at UOP or Eastern Washington. Key signings from bright SA who want a UC degree and a post career like Payne or Parenteau. Look at the success of UCSD.
A lot of words to unpack here too. I'm assuming you are referring to Kent State coach Bobby Steinburg ? Kent is Kent and Davis is Davis. It's also in a different part of the country, not everyone aspires to be in CA. Maybe Kent State Is more attractive a destination for those who choose to go there, mass shootings (as opposed to stabbings)aside ? I didn't say Davis is unattractive to recruits because of its size and population, so a comparison to Kent is irrelevant. That UCSD is in La Jolla doesn't take away from the fact it's still a more attractive destination than Davis.
Football gets recruits, good recruits, and they win. However, they also play against basically minor league college football teams. Basketball doesn't play in a minor league classification-they can and do play anyone who will work out a sufficiently favorable contract with them, more frequently against teams that are a lot better than they are. If basketball only played 2 such teams a year they would definitely win a bit more. I sometimes read articles on
mlbtraderumors.com where they talk about players having pitched or hit better in Triple-A than they have in their brief MLB careers to date. Well no sh!t, Sherlock !
Oh, and sometimes football doesn't win, like in the playoffs. What football does is irrelevant to basketball's performance.
Momentum helps. You only need 2-3 key recruits, and role players. Start winning, getting 4-6,000 in the house, momentum builds. Football and women's basketball don't have the same turnover.
They get key recruits and role players, and so do the teams that beat UCD.
Are you planning to summon these extra fans via a time machine from the past or use the Burt Wonderstone trick of gassing everyone at a Mondavi Center event, transporting them to the ARC before they wake up in a "disappearing audience" gag ? There needs to be a massive shake-up in the way people prioritize their leisure activities before UCD basketball becomes that relevant again. And football attendance is irrelevant. Brutes hitting each other while some guy tries to run away has great universal appeal. This has been true for thousands of years.
If you don't like how the team is playing, and it causes you so much frustration that you're calling for a coach to be replaced, then you have the option to not follow it instead of letting it get to you. Outside of the team and coaches very few people actually have to live and die with the fortunes of a college sports team (and I don't count gamblers), I don't feel like you've made a compelling enough argument for Les to be replaced before his contract is up, wasting money and trying to solve a problem that isn't there.