In Reply to: Re: Yeah, that answer leaves a lot of holes and posted by Cachorro on June 12, 2025 at 08:52:43
by the time Mara was preparing to leave for Spain I was reading that it appeared to be a done deal that Mara would be returning and that he would sign upon his return. It appeared that both parties were of this mindset. Something seems to have happened in the interim and everything changed. At least that's how I remember it. I'm left thinking that we really don't know the whole story here which is often the case in situations like this and part and parcel of this new era of NIL and easy transfers.
Anyway, this wasn't my intention with my original post. Mara is gone. People lament that. Booker is now at UCLA and people seem to think this is a downgrade of sorts. Some also seem to be blaming Cronin for all this. Maybe he is to blame completely. I don't really know and I think, except for a few insiders, nobody else really knows. I'm not too interested in blaming anyone. I was just trying to point out that perhaps Booker is not a downgrade. Perhaps Mara's return would/could have been problematic. And what Booker offers versus what Mara would have offered is potentially a good/better thing for UCLA and maybe even an upgrade in possible potential for the betterment of UCLA basketball next season.
I tried to acknowledge that Mara has a huge upside and could be a unique game changer, but if Booker can produce what is needed UCLA basketball may be better off. That idea seems to have gotten lost as people want to re-litigate the Mara sage and perhaps take this opportunity to take some shots at Cronin. I've no interest in that. I'm looking forward toward next season.