In Reply to: The "fire Cronin" crowd doesn't realize that UCLA has got posted by ej on April 22, 2026 at 11:12:58
I mostly agree—especially when it comes to his ability to develop players.
That said, it’s hard to ignore the off-court issues, and it’s fair to question whether they’re impacting recruiting. We may not have Louisville or Michigan-level resources, but we’re not operating on a small budget either. Based on what’s out there—and the caliber of players we’ve pursued—it’s reasonable to say we’re spending at a top-25 level, maybe closer to the top 15.
At the core, there are two questions. First, can UCLA compete at the highest level? Some don’t think so, and from that perspective, Cronin makes sense—he keeps the program relevant and in the tournament most years. Some would say he's doing all that he can. But for those who believe UCLA should be competing for championships, the real question is whether Cronin can get us there.
I used to think he could. Now I’m less certain—and it’s not about his coaching. The concern is whether he can recruit and retain the level of talent needed to win it all. The reality is, we haven’t had a true championship-caliber roster since 2022. Regardless of the reasons, that’s the result—and it doesn’t look like it’s changing this year.
Looking ahead, even if he retains the current group, we’ll have experienced upperclassmen—but likely no elite, game-changing player. That means again relying on landing a star. Can he recruit a five-star High School difference-maker like the Dukes of the world? It seems unlikely. And after coming up short this cycle, it’s fair to question whether he can land one or two star players in the portal next year. The trend so far suggests that it will be a challenge.
I’m willing to see how it plays out. But if there’s another off-court distraction, I’ll probably start to agree more and more with those who think it’s time for a change.