Pointing the finger at Jim Harrick

Published: Monday, April 1, 1996

Monday, April 1, 1996

Coach's failure to learn from mistakes causes NCAA upsetBy James A. Lebakken

John Wooden has said that no one is a loser until they start pointing fingers, but the final score of the game against Princeton is incontrovertible. UCLA lost that Thursday night (March 14) and maybe that indicates a need for some finger pointing.

The men's basketball team has a profusion of talent beyond any claims Princeton can make, so why? The question keeps swirling in my mind. A whirlpool of whys (sic). The more I think about the game, the more I review the tape, the greater is my conviction that this was a coaching failure.

When I first transferred to UCLA in the spring of '94, the campus had just begun recovering from the upsetting Northridge quake. But the more striking characteristic of my new surroundings was a student body trying to make sense of a first round tournament loss to Tulsa. Articles called for Jim Harrick's dismissal, and others rebutted. A year later, the story had changed dramatically. (It's only fair to indicate that fact.)

I've already encountered too many people who are eager to let Harrick off the hook while being grossly unfair to the players (who are students), signifying a willingness to forget that Harrick is the highly paid professional with the highest level of responsibility on that team. (Coincidentally, certain sports casters can keep their two cents because Harrick doesn't need them.)

I am not calling for his replacement. The coaching staff is already suffering displacement with Lorenzo Romar's departure. I am, however, charging the current head coach with a very basic responsibility, one we all have as students and teachers (coaches) alike. He must, as we must, eagerly learn from our mistakes.

First round losses are rapidly becoming a chronic feature of the Jim Harrick coaching style. He needs to address this problem and it is a problem. Going to the tournament with a willingness to "play their game" is a dangerously defeatist attitude. Letting a less talented team dictate their style of play to you is not a winning strategy. If Ike had gone to Normandy with that strategy, we would all be speaking German now.

A dynamic problem-solver does not simply develop his team's strengths, but finds innovative ways to apply them even when the opportunities don't present themselves.

The Princeton style of play is/was obviously not an impregnable strategy for two reasons: 1) They have been beaten, most recently by Mississippi State in the March 16 game. 2) If their game plan was flawless, then every collection of low talent, three-point trick shooters would scrap the fundamentals and adopt that style of play. We not only could have, we should have won that game, and the coach is culpable.

Lebakken is a senior English student.

FRED HE/Daily Bruin

Men's Basketball coach Jim Harrick (second from left) watches the Bruins lose to Princeton on March 14 in the first round of NCAA playoffs.

Going to the tournament with a willingness to "play their game" is a dangerously defeatist attitude.Comments to webmaster@db.asucla.ucla.edu