Harrick Under Fire: Critics Cite Loss to Cal, Others See Big Picture

As Jim Harrick’s inevitable fate unfolds, his defenders in the media sound more and more absurd. They cry up his “winning record,” his final-eight finish, the academic performance of his players.

Harrick’s wins and losses should soon be comparable to his immediate predecessors, Walt Hazzard and Larry Farmer. We all know that par at UCLA is not your standard par. We know why that is and so do the coaches who apply. Whining about this, while they’re being carried out, only validates the impression of their original foolishness in taking on more than their modest talents could handle.

Whatever academic quality we’re talking about in the program says more about UCLA’s institutional policies and the players themselves than it does about Harrick. And boasting about a distant final eight says more about people who are out of touch than it does anything else.

Can we finally say it once and for all? The Wooden factor is a red herring. Even a yuppie, know-nothing like Jim Lampley ought to know this by now. What UCLA needs is a talented, young, low-profile coach who can at least give them a shot at building on John Wooden’s one-of-a-kind legacy. What they don’t need is one of these basketball camp, Sonny Vacarro, Nike all-stars. Too bad Peter Dalis is the one who has to recognize and sign this man. Maybe what they really need in Westwood is a bigger broom.

CHARLES CHICCOA

Reseda