DrMike is not saying the kid doesn’t deserve a second chance. Nothing is stopping him from getting an education and improving himself. But building a team around felons and kids with disciplinary issues such as Sac is doing in their football program is not what many of us want to support.

This is silly. We are not a big time sports program. We are not building anything in men’s basketball. It’s an average program that is struggling in a lower conference. Once we move to the mountain west Coach Les will get exposed. We will be lucky to have a winning season as the competition gets better. You think we are building something? What is it? Because all I see is a bunch of people who have grown very comfortable in their positions. We can do better. If you want the student body to get behind men’s basketball we have to be better. There are a ton of kids who want to support davis sports but the AD has to expect more. Coach Les has been here since 2012. It’s time for new blood.

if you think being a below .500 coach is somehow “successful” we disagree on the meaning of success. The program needs a jolt of energy.

I agree with Gabe when it comes to needing to shake things up (whether that is coaching, recruiters, facility work) before going to the MW, but I do not think Sac State's strategy is a promise by any means of long term success. Its just too much betting in my opinion. Our basketball program has felt really stale as of late. That game on ESPN was so fun, but it seems like we have been pretty "mid" since that march madness run in 2017. Good kids, nice coaches, but I really think our current position a year out from joining the MW is worrying. A coach with a less than .500 winning percentage, mediocre season (yes 2 years ago we were a game from march madness, I understand that as an outlier), facilities needing to get renovations started, and not much of a team identity. Other than joining the new conference, I feel like football and basketball feel like they are totally different in the energy around them. We have had star players that have kept some energy, but in general everyone I have talked to is like "I loved Pepper..." not "I am loving Davis basketball"

I am used to loyalty to those that have stuck with us. I am not used to constant turnover. If someone new has success here, they will more likely leave ala Sac State. Look, if we can become a Duke or Bama (of old) sure, let’s do it. But if we become a Umass or a Kent State then no.

I understand this perspective but also I think its a different convo when someone is loyal but also has a lifetime losing record and has not brought us back to march madness since 2017. Its no personal attack, but I don't see how the program will be rejuvenated without some movement? This is the longest tenured d1 basketball staff (including all assistants) if I am correct.

You folks do know that Les isn't solely responsible for player performance, right ? The players themselves bear a greater share of that responsibility. He can only instruct them what to do to prepare (practice), what to during the game + when to do it. The execution is purely in their court (pun intended).

If the coaches are recruiting the all-county everythings they claim to be recruiting then it's not that they are recruiting inferior players. The players are good. Other teams have good players too, and this isn't like the D-II days when they could just out-smart the majority of the big dummies playing for the other teams (except for Bakersfield)

I know that as alumni we think our school is great and can accomplish anything, especially because it's very affirming when there is success. However, I only believe UCD can do that academically. Athletically there are more limits. Could another coach take the same players and turn them into a national powerhouse. No, because the players aren't THAT good.

The best recruiter in the world couldn't convince a lot of the best players to come to Davis if they don't want to be in a place like Davis. You know, free-will and that stuff. UCD is not the be-all-end-all of existence some alumni think it is. You could hire Michael Jordan as the coach with Larry Bird as his assistant and they still wouldn't sign. Well, to be fair, some of them might not be familiar with his career considering it was ancient history before they were even born.

Knowing that there is a ceiling and accepting that it exists puts things into perspective. A different coach might help them get a slightly closer look at it, but not significantly. I would say if Les were doing a horrible job or mistreating the players that would be one thing. He isn't though, so let the man finish providing the services for which he's receiving contractually-obligated payments. When it's over you can hire a new coach. Honestly, some of you folks act like money is no object when it's somebody else's. Are you going to foot the bill for termination costs ? You might as well all be CA politicians.

And keeping up with Sac State should also not be a huge goal. They may have a little more potential upward mobility because they're less-encumbered by academic requirements, and they are in a more interesting place.. And if they succeed-great. If they produce something fantastic I may go see it sometime because I'm not obligated to be a cheerleader of everything UCD for life.

Lots of words to unpack there.

[The players are good. Other teams have good players too, ...]

Our good players are 6'2" and 6"4". Their good players are 6'2", 6'5", 6'8" and 6'10".

[Athletically there are more limits. Could another coach take the same players and turn them into a national powerhouse. No, because the players aren't THAT good.]

Who's our ace recruiter? Les recruits and plays guards.

[The best recruiter in the world couldn't convince a lot of the best players to come to Davis because they don't want to be in a place like Davis.]

False. I'm told Bobby Steinberg was terrific. Football gets recruits, so does Jen Gross. 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 different coach might help them get a slightly closer look at it, but not significantly. I would say if Les were doing a horrible job or mistreating the players that would be one thing.]

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.

If either Sac coach succeeds, they bounce.

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.