Gottfried tweets commitment to N.C. State

North Carolina State head coach Mark Gottfried reaffirmed his commitment to the school via Twitter on Wednesday night. Although he wasn’t a popular fan pick to fill the UCLA vacancy left by the recently fired Ben Howland, the former Bruins assistant had been mentioned as a candidate.

The 49-year-old worked on Jim Harrick’s staff during the 1995 national championship run. A source said Gottfried — who just finished his second season in Raleigh — was interested but had not been contacted by UCLA, adding that former players were supportive of his hire. previously reported that Bruins boosters wanted Gottfried.

Share this post:Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • Marc

    I also read an article where Gregg Marshall has stated he loves Wichita and isn’t leaving.

    Well, that should not stop UCLA from going hard after him. In business, an initial rejection only acts as a lesson in how to shape your pitch.

    I honestly don’t have a lot of faith in Dan Guerrero, but I know he’s smarter than most of us give him credit for. Surely, he’s got to have the ability to craft a pitch that is strong.

    But, no need to apply that to Gottfried. He should be far below Gregg Marshall, Shakka Smart and many, many others.

    My business analogy applies to Smart as well. I mean, see what they value, do some homework. You do that and your halfway there.

  • Bru-Crew_UCLA

    I’m glad to hear “Got Fired: will not be gracing us with his presence. I think B-Shaw should be the guy UCLA goes hard after and Kareem as an assistant. Give all credit to the blogger who originally mentioned B-Shaw as his choice.

  • Nobody wants this job. Give It to Alcindor

  • Mark

    Commitment in 140 characters. Guess its official then.

  • Mark

    Haven’t read 1 single thing about Mark Few either way. Interesting…

  • Bruwins

    The new coach won’t be coming from college ranks. Start thinking about former NBA coaches. I won’t be surprised if Stan Van Gundy or Mike Brown interviews for the job.

    • 92104bruinfan

      I read a while back that Mike Brown’s coaching style is much more suited for the college game than the pros (just ask LeBron and Kobe). Known as a great defensive coach but employs overly complex offensive sets so would have to simplify a bit at college level. Much like Mora, he has plenty of cred as far as knowing what it takes to cut it at the next level. He is used to the LA media and lifestyle. Apparently has been watching his kid play at Mater Dei and imagine he’s had a chance to meet some local HS and AAU coaches during his downtime. I’m not saying he’s my first choice…but certainly intriguing.

  • Weird to me that some coaches are “scared” of taking the UCLA job because of unrealistic expectations and job security at their current schools. The best of the best in any profession aren’t afraid to take chances and dream big. They are telling their kids, the sky is the limit, but they are too chicken to take chances themselves. If they are scared of UCLA, we really don’t want them either.

    • Lifelong Bruin Fan

      Cliff, I don’t mean to pick on you but to characterize coaches who are turning down the UCLA coaching vacancy as “scared” sounds childish and conjures the image of immature schoolchildren taunting the kid who won’t swallow the earthworm as “chicken” while making chicken-like noises.

      While apparently many who were calling for Howland’s head imagined that up-and-coming coaches at less prestigious basketball universities would be tripping over themselves for the UCLA head coaching vacancy, the reality as I and others who have seen this play out over the decades is that no, it doesn’t happen that way. Believe it or not, Ben Howland, having won National Coach of the Year honors at Pitt, was, except for Gene Bartow, the coach with the most impressive resume prior to his arrival at UCLA. Yes we hired Larry Brown in 1980 but this was when he had still only achieved moderate success with the Nuggets and way before he became celebrated for winning titles in the NCAA and NBA.

      So the reality is that we have about zero chance of luring away one of the current leading college coaches already established in a top-tier program, and many of the up-and-comers don’t feel like they need to come to Westwood for a number of reasons–they have a good thing going where they are, they already make enough money (if anybody thinks $1M a year is not enough especially outside of CA and NY they have a spending problem), they can compete with more recognized programs because of greater availability of talent and the fact that recruiting kids who will stay 3 or 4 years is a great advantage over the one-and-doners, they get great support from their university, local community, and boosters, and they don’t want to deal with the downsides of the UCLA job (including lackluster attendance, relative lack of enthusiasm among fan base and playing second fiddle in a large entertainment city, highly charged negative media presences such as BN, semi-unrealistic expectations in the current college basketball landscape, and quality of life issues in certain regards such as pollution, traffic, cost of living, etc.) The fact that a mid-major like Butler can make the NCAA championship game two years in a row, or Gonzaga can finish the season as the number one ranked team, are indications of the relative parity in today’s college basketball and a major reason why coaches don’t feel like they need to be at a traditional powerhouse to achieve college basketball glory.

      In spite of the above, UCLA head basketball coach is still a storied position so I’m hopeful we will land a top notch coach whether from the college or pro ranks, but let’s dispel the notion that “because we are UCLA,” coaches will be busting down the door to Morgan Center to sign on the dotted line. And it has nothing to do with being “scared.”

      • samollie

        well said…the most balanced analysis thus far

      • Marc

        While I agree with a few of your points, the overall tone was, in my opinion, negative and one sided.

        While there are challenges that UCLA faces that a lot of other colleges don’t; high cost of living and high expectations chief among them, UCLA also has many natural advantages.

        UCLA is in a beautiful area with a near perfect climate. Some say coaches don’t care about that; coaches’ wives do, therefore coaches do. UCLA has a level of prestige unrivaled, both in athletics and education. L.A. is an entertainment center; again, wives…

        Can you go see an amazing show (play, concert, gala) any night of the week in Richmond or Wichita?

        It is up to the AD to identify UCLA’s strengths and the potential head coach’s desires and put a strong pitch together.

        UCLA should hire me to help them craft their pitch, but, well, I’m sure there are more qualified people already there doing just that.

        Do a good job with that and your very likely to get your guy.

        • Lifelong Bruin Fan

          What you view as “negative and one sided” I see as acknowledging reality. Of course I understand the attraction of the UCLA head coaching position and I’m assuming most of the readers here do too. (FYI I consider the UCLA head coaching job as the most prestigious one in college basketball.) But judging by some of the comments I don’t think many readers understand both sides of the issue.

          Yes UCLA does offer advantages that few if any other schools can offer, and LA does have its unique qualities, but in case you haven’t noticed, every time the head coaching position has become available over the past nearly 40 years and especially the past 25, we are not the ones picking the most vaunted coach out of many desperately vying to fill the position. Rather, we often had to scrap to get it filled not with our top choices. Why do you think this is so?

          Sure we might benefit by possibly crafting a better pitch, but to ignore history and the other side of the coin is to not understand the situation.

          • Marc

            Honestly, I truly believe it comes down to the sales pitch.

            I’ve been a businessman for over a decade, including closing some big sales and I have a great ability in putting the business I represent in really good positions via the ability to craft the sales pitch in a way that put our strengths squarely in the direction of their needs/wants. I also know about mitigating the impact of the negatives by way of detailing how they are overcome. I’m telling you it isn’t rocket science, but if UCLA does not have a super strong pitch man, they may be selling themselves short.

            I believe that very strongly.

            A recent analogy would be Notre Dame football. Many people were saying similar things about them; they used to be one if the only teams on national TV, now everyone is. They have been living off of old prestige. No one wants to play in the cold snowy winters anymore. It went on and on. Well, they got themselves a pretty good coach and ended up in the NC game this year. Now they still got a little ways to go in order to beat an sec team, but they are right there, after many said they were dead.

            UCLA can overcome any and all obstacles; they just need strong, visionary leadership. The question is: do they have that?

      • samollie

        And just to add to your criticism of BN, they truly do have an affect on our school’s perception to the outside. As society is so incredibly reliant upon information gathered from the internet – and they are so visible – it’s beyond tragic that their voice is so loud. I truly believe they have become an ominous black cloud over our institution. How do we take our voice back from them? So sick and tired of their agenda and the “Lord of the Flies” mentality. If we could only spike the Kool-Aid they have all drank…
        in 5 years they will look back and realize what fools they all are.

        • Lifelong Bruin Fan

          Yes I agree with you completely.

  • disqus_9T0WbttUGT

    What about Flip Saunders if we are going the NBA route?

  • Great News. Gail Goestenkors is interested in the Bruin job.

  • bruinbiochem06

    Good to hear.

  • 92104bruinfan

    Meanwhile a certain unnamed national news outlet is reporting that UCLA is going hard after Butler’s Brad Stevens. There are enough half-denials, no comments, and a lack of affirmation from Stevens beyond “I’m the coach at Butler” that makes me wonder if he’s chatted with DG & Co and he’s at least thinking about it despite being a lifelong Indiana resident. Curious to see how this plays out. Go Bruins!