Steve Lavin. Yes, I am prepared to take a lot of heat for even mentioning him as someone we should consider, but looking at his resume I see him on equal footing with some of the other names being thrown around. Add to that he was the coach at UCLA and IMO it separates him from the rest of the B list guys being thrown around.
- 5 Sweet 16s in 7 years at UCLA
- 145-78 record (his last year skewed the number down)
- Elite 8 in 1997
- 2001 PAC-10 COY
- 4 wins over #1 ranked teams
- 6-1 in 1st round NCAA Tournament games
He never won the PAC-10 in his 7 years there and UCLA fans make the argument that they underachieved (and they're right to a point) under Lavin, but for Alabama five Sweet Sixteens in 7 years is much better than 1 in the last 17 years.
Lavin is still young (44) and he learned a lot from being the UCLA HC. People have to remember that Lavin was thrusted into the position when Harrick was fired. Looking back, I think he did a decent job, but decent is not enough for UCLA. They want championships and Lavin at that time probably wasn't ready for that level of scrutiny. When he was fired, I believe he thanked UCLA for the opportunity and left with class and dignity.
He probably can be had for $1-$1.5 million per year... and I'd lean towards the lower number. I think he'd do well here.