Headline: UCLA upsets Cal

by bluegold on Oct 21, 2007 12:06 AM PDT Comment 10 comments

And people are dancing in the street. People are crawling out of the woodwork to bash Bruin Nation for it's anti-KD stance. People that were nowhere to be found after Utah and after Notre Dame. And here they are in droves, flipping their middle finger at BN.

To these people: why don't you stop and consider what "UCLA upsets Cal" really means. Cal is ranked, and we beat a ranked team. Why aren't we ranked? Why is a UCLA win over Cal now considered an upset?

Yes, it's the Lavin debacle all over again. After Lavin beat a ranked SC basketball team he was running up and down the court exclaiming "We beat a ranked team...we beat a ranked team..." It was an embarrassment, and sportwriters asked -- why wasn't UCLA ranked? Why should UCLA ever be so gleeful over a win, as if it were a rare occurrence?

Questions such as these are the basis for the existence of a site such as BN. If you don't see the legitimacy of these questions, then stay the hell away from BN, because you are clueless as to what an elite UCLA football program means. You are hopeless zombies to the KD brand of second-rate, road-to-nowhere, ridiculed football.

For those of us who wants an elite program at UCLA, "UCLA upsets Cal" signifies the sorry state of the KD regime.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Couldn't agree more...

Absolutely.

No one on this site is actually rooting AGAINST the Bruins. We're simply rooting against the program sinking further and further into mediocrity.

There is NO WAY we should be beating Cal, $C, and then losing (not in a last-second stupid-mistake kind of way, but getting POUNDED, THRASHED, ANNIHILATED!!!) to the likes of Utah and arguably one of the WORST NOTRE DAME teams in HISTORY (and at the Rose Bowl, no less).

This type of inconsistency is grounds for dismissal, whether you're a librarian, a football coach, an aircraft pilot, a brain surgeon, or a teacher... you can't be that incompetent.

There are TWO breeds of Bruin faithful... those who accept mediocrity and failure (those content w/ the 'gutty little Bruins' mentality installed by that poor sap Terry Donahue) and those of us who think we should be a top 10 team in the country EVERY autumn of EVERY season.

We can't accept anything less from this program, unless of course the majority of us are content with Holiday Bowl or Sun Bowl victories and streaky 7-5, 8-4 seasons (beating SC and Cal and losing to Arizona and Wazzu)...

It's got to end. We have to hold the program accountable.

W.S. Montano Class of 1994

by wsmontano1994 on Oct 21, 2007 3:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Don't Tarnish the "Gutty Little Bruins"

As Geezer #1 on this board -- I want to correct the improper use of the phrase "Gutty Little Bruins".

You, and others, use it to represent a mentality that accepts mediocrity.

That is a complete misuse of the phrase. To use "gutty little Bruins" as the mantra of mediocrity is WRONG. (Yes, I know I am shouting, but this really bugs me.)

The phrase was coined to represent a small team that WON big games. It was a team on which both Donahue and Colletto were undersized lineman whose efforts helped us beat much larger teams.

The Gutty Little Bruins beat SC and the then upset the then ranked #1 Michigan State Spartans in the Rose Bowl.

How did they do it? They did it with effort, intensity and COACHING (Tommy Prothro).

Montano, I know you mean no ill will, and you are not the only person to misuse the phrase -- but it is a part of what was best about the UCLA football tradition and ought to be honored, not denigrated.

How do I know? I was there. And, that's why the old guys like Fox and me are constantly trying to remind everyone that we have a storied traditon in football that must be restored.

We should use the "gutty little Bruins" for inspiration -- we should not use them as a symbol of shame.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Oct 21, 2007 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Gutty" was the operative term

because "little" was the descriptive term. Our biggest guy - the behemoth of the team - was one of our defensive tackles. He was so big that he had the obvious nickname. He was "Big" John Richardson, all 225 pounds of him. He was much bigger than the defensive tackle that was next to him, Terry Donahue at 196 lbs. I'm not making these weights up - I remember them vividly from those days so long ago.

The difference? Coach Prothro. He put us in position to win. He punted on third down (quick-kicks by Gary Beban.) He went for it on fourth down. He was the opposite of CTS, in that Coach Prothro was one step ahead of the other side rather than one step behind. In the Rose Bowl against Michigan State, on the very first play, Beban rolled out around Bubba Smith for 27 yards. People had tried unsuccessfully to run away from Bubba Smith all year. Coach Prothro figured that we could be successful running at him. And after we scored on our first drive, Coach Prothro tried an on-sides kick which we recovered and which lead to our second TD. And this was against an MSU team that had beaten us fairly easily during the season.

Would Coach Prothro's team beat this year's team? Who knows? I know only this. I had a realistic hope that Coach Prothro could somehow figure out a way to beat any team. I have the exact opposite feeling about CTS.

by Fox 71 on Oct 21, 2007 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another Way of Asking Your Question:

Would we beat Stanford, BYU, Washington and OSU again?

Prothro took a team that had been beaten, in its first game by MSU, and created a new strategy.

When we took on MSU in the Rose Bowl, they were a heavily favored #1.

We had just won a big, come from behind game against sc to gain the Rose Bowl berth -- another upset victory.

MSU had not idea what we were doing. We played against pattern. Great coaching and good execution against a much more gifted and big team.

That's what coaching does. Takes advantage of the talent there AND convinces everyone that they can win.

That year, we so believed in this team that we thought we would win all of our games.

That's what we want for you youngsters -- that sense of excitement and hope that has been lacking under CTS.

Good memories -- right Geezer 2?

sjh

by Class of 66 on Oct 21, 2007 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have many wishes

One of them is that I could transport the entire student body (and basically everyone who wasn't there) back to those two games - against justsc and against MSU.

I really remember the justsc game as being sort of black and white. I don't remember a lot of color. The day was overcast and sort of cold and damp. A really crummy day. justsc was moving up and down the field on us at will. Mike Garrett had 210 yards (but no touchdowns.) We were going to lose and we knew it. We had been stomped the year before (I think Larry Zeno was QB, and his son has long since come and gone from the Bruin squad.)

With 4 minutes to go, they had the ball and were driving again. But Troy Winslow (yes, he was named Troy by his daddy, Bob Winslow who played at justsc) fumbled and IIRC Vic Lepisto recovered. Then Beban threw a 48 yard pass (IIRC) to Dick Witcher for a TD. (One of Prothro's earlier bits of genius was to use the "sleeper" against Washington to help us win - Witcher looked like he was running off the field but he stopped right on the sideline, got set and Beban hit him for a 60 yard TS. (Soon thereafter, the sleeper was banned.)) Then we get a two point conversion, Beban to Byron Nelson. (And Curt Gowdy felt duty-bound to say "No relation to the former golfer of the same name" every time he mentioned Nelson's name.) It's now 16-14. At that point, the mood totally changed. Everyone on the Bruin side of the Crapaseum felt it - we were going to win.

Then Kurt Zimmerman kicked a perfect 10.1 yard one-hopper to (I think) Dallas Grider. Then on 3rd and 14 or so, we're going to throw the "X-post H," with Altenberg going long, and Beban will throw to Mel Farr short who, in theory, would run for the first. But Altie gets behind the defensive back, and Beban hit him perfectly. 20-16.

We lost to Tennessee at Tennessee in a game that we were robbed by refs like you have never seen. Coach Tommy said after the game that it made him ashamed to be a southerner. But we were already in the Rose Bowl to have a rematch against Number 1 Michigan State. Each one of those guys was the size of Paul Bunyan, and they had Bubba Smith, touted as the best defensive end ever.

And they were no match for us. Prothro totally outcoached Duffy Daugherty. And the game was saved when 170 pound Bob Stiles knocked himself out stopping MSU's 230 pound fullback from tying the score on a two point coversion on the last play of the game.

If I could transport everyone back to those two games, you would see what you're missing now. We didn't always win. But we always had a real, deep-seated hope that we could win. Now, if we win, I feel it was luck.

by Fox 71 on Oct 21, 2007 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow Fox -- Great Memory for a Geezer!

I had goose bumps reading this post. You are so spot on in your description.

I was a Yell Leader that season. My Mom and Dad were in the stands, on the 50 yard line with my tickets.

Dick Witcher was a very good friend (I've lost track of him if anyone knows where he is, please, contact me.)

I have NEVER heard as much noise and cheering as I heard in those last moments of that game when we pulled it out and won. Never.

Then, on to the Rose Bowl. In the parade, all the MSU fans were yelling "Kill Bubba Kill". He was one big guy. I was on the edge of the field at the goal line when Stiles stopped Apisa.

I'm with Geezer #2. I wish we could take you back to a time when we were great -- just to show you that we have been and that we can be.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Oct 21, 2007 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Perverting the term Gutty little Bruins

Unfortunately while the term was created as a positive for teams that played bigger than they were, and in the shadow of SC and their run of good fortune in the 60's and 70's, the term was taken by others to slight our teams and their shortcomings. They (SC people) have taken it and used it to their advantage, by saying we will always be inferior no matter how well our guys play. That is the problem. Many Bruins in fact feel we are never going to be able to overcome this and embrace it instead. They accept the KD's and Terry Donahue's because we will be nothing more than Gutty Little Bruins, so why even try. The term is hanging around the collective neck of the Football program and has helped keep it down. Sadly we need to render this phrase as quaint nostalgia (no offense meant) by hiring a strong head COACH who is the antithesis of this mentality, and win big.

I know I don't have to explain this to you. I just needed a place to say it.

by isodore on Oct 21, 2007 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

but it's funny to hear for me

because it signifies for me that we're all substance and they're all style. Trojans are in their little own world. I'm sure they stopped using it, too, when we had racked 5 or 6 on them in the 90s. SC's a paper tiger.

by bruin95 on Oct 22, 2007 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks for the perspective...

SJH:

Thanks for the history lesson. Seriously, I appreciate it. My allegiance to the Bruins goes back only a mere 23 years (my older sister went there before I did, but I was a fan once she began freshman year in the fall of '84).
Therefore, I don't have the entire perspective of the 'gutty little bruin' meaning.

I actually had no idea it was that memorable or valuable of a phrase, I assumed it was meant as a positive, certainly not as a pejorative, but as isodore states at the tail end of this string, it has morphed into something else.

I remember Keith Jackson on ABC using the phrase, and it was something to be proud of about 20 years ago, but I think this new generation (or middling generation I suppose, as I'm now about 15 years OLDER than the current UCLA graduates) interprets the phrase a bit differently.

To me, the emphasis has been on the 'little', and I understand that it means something entirely different to you and Fox and those of your generation... perhaps we/I shouldn't use it from here on out and just respect it for what it means historically. As a trained historian myself, I definitely respect its original meaning.

Again, thanks for the clarification, gentlemen.

wsm

p.s. I also value Terry Donahue's contributions more now when he was a player than as a coach. He didn't ruin the program in any way, but I do think the expectations were never as high as they could have been in all the years Terry was our coach. That sort of mentality has been institutionalized, as we can see with Dorrell not appearing to be upset in the least that he has botched a great opportunity this season. I think for our players, it has been taught to them over the years that it's simply 'ok' to just win a Pac-10 or get to the Rose Bowl. We seriously need to change that and think of ourselves as a respectable, tough, (i.e. 'big' not 'little') program. But I'm belaboring this already. Again, many thanks. I understand your point and I think you understand mine.

Go bruins!

W.S. Montano Class of 1994

by wsmontano1994 on Oct 21, 2007 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree but

think we should let those thoughts flow on Monday, and be able to enjoy the effort and accomplishment of the players on saturday and sunday.

I am really proud of our guys. KD is a joker, but I love our boys, and we should spend a few days celebrating wins with them, even though we all agree KD has to go. They need our support, and we can deal with KDs nonsense during the week.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Oct 21, 2007 7:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs