Foxsports Bowl Projections: the pressure builds

by drumfool on Jun 5, 2007 10:31 AM PDT Comment 26 comments

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/6871352

Foxsports has put together a "way too early projections" list of bowl predictions. They have u$c going to the title game vs LSU in a "dream matchup." And they have UCLA going to the Rose Bowl in a classic matchup vs. Wisconsin.

This just goes to show (again and again) that the national media fully understands how much talent this 2007 Bruin team has. That paired with a very favorable schedule ought to make for a very successful year.

The article says:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The call is for Wisconsin to win the tie-breaker with Michigan, and come up with the wins needed, to get to Pasadena, but Penn State, Ohio State, or even Iowa, who misses the Wolverines and the Buckeyes, could slide in. With USC the call to go to New Orleans, UCLA would be a dream choice to create a Big Ten/Pac 10 matchup. Of course, if USC plays for the national title, the Rose would get the first choice of at-large teams and might be interested in selling out the place with LSU fans, if the Tigers aren't staying close to home in early January.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

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 26 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So much for the haters

chiding BNers for having "unrealistic" expectations.

by bluestreet on Jun 5, 2007 11:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

And another note to the "Haters"

I don't think the expectation was ever for Mr. Dorrell to have a victory every single time he leads the team onto the field. An undefeated season is rare, obvously.

The problem many of us have with Mr. Dorrell is that he is staggeringly unprepared and inept, and appears to be indifferent to the team's slide into mediocrity. We went through that with Coach Howland's predecessor, and should not have to go through it again.

My own particular gripe with him is based on fraud. His TV soundbites are carefully chosen to make him sound sage and erudite, but if you listen carefully, he is simply mouthing platitudes. The fraud involved is that he and his high priests touted him as being a deep thinker, whereas I am now convinced that he is just stupid. The reason he speaks only in cliches is because his brain fires too slowly to come up with an original thought.

Think about it - can you imagine him posting here, and trying to defend his statements? He wouldn't last ten seconds. But with the MSM, he can get by with any kind of verbal diarrhea and is NEVER called on it. (And yes, I did have to look up how to spell "diarrhea" and funny thing, it had a picture of Mr. Dorrell giving an interview next to it.)

by Fox 71 on Jun 5, 2007 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That projection implies

that we lose to SC. That would still fall short of KD's own battle cry (when he was first hired) of beating SC/winning the PAC 10. But a trip to the Rose Bowl would save his behind.

by bluegold on Jun 5, 2007 11:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

If we go to the Rose Bowl

even after losing to Southern Cal, it probably means a regular season of double digit wins. I'd be disappointed but I wouldn't ask for him to get fired.

It would work for me.

But as many here predicts (different from "expect") KD will probably fall flat on his face and lose 3-4 games we have no business losing.

by bluestreet on Jun 5, 2007 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not necessarily

We could beat U$C and go to the Rose Bowl, with them still going to the championship. The unlikely scenario would be that we would have already lost two other Pac-10 games, while U$C is undefeated and the runaway #1 in the country. They could lose to us and still win the Pac-10 as they would only have one loss. They might then still slide into the national title game because of the BCS calculations, i.e. if there are no undefeated teams or many one-loss teams.

Again, very unlikely, but we could be considered the at-large since we would be in the top 8 and since it's our home stadium...

by tasser10 on Jun 5, 2007 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rose Bowl

would be nice, but hopefully not against effin' Wisconsin again!

I'm sure many Bruin fans remember the de facto home games for the Badgers and, of course, the outcomes of the games in the 90's.

Embarrasing.

by godblesstyus95 on Jun 6, 2007 8:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

*Embarrassing

it really is.

by godblesstyus95 on Jun 6, 2007 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yup...

i wasn't there in '98, but i was there for '94 ('95 because new years?)...lol...neways i was only 9 and remember sitting with my parents next to wisconsin fans and surrounded by them, very very sad, and annoying =/

by redsand514 on Jun 6, 2007 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

How in the hell did that happen? How in the world did that game, UCLA in the Rose Bowl, our home stadium, become a sea of red?

Yes, I know many UCLA fans sold their tickets for a quick buck, but why? I never really figured that one out. Maybe I am missing something here.

Please, please, please, it cannot be the whole "laid back L.A. fan" thing. When the Lakers (and SuC) are doing well, they have no problem drawing fans.

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 6, 2007 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

My guess

It wasn't actually "fans" who sold those tickets, but scalpers and the like. The mistake of the real fans was probably waiting too long to try to get tickets, and then not buying them once they were being scalped, as scalpers were getting much better offers from the Wisconsin fans.

by tasser10 on Jun 6, 2007 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think

you are more generous than I am. I really think, for whatever reason, that it was more UCLA fans selling their tickets than anything (in other words, season ticket holders bought Rose Bowl tix and sold them OR, possibly, they chose not to buy tix in the first place).

Now, a very good friend of mine has been a long-time season ticket holder, and he always buys tickets to the Rose Bowl game no matter who is in it. If the game/matchup doesn't interest him, he sells his tickets for big bucks. In the back of my mind, something tells me that many UCLA fans had tickets but opted for the payday instead of attending the game. I hope that is not the case, but I think it might be.

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 6, 2007 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Quite possible

With the bad taste left over after the Miami game, I wouldn't be surprised at all that people just flaked. That game was sickening, and the Wisconsin game just added to the misery.

by tasser10 on Jun 6, 2007 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The 1995 Rose Bowl Game

was just as bad.

by bluestreet on Jun 6, 2007 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

My brother played on that Rose Bowl team....

and often says that when we came out of the tunnel (pre-game) it was loud, but when Wisconsin came out it was deafening.

by bornagainbruin on Jun 6, 2007 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sorry

but that should never happen in our home stadium. I cannot think of any set of circumstances where that should happen. I am sure the Wisconsin fans were more numerous and not just louder.

I have no problem with fans of opposing teams coming to the Rose Bowl and yelling as loudly as they can. I recall games against Nebraska and Tennessee (with Peyton) where their fans yelled loudly, but overall, were respectful and I enjoyed talking with them before and after the game.

But to have more fans than us in attendance? That is awful.

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 6, 2007 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It was 1994

and I was at that game as well.

I remember buying my tickets on campus, and immediately being confronted (rather aggressively, too) by 2 or 3 people offerring me like $300 per ticket (I believe I payed $50 each). As a near-destitute medical student at the time, I'll admit I was tempted, but said "No thanks" and walked away.

While I understand the temptation, it's hard for me to believe a true Bruin fan would give it up.

by godblesstyus95 on Jun 6, 2007 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeap

As soon as I got my ticket at CTO (late Dec, 93) I was approached by two rather large middle aged Wisconsin couple offering me $500 for my tix. And I know some kids forked up the tickets so that they could pay for their books for Winter Quarter.

I hung on to mine and went on to see f**king Cook not spike the ball in last 15 seconds. Grrrrrrrrrrr.

by Nestor on Jun 7, 2007 5:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tough decision

Honestly, if I were offered big bucks for tickets and the chance for a big payday (especially if I was a starving student), that would be tough to turn down. I mean, if we need the money for food or books, then well, we need the money. I would understand if someone sold their tix under those circumstances.

But for alums who pay large for season tix and then sell out, even when they don't need the money? That rubs me wrong--especially when the opposing team wears red.

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 7, 2007 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It was indeed bad

I leved in Altadena at the time, and my wife bought me a ticket for a Christmas present. It was in the last row, tucked under the press box. (Interestingly, I could talk easily with the people next to me, but none of us could hear the PA announcer and we could barely hear the crows.)

Anyway, the place was almost entirely red. Every Wisconsin person had red on, and it may be that not every Bruin had blue on.

Also, I think that there's something about the wavelength of red that makes it more visible somehow. So I think there may just be something physically about the color that played a part. I'm sure there are smart people who know the answer to that one. (And our resident highschool genius who is heading to WSU probably already knows the answer.

One other hypothesis about the lack of blue at that game is true, I think. After the Miami game, the bandwagon emptied quickly, leaving only the hard core fans. The bandwagon had lots of tix to watch UCLA win the national championship, but with the disaster in Florida, they jumped ship. (They probably were justsc fans anyway.)

I just remember being disappointed at that game. It seemed like we were getting pushed all over the field, but then in the end we still had a chance and just came up short.

by Fox 71 on Jun 6, 2007 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Someone correct me if I'm wrong...

But I do believe there is a difference in the visible spectrum such that because Red has a longer wavelength it travels farther and it is more easily visible. Where as Blue and violet with their shorter wavelengths dissipate after a shorter distance. It's been years since I took Physics, so alot of this info is murky in my memory.
But, it still doesn't excuse apathy on any Bruins' part. We have to be in "True Blue" and in huge numbers no matter what. Some of that is improving, but there needs to be a concentrated effort on our part. The UCLA Store doesn't get to set up for the Jan 1st game so any souvenirs will be red Rose Bowl stuff. That means the next time we play there (on Jan 1), we have to do our job as fans to be prepared.

by isodore on Jun 6, 2007 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

why it happened

Wisconsin hadn't made it to the Rose Bowl in forever (30+ years) and had a very good team that year, so demand for tickets was WAY higher than normal. UCLA had done well, but was IIRC only an 8-3 team with no national title hopes, so we were not as into this one as one would normally expect. When people are willing to offer $300+ (many of my friends sold their tickets at $500+)for your Rose Bowl ticket with a face value of $75, well, there you go.

It was the first year I had not bought season tickets, so I was able to pontificate that nobody should sell their ticket without facing the temptation that a large profit represents.

It did suck seeing the Rose Bowl so red.

by ucladj89 on Jun 6, 2007 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs