Hope

by Nestor on Sep 28, 2008 10:59 AM PDT in Football Comment 33 comments

Let’s build on Class of 66’s post game thoughts because I found myself nodding with most of what he wrote. Now that I have had some time to think about it and replay the two in game situations (call to for it on 4th and 1 and the decision to accept the holding penalty that put Fresno State at a 3rd and 22), I find myself completely as peace with the decisions CRN made on those two situations.

The bottom line here is CRN played to win. That is my kind of head coach who will always go for it based on calculated decisions. As 66 explained, both of those decisions were well calculated given the circumstances at the time. Kicking it on 4t and 1 would have been the Dorrellian thing to do. And we know what it feels like to play it safe during last few years.

However, that said right now unlike lot of fans who are being rough on DeWayne Walker for the defense’s performance from last three games, I am not all that upset with what is going on. I really believe Walker’s hands are kind of tied given what he is working with. Let me see if I can explain what I am seeing, while watching our defense. From what I am seeing Walker is in a very tough situation.

It’s obvious right now that the opposing offenses are having their way with our defense by carving it up underneath. QBs like Max Hall and Tom Brandstater have simply killed our offense in that proverbial "death by thousand cuts" (a feeling that unfortunately we became familiar with during the Donahue era). It seems like right now they have all the time they need to sit back and pick their targets, and pick apart our secondary. But what can Walker really do? Let’s take a look at our front-7 again.

We have two incredible talents in Brian Price and Brigham Harwell. Those two are amazing and are doing what they can to seal up the middle. And backing them at LB Reggie Carter is doing what he can to fly all over the field. But besides those three, Walker is having a difficult time putting together a combination that can generate sustained pressure on the opposing QB or contain the opposing RBs when they go outside. Right now from what I am seeing it seems like Blake (Senior LE), Hale (Senior SLB), and Korey Bosworth (Junior RE) are having a rough time out there. Steve Sloan, a RS Frosh starting his second game at Mike. It’s not because of lack of effort on any of their part. They are playing their hearts out but right now getting out toughed by the opposing offense.

It is clear right now that this defense is sorely lacking the athleticism, experience and toughness of Bruce Davis, Justin Hickman, Christian Taylor, Trey Brown, Dennis Keyes, and Chris Horton. At this point Walker is in a lose-lose proposition. I can sense why he is reluctant to blitz because he is not sure if his young CBS can lock down the opposing receivers, the same way Brown, ATV, Keyes and Horton were doing last couple of years. While up front Blake, Hale, Bosworth et al are not being able to complement the inside toughness of DTs with, the effective speed rush we saw courtesy of Hickman and Davis from last couple of seasons. Remember those guys – Davis, Hickman, Brown, Horton, Keyes, Taylor – they came along in their junior and senior seasons at UCLA. Growing/developing into effective football players take time at D-1 level. It sucks that the defense of last two years were completely wasted because of the total cluelessness on offense. But there is no need to go over that Dorrellian offense again.

We have had some really tough words for Walker here on BN, especially during the toxic times of Dorrell era, and the campaign for the head coach (when things got heated and emotional after a decade of train wreck). However, folks cannot dismiss how Walker improved the defense from the Larry Kerr era (another Dorrell fiasco). I think Walker is a good DC. He has the potential of being an elite DC if he can show in next two years, his ability to figure out the spread/multi dimensional offenses in college football, using the talent he has brought into our program. And I think there is a good chance he will develop into one as he will get more and more support from the developing offense from the other side of the ball (which he didn’t get last two seasons), and the new talent matures by next season (hopefully).

For the short term though, I wouldn’t mind if he gives the news guys more chances. One of the bright spots from yesterday was the play of Akeem Ayers. From what I am seeing, it seems like Ayers brings so much more speed and athleticism at Sam LB than Hale. Seems like every time he was lining up he was in the middle of the action. I think it would also be worth pondering whether any of the new cubs – Dye or Hester – would be better options than Courtney Vinney. Again from what I was seeing, it seemed like Vinney was having a "rough" time. This was not the first time Vinney was struggling. It has been a pattern since the Tennessee game. Same goes for our safeties. I think if Lockett doesn’t step up in next couple of weeks, it might be worth considering starting our other young safeties, getting them ready for next season. We will see how they come out and respond against Washington State next weekend.

On to some of the great positives from yesterday. There were lots of them. Here are just some, I jotted down while watching the game:

It’s obvious how our OL has been improving. However, we should note that yesterday’s performance came against a Fresno State defense that was struggling against ground attacks, and was missing two of their best DLs. Still a tremendous effort by Coach Palcic’s unit. It was especially heartening to see that performance given how the OL so freaking young featuring true frosh such as Baca and sophomore such as Jake Dean. They were terrific.
It was great to see Kahlil Bell back. Hopefully in couple of weeks he will be back in full form. You can sense he needs to get in little more game shape. And I am digging what I am seeing from Derrick Coleman. I don’t really care about that last fumble. That happens. Watch the replay. He had his shoulder down and was taking care of the ball. It was just a great hit by the Fresno defender. I simply love how the kid doesn’t mess around and just explodes forward.
How about that end of the half 2 minute drill? That was a methodical drive upward with 46 seconds left, which didn’t depend on desperation or athletic skills of freaks like MJD. I haven’t seen a Bruin offense march up the field with such composure with clock winding down, since the days of number 18.
Speaking of methodical, the offensive play calling was a delight. I was I enjoying the package Chow put together featuring roll outs, options to Kahlil Bell, reverse, runs to the outside, draw plays. Man … just mouthwatering stuff and gets you even thirstier when you imagine that offense with little more experience and talent.
Speaking of talent, welcome Terrence Austin!!! Now please don’t leave. Stick around, stay steady and play with same kind of swagger and confidence rest of the season.
Taylor Embree is a rock star. I have never cared about glowing practice reports that we read from beat reporters or message boards. But all that hype we read about how this kid doesn’t drop a ball (knock on wood so that we are not jinxing him) is true and then some. This kid is a natural. In some ways he reminds me of Danny Farmer and Sean Lachappelle. Whatever is thrown at his direction, he comes up with it.
Kevin Craft was steady. Except for a play or two he was steady throughout the day and play within himself. And I also think he has more ability than people give him credit for. Let's hope he keep this up.
As for the special teams, it was infuriating to see that first punt return for TD. However, other than that I though the unit was somewhat steady (not including Austin’s spectacular afternoon) and also provided a huge boost courtesy of that extra point block.

So there we are. That’s what I have for now. In some ways this am, I am not as down as I was following the Arizona and BYU game. I still think there is a good chance (a very good one) that this team is going to struggle rest of the season and end up with 3-9 record or something worse, given the situation described re our defense. I am not sure we have the horses to win shootouts after shootouts. However, what I am more than encouraged from last three weeks is that the team overall is moving towards positive direction. Now if it can take care of business against another desperate team (which it has a very tough time with in recent years) next weekend, it will give us more reasons to hope to keep moving towards the positive direction rest of the season.

Here is to HOPE:

Photo Credit: Louis Sinco (Los Angeles Times)

We have seen enough to keep us charged with it rest of the way.

GO BRUINS.

0 recs | Comment 33 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Thanks for that pic N

I really needed that today. It shows me that CRN believes in his players and the players believe in CRN.

Even though I disagree with taking the penalty, I can live with it because CRN is playing to win and I know I will agree with the vast majority of his calls. It’s water under the bridge now, and that’s the last I will say about it.

I think I will feel more hopeful after we get our next win. The beauty this season is that I believe we can win any game we play in because of our coaching staff, rather than last year where I wondered how our team would overcome the coaching.

There is always next week.

by bruinbabe2000 on Sep 28, 2008 11:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

right on

I’m pleased with the fact that we’ve shown improvement and growth after the blowout at BYU. Its easier to deal with defeat when one can see a system being put in place that with more talent and maturity will only get better.

but who knows..last time SUC was upset at Oregon State, it lost one more game that year : )

O.A.

by Ollie on Sep 28, 2008 11:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I mentioned the same thing to Mr. BB yesterday

by bruinbabe2000 on Sep 28, 2008 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Respectfully Disagree on Walker

The type of defensive melt downs we’ve seen this year are not all that different than we’ve seen in the previous Walker years.

Last year it was Utah, Notre Dame and WSU. Those meltdowns occurred while DW had all those talented players you lament not having this year. Even with those players, we lost games we should have won in great part because the defense melted down. So, getting blown out this year is not solely a function of players — because DW’s defense has been blown out with and without strong players.

In 2006, the meltdowns that cost us games we should have won occurred against Notre Dame, WSU and FSU.

An honest assessment of the players we have would probably lead one to say that we have better defensive players than offensive players, and that our greatest needs are on the offensive line and at QB. However, the defense is showing less progress than those deemed less “talented”. Palcic has moved people around and worked hard with a group that is showing great improvement. And, what Chow has done with a an injury depleted line up has been brilliant.

We can see the difference that the offensive line coach and OC have made on the offense. I cannot see the difference that DW has made in improving the defense.

I said last year that if CRN wanted DW I wanted DW. I’ve not changed my mind. But, I think the problems with our D go deeper than simply the players and that DW has to do what Chow and Palcic are doing — he has to find a way to work with what he has, and he has to convince me that each week our D is getting better. Chow and Palcic are raising the bar and I think it’s time for DW to do the same.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 28, 2008 11:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Good point

Chow and Palcic are definitely raising the bars. However, I am going to maintain than we don’t have a lot in our front-7. Also as noted the impressive rushing performance came against a depleted and below average Fresno DL.

It will be interesting to see how our defense responds next week. Hopefully they will take the opportunity of favorable matchups and respond the same way our OL did this past weekend.

Also re. Walker, notwithstanding the history of few clunkers (against spread offenses) last couple of years, I want to be open minded with a clear slate. So I am going to withhold from making any conclusions re. him at least till the end of next season.

However, as always, nothing wrong with well informed, honest and respectful disagreements.

by Nestor on Sep 28, 2008 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's time for Coach Walker to start coaching

Coach Palcic and Coach Chow have done what they had to do with the players they have to move those players along. We had no running game at the beginning of the year. We now have a running game, or at least we had one for one game. Our offense has done things that it didn’t do for the past five years, and his after four games.

But the defense doesn’t seem to have changed. We have our moments, of course, and we had one moment that lasted for 60 minutes which can best be described by the numbers 13 and 9. But we don’t string things together. When we need to get a big play on defense, we occasionally get one when one of our players has an individual moment of brilliance. But it doesn’t appear that we have schemes like we did when Rocky Long was here. There doesn’t appear to be any creativity. Frankly, it looks like the West Coast Defense.

I’m not saying that Coach Neuheisel should toss Coach Walker out. I believe in Coach Neuheisel, and if he believes in Coach Walker, then I believe in Coach Walker. But it’s time for Coach Walker to start doing something. Our defensive game plans need to get stepped up a notch. We’re playing good teams with good players, but our guys are just as good as their guys in most cases. I put it on Coach Walker for not doing something special as a coach. He has to put our guys in a position to win. He seems to be coaching our defense to be almost good enough to win, but not quite. It’s time to step things up, Coach Walker.

by Fox 71 on Sep 28, 2008 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rocky Long

As fine a defensive mind as UCLA has had in a long time. Once he got organized, his defenses were terrific. Too bad he had to leave for NM so soon. DW is less than adequate. Rock Long was to defensive strategy as Homer Smith was to offensive smarts (and maybe Norm Chow too in time).
Bill

BillSouthBay

by BillSouthBay on Sep 28, 2008 7:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

CRN

badly wanted Coach Walker on board for a reason. I trust his decision making off the field as much as I trust it on the field.

But I guess if Coach Walker really is the weak link in this coaching triangle, he’ll be fired by CRN as soon as the season’s over. If not, I guess CRN is failing as a head coach as well, right?

by brewin05 on Sep 28, 2008 7:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We will never know

how badly CRN wanted DW.

There was a lot going on at the time including the threat that we would lose our recruiting class if DW was not retained and a base of fans who were threatening to destroy any chance of unity if DW were not on the staff.

All that being said, when CRN said he wanted DW, I said I wanted DW. I assume that CRN kept him because he wanted him — and that his praise for him on more than one occasion means that he appreciates him.

I don’t see what any of this has to do with the fact that some of us are expressing concerns about patterns we have seen in his D’s since he got here — namely getting blown out in games we should have won.

None of us are calling for DW to be fired. Frankly, I don’t see CRN doing that. Unlike CTS, CRN is a stand up guy and takes full responsibility for what goes on in his program. I cannot see us having the firing of scapegoats after every season. CRN will stick with DW and I believe that having CRN, NC and the other really good coaches on this staff will allow DW to both improve and find the head coaching job he some day will deserve.

We are asking that he step it up and create schemes that maximize the impact of the players he has — like Palcic and Chow are doing. In one sense DW did improve this week. This week he didn’t throw a player under the bus as he did ATV last week. That’s progress.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 28, 2008 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

DW's recruiting

Doesn’t DW share some of the blame here in terms of players? There somes to be a general consensus that the defense is not as talented as we would like. There is less consensus as to whether DW is getting as much out of this unit as possible, given the talent level.

However, DW has been on the staff for several years and also has responsibility for recruiting in LA and San Gabriel Valley. We were told how essential he was to the recruiting process last winter. Yet somehow, despite being in the middle of the recruiting process and presumably being aware of UCLA’s future defensive needs, we find ourselves in the position of bemoaning our lack of talent on defense.

Seems to me that DW needs to take some of the blame if there is insufficient talent on defense. It would be refreshing to see our talent level step up in the future. And if it does, we should give the credit where it is due (CRN) and not rely on the DW supporters to tell us how indispensable DW is in the recruiting process.

by islandbruin on Sep 28, 2008 12:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

he's had 2 recruiting classes, one of which was limited to 9 total players

and the players he recruited last year look to be really good. people seem to forget what he walked into from Larry “not moe, not curly” Kerr

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

by silverlakebruin on Sep 28, 2008 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Talent Base

Thanks for the reply. For curiosity, was the limit of 9 players in the 2006 recruiting class, which would have been due to the lack of graduating seniors on the 2006 team?

Turning to the present, the top 3 defenses statistically this week in the Pac 10 are Arizona (helped by our offensive performance vs them), $C and Cal. Obviously, with so few games played, these could very well not be the top 3 at the end of the season. Nevertheless, taking these 3 as examples, Arizona starts 8 jrs or srs on defense, $C starts 10, and Cal starts 9. The Bruins started 8 jrs or srs on Saturday, which is not wildly different. I went back to the 2006 season, when DW’s reputation first started to shine- the Bruins started 7 jrs, 1 sr, and 3 sophs on defense.

It doesn’t look from this that we are starting a younger group than the higher ranked defenses (which supports the thesis that college football players need to develop before they can contribute). If we were starting a younger group, the disappointment on defense would be very understandable.

Therefore, it could be that our juniors and seniors are not as talented. The 2006 defense which DW inherited included names like Davis, Hickman, Taylor, Keyes, Brown and Horton. This clearly was a very talented group.

It seems inconsistent for some to laud DW based on the performance of the 2006 defense which he did not recruit, and then turn around and say that he should not be held as accountable for this year’s performance, because he did not recruit this year’s team.

When DW has talent (2006), the results are impressive. Hopefully, when his recruits mature and can show their stuff, the results will again be impressive. In the meantime, for a consistent program, we need to be as impressive as possible when the talent pool dips. I’m not sure that is happening this year (at least so far). Hopefully, DW is learning what works and what doesn’t, so that we can see the defense match the offense in terms of getting the most out of what we have this year. This in turn would set a great base for the future, as recruits see the power of the coaching staff.

by islandbruin on Sep 29, 2008 7:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good Work Island

Always helps to have the facts.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 29, 2008 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree, DW did have talent to work with when he got here

Thats what made Kerr so bad, he had talent but he installed an attitude of complacency on defense you just can’t have. One of the things DW has brought to the defensive side of the program is toughness, aggressiveness, and pride, which were sorely lacking when he got here. The Kerr defenses didn’t even really try, which was pathetic.

he had a good amount of talent to work with his first two years, and now is dealing with some young talent and some older not so talented kids from KDs year 2 and 3 recruiting classes, which just weren’t very good.

I think it is totally fair to judge him on whether this unit gets better and improves, but I’m not going to look at the first four games and make a determination yet. I think we gotta give him the chance to make this unit better, and I am hopefull he will.

We did have 9 players in the class because of lack of graduating seniors. Somewhere the class spacing got screwed up, but I don’t remember why.

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

by silverlakebruin on Sep 29, 2008 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

KD's Recruiting Class?

Last year, DW was getting all the credit for the recruits.

Interesting spin.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 29, 2008 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Spin? its called history

Coach Walker wasn’t here during KDs second and third year which is why I don’t hold him responsible for the recruiting during those years. He’s in his third year as defensive coordinator.

Do you call that spin? Do you think he should have been in charge of recruiting while he was secondary coach for the Redskins?

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

by silverlakebruin on Sep 29, 2008 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

See your point

I was referring to the recruiting classes in which DW participated and for which he took total credit. During the time in which DG was making his hiring decision, no one attributed the strong recruiting class to KD — it was DW’s. If the “bad classes” were KD’s, because he was the head coach, shouldn’t the good class be KD’s, too?

And, having been here 3 years, aren’t “DW’s recruits” either juniors or red shirt sophomores? As Island points out, he should be responsible for them and their ability to contribute.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 29, 2008 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think we are almost in agreement!

It just depends on what you want to do with the class from three years ago. Although they signed after DW was named a coach, DW hadn’t yet coached a game when they were signed, and the recruiting process was well underway when we got here, and he had yet to prove what he could do. This was a class that had only seen Kerr.

I consider his first class the class that was recruited during his first year as DC.
That class in 2007 was limited to 7players on defense, and those players are now redshirt freshmen or true sophmores. (Price, Sloan, Ayers, Viney, Love, Edison, Schmidt), I would say we are getting good contributions from that class based on size.

The class in 2008 was a normal size, and is true freshmen. It is way to early to evaluate in my mind, but by all indications they will be very good.

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

by silverlakebruin on Sep 29, 2008 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

For the first time ever, Class of 66, I'm gonna disagree with you

In my opinion, the weirdest (is that even a word?) thing about the KD experiment was how new commits would usually talk about how they “always wanted to be Bruins”, how their UCLA offer was “the best they got”, etc. They almost never talked about wanting to play for KD or the rest of the coaching staff. That changed when DW brought back the defense’s pride and swagger (as mentioned above by SIlverlake) in 2006. The proof is in the comments made by the top defensive recruits the last two years. Every last one of them talked about wanting to play for DW ( Price is the only one I can remember even saying that they wanted to play for KD). Also, take a look at the average quality of our defensive recruits the last two years. Many of them are 4-star guys, where as the ‘04 to ’06 guys were almost all 3-star guys. If anything KD was a major recruiting headwind in DW’s recruiting sail. So, I give KD almost no credit for those guys, except a little indirect credit for lucking into DW.

It will be very interesting to see what kind of quality defensive guys we can bring in, now that the KD headwind is gone and the RN tailwind is firmly in place.

by bornagainbruin on Sep 29, 2008 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am with 66 on this one

It seems very clear to me that DW’s defense showed a marked improvement in 2006, when he had a great group of players who he had nothing to do with in terms of recruiting. It also seems clear to me that this same group (absent one senior) underperformed in 2007. The finger can be pointed at the offense, as DW proponents like to argue, but the fact remains that the returning starters did not show improvement for whatever reason.

Now the defense is less talented, as a result of the lack of success by KD in recruiting (since DW proponents are disavowing any association with the upperclass starters on defense). DW either (a) has been able to see them reach their full potential (as NC is doing on the offensive side with better results), which means that they are simply awful, or (b) his defensive schemes and teaching are not utilizing the available talent to the fullest extent. I vote for b.

Regardless, the proof will come next year and the year after, when DW’s 4 star recruits move up the charts into key positions. Hopefully, he can coach great players with great success, as he did in 2006. Until then, the DW proponents who say it is lack of talent should not then turn around and claim full credit for DW in 2006, when those were also not his players.

by islandbruin on Sep 29, 2008 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I Thought we had a great recruiting class last year

Are the coach going to use tht new guys or just look at them?

Your only as good as your second serve and first volley

by Bruin in the mesa on Sep 28, 2008 4:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Uhm

You do realize … it takes 2-3 years for most high school recruits to develop into solid contributors at college level? Right?

We have discussed that enough here on BN to write an one liner like that.

by Nestor on Sep 28, 2008 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

NO offense

Who maid you god dude what the heck do you know about playing sports, I have an opinion it comes from an college tennis player and teaching Pro.

Your only as good as your second serve and first volley

by Bruin in the mesa on Sep 28, 2008 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

5 star players can play right away

Players below that, which comprised the majority of our recruiting class, generally take more time to develop. It’s not a personal opinion. It’s actually fairly common knowledge. This is the same sport that earned a 3 years out of high school minimum age ban on the professional league on the basis that younger players aren’t physically ready to play. This is the same sport that makes liberal use of the redshirt freshman year, far more than any other sport.

I’d also suggest backing up your points with evidence to the contrary rather than arguing from (dubious) authority. For instance, you could have pointed out the players that start and play significant minutes as freshmen (although you wouldn’t because it contradicts your original argument). We have actually played many freshman that I’m sure CRN would rather sit for a year if given the choice. Given the injuries and personnel, the choice isn’t his to make.

Since you’re so fond of the ad-hom attack, I’d also like to ask you what the hell being a college tennis player has to do with you being qualified to speak about football; a completely different sport. Obviously I don’t believe that you have to play or coach football to know about the development process, but I can apply an arbitrary standard to make you look equally unqualified to speak about football as well. Something to keep in mind.

by Tydides on Sep 28, 2008 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

Because tennis is so similar to college football.
LOLOLOLOLO
I’ve gone through a couple of your posts and your writing suggests that you are too stupid to be a real person. Either you are a USC troll or I really regret calling you stupid because its wrong to make fun of people like you.

by bruin8uclap on Sep 28, 2008 11:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He is a Trojan troll

Not a “Bruin” as his screen name suggests.

by Nestor on Sep 29, 2008 4:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A-Ha, We Should have Seen That Immediately

from the grammar alone.

Love My Bruins

by Bruingirl83 on Sep 29, 2008 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In the radio pre-game interview before FSU

CRN stated 11 true freshmen had already played, and more would play as the situation, including injuriies, warrant.

by Give me a B... on Sep 28, 2008 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Still hopeful

I was disappointed with the loss, of course, but I am still hopeful. I like what I’m seeing. Despite the injuries and playing in front of a somewhat hostile crowd, we were always in this game. We brought some life back into the running game and took some pressure off the QB. But for the last fumble, we could’ve very well won that game. Sure, it would’ve taken another incredible drive, but we know the bruins can pull it off.

I think our players are starting fall into their positions. It is just a matter of time. We are improving, and that’s all we can ask for.

I acknowledge that I need to let go of my dream of an 8 win season. And I can’t help but chuckle at how giddy I was after the Tennessee game, but you know what? That optimism is still there.

We have a tough season ahead of us, but I really believe it will make us stronger in the years to come and I’m ok with that.

Go bruins

by UCLAbruin920 on Sep 28, 2008 4:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

"... somewhat hostile crowd"

Inexcusable at home.

I cannot tell you how I hate to see red in our house.

First time I saw it was at the first Rose Bowl game against Wisconsin. Bruin fans had scalped their tickets and there were Badgers everywhere. The Rose Bowl sounded like Camp Randall Stadium (the on campus stadium where Wisconsin plays its home games).

A couple weeks ago, I was in Vegas and happened to have dinner with a professional sports handicapper. I know nothing about sports betting so I asked him what he looked at. Number one factor in his eyes? Home field advantage.

We need to fill the stands. If we have tickets we should attend. If we can’t, we should make sure they go to Bruins.

And, we need to stop bonehead promotions like the one in the Fresno media.

Scalping our own tickets to the enemy and promotions like the one in Fresno put greed before school spirit. And, that’s wrong.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 28, 2008 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

It was almost like a bowl game, with the split crowd. We lost our home field advantage. I was listening to part of the game on the radio and there were times I heard the crowd cheering and assumed that UCLA made a good play. Turns out, the noise was from Fresno State’s fans.

I’m not sure what this promotion was about. Most likely slumping ticket sales. Whatever it is, I don’t like it.

by UCLAbruin920 on Sep 29, 2008 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Big Time Progress

that the Bruins showed against the Bulldogs – a very talented team. It was a disappointing loss. But the Bruins showed poise, effort and talent. Accepting the holding penalty made sense as revealed in other posts. When you give it a little thought the circumstances suggested it. When the oppsoing team makes a toucdown, then any defensive call was not the best call, right? The Bruins played a very good game, Our pass defense was weak and it really hurt us. The defenders just have to play the receivers tighter. They are always there to make the tackle – never to contend for possession. But this is clearly not a coaching issue.

Why is the LA Times so biased against the Bruins? Only thing I can think of is they will profit if SoCal has a National Champion. And the Bruins are somehow getting in the way. Does not say much for them as, if you want to be so kind, Sports Journalists. The bias is so obvious that it makes them look like fools as sports analysists. Dohn, admittaedy, does not root for the Bruins. But at least he is not against them.

The credit goes to the players this week – a well coached play hard team. I am totally proud.

Go Bruins !!

by northbaybruin on Sep 28, 2008 6:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

North, this will come as a shock

You don’t have to read the fishwrap.

I really feel like a voice crying out in the wilderness. I have preached this sermon over and over. I feel like the voice crying out in the wilderness. Let me give you a parable.

When Billy Kilmer was tailback for the single-wing Bruins, I understand that the fishwrap was a trOJan organ of propaganda. I don’t know that for sure, because I read the Daily Mirror. Then the Mirror and the Examiner faded away, and in a brief moment of mental instabilty, I subscribed to the ‘wrap. Shortly thereafter, and certainly before you were born, I cancelled my subscription. I didn’t then and don’t now need to know the details of what the fishwrap has to say about the Bruins, because they have always had the pro-trOJan bias. This isn’t a rhetorical question – would you subcribe to or read the daily trOJan? You wouldn’t, of course. So why would you buy or click on the off-campus version? You don’t need the ‘wrap to know what’s going on. There are plenty of alternatives. Buying or clicking or linking to the wrap just enables them. Bruins – vote with your feet. Boycott the fishwrap. If enough Bruins just said no, maybe we wouldn’t get a trOJan writing our blog. Maybe they would have noticed the same stuff that the Yahoo sportswriters found about bu$h and OJ Payo. But you can bet before there is any ink about those to little items, there will be another attack on Coach and how Sam Gilbert paid our players millions. That’s the fishwrap. That’s why I would line the bottom of a birdcage with it.

by Fox 71 on Sep 28, 2008 9:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs