Another Frustration Filled Saturday
I wrote in my last post that I was not going to do a post game write up if the Bruins didn't come back. Well the Bruins never came back despite showing weak signs of making a run. But in the interest of creating a fresh thread let's add some quick thoughts following the second half. We once again tried to make a second half come back but fall short by a score of 45-26. Here is the box score.
First of all big ups to Jeff Tedford and his California Bears. While we have enough reasons to be frustrated with our team, we have to give credit to Bears for getting it done and finally breaking their LA curse. They made the big plays when it counted. We ... not so much.
Second, there are some silver lining to today's frustrating loss. Our offense finally showed some signs of life in the second half. However, we got burned by the same old story of not being able to convert in the red zone and settling for FGs. It is clear right now that we don't have any play makers on offense. The veterans have not been able to step up (especially at the wide receiver spots) right when our teams needed them most. We are simply not taking advantage of opportunities when they present themselves.
Our defense did redeem themselves a bit in second half doing a better job containing the Cal offense, limiting them to 3 points. Still over here on BN we are not going to celebrate moral victories or get excited about signs of life. What we were looking for today were clear signs that our team was ready to play and fight for the entire 60 minutes. Based on what we saw in the first half the answer was disappointing.
Also, I am not sure right now whether Kevin Prince is the answer for the coming years. He is showing a lot of heart and he probably has a better grasp of the offense. Yet, in the back of mind I am left with wondering what we could have gotten if Brehaut had gotten a shot. I don't really care much for the answers that results would have been frustrating. Because I am not sure how much more frustrating it can get after what we have seen for last three games.
Of course, we are not giving up on the season. Neither are we giving up on the coaches. However, we are going to need some answers very soon if the coaches want to save this season. Let's make it clear. Anything less than an appearance in a bowl game this year will be considered a disappointing season. Hopefully Rick Neuheisel, his coaches and his players are working on the answers. It would be nice if the Bruins play with fire, heart and desire for the entire 60 minutes. They haven't done it since that glorious weekend in Tennessee.
GO BRUINS.
0 recs |
94 comments
|
Comments
ND Deep In 'SC Territory
:35 left.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Oct 17, 2009 4:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Final 4 seconds, go ND!
"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
by Yoyo on Oct 17, 2009 4:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
1 More Shot For Domers
C’mon ND, do it.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Oct 17, 2009 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Passion, heart and fire?
I saw plenty. Guys were working hard and if you could see them on the sidelines, you’d see the passion. Playing smart and being put in the right positions to succeed, especially on defense, is another matter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Oct 17, 2009 4:29 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Passion, heart and fire?
I saw plenty. Guys were working hard and if you could see them on the sidelines, you’d see the passion. Playing smart and being put in the right positions to succeed, especially on defense, is another matter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Oct 17, 2009 4:30 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Yes I saw plenty too
But not for the entire 60 mins and certainly not at the outset.
by Nestor on Oct 17, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I saw it from the kickoff
And for 60 minutes. Judging such a thing from a TV or even in the stands is a dangerous road to go down and one I don’t really want to go down. Except for a few extremely obvious instances, I think it’s too easy to confuse other things for what you’re accusing the team of and it’s a path I’m staying clear of.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Oct 17, 2009 4:39 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
We will have to disagree
I understand that you have a different perspective while watching the game from the stands. However, I am also pretty confident about what I see with my own eyes.
From what I saw in this game I saw a number of players who weren’t giving their all in certain plays. I saw our WRs not getting separation which at times look as a result of lack of effort. I saw a certain defensive back (who I am not sure why he is still in the game) getting repeated PWNed in the first half and not being able to provide enough run support.
I agree that there is also an issue of whether our players are being put in positions to succeed. We have to question that. However, right now based on what I have seen I certainly believe there are reasonable concerns whether this team is playing with heart for the entire 60 minutes.
by Nestor on Oct 17, 2009 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Was
Sheldon Price the one that got beat when both Verner and Price were on that guy in the south end zone?
by captainqtp on Oct 17, 2009 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are much closer to the team than I
so I believe you. Can you share any specifics about how the D was not put in the right positions to succeed?
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
by gbruin on Oct 17, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
4-8
that will be us AGAIN…and we will sweat out the final 2 victories over WSU and ASU or AU…THIS SUCKS!
by bruincheerleader on Oct 17, 2009 4:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
?
5-7 right? If we only win 2 games
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 18, 2009 7:14 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Actually quite happy with the game
I didn’t have the expectation of winning this game; Cal’s offense is simply just too explosive. But I did see some signs of life on the offense – I don’t think we’ve had that good a game offensively this year. Prince is clearly maturing behind center. And our RBs are starting to find holes (and the OL is starting to make them.)
The defense obviously needs to work on giving up big plays. But that’s correctable (I think).
There’s a lot of work to do, and a lot of growing left. Let’s hope we don’t slip next week, and we have a winnable game on our hands.
Go Bruins!
by Harsha on Oct 17, 2009 4:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"We don't have any play makers on offense"
I respectfully disagree, N. We do have playmakers. We don’t have consistent play makers.
Prince played pretty well today. But his big mistake turned a TD for us into a TD for Cal. 14 pt switch.
Some of the WR’s made some nice catches. But one also missed a TD on a ball through the hands, and there were some deep balls that we didn’t convert. Meanwhile, see Cal’s great TD pass over ATV. At least 7 more points we left on the field.
Jet Ski went 74 yds for a TD. But that was over half of our rushing yards today. The running game didn’t do too much else (though we were playing from behind and passing all day).
We had a nice TD run in the red zone. But we still settled too many times for FGs. More points wasted.
And this is on a day that the defense really didn’t give us much of a chance to win.
We aren’t good enough now to miss opportunities and still get away with it. Our margin for error against a good team is incredibly small. Any mistake or missed opportunity will cost us. If you look at the last 3 games, there were only 3 or 4 plays in the game that changed the outcome. That’s what is frustrating, but that is also the sign of progress. We weren’t this competitive (despite ourselves) before. The talent and coaching are better today than anytime in the last 8 years, but both are young and are still overly prone to inconsistency and mistakes.
I believe that will change. This was always a 3-4 year project, so we aren’t even halfway there, yet. As frustrating as today, and the last 2 weeks have been, we are still heading the right way. The path to the top of this mountain is steep and painful. But we are climbing.
Don’t confuse this for celebrating a moral victory. I’m not. Losing sucks huge. But keep your eye on the long term goal. It’s getting closer.
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
by gbruin on Oct 17, 2009 4:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Tough day for me
and I’m sure for the rest of you. But I’m still full of pride and still full of hope for the future. There is nothing else we can do but to go on. Permit me one moment of selfishness when I lament: How long must we wait for victory?
Forever a Bruin
Troy will fall...AGAIN!
by Bruins102NCAA on Oct 17, 2009 5:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
we can't win without an offense
and we did see that we may actually have one today, and that it is getting better.
However, the defense took a huge step back, and I think the receiver play was absolutely inexcusable. Austin stoppoing short on his pattern that would have been a td, Rosario not tucking the ball in and dropping it, etc. Way too many “should have been caught” plays.
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Oct 17, 2009 5:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And the first down right before the pick 6
I was encouraged that our offense does evidently know how to get things done. They showed that by coming close to connecting on some big plays. But close doesn’t count, and that’s a matter of execution. In a way, this is more what I expected out of this team offensively this season with all the young guys at the skill positions – not huge leaps and bounds but more close calls that sometimes connect.
On the other hand, I am disappointed once again by the slow start of the defense, and the bleeding never seemed to stop until the end of the half, which pretty much sealed the game and altered our offensive playbook to plays that are unsuitable for us at this point. It seems that we can lean on them after they’ve taken a few shots, but in games like this, we don’t have that many shots to give up, certainly not 35 points worth. I have no doubt that these guys want it, but in this case I believe Bullough needs to have his A game from the opening whistle. We seem to be content to go out there and play hard and adjust to the offense later, when we need to be the ones establishing the tone on defense, taking things away – Ben Ball style. It’s bad news for any opponent’s best player coming into Pauley, because that just means you have CBH’s full attention. That’s the attitude we need in our D. Take your strengths away and beat us somewhere else.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frustrated Patience
So, let me attempt to thread a middle ground. Clearly, we are a better football team than last year, game for game. But, we’re still not that good yet. RN has had some recruiting success in his short tenure, but he doesn’t have enough talent yet for UCLA to compete at the level we expect. He doesn’t have enough size or speed. He has more talent now than when he arrived, but not enough — and certainly not enough EXPERIENCED talent.This team will get better next year, and the year after that, as RN continues to bring in talented players, and the talent already in the program matures and gets better.
After opening the season with three decent wins, I fell in with “higher expectations than I had a right to” crowd. I’m guilty. What I forgot is, PAC 10 games are tougher, with more on the line, and by the time we started the conference season there was plenty of film for opposing teams to pick a part our young, untested, inexperienced, not very deep, not very fast, not very big team. What many frustrated fans see as a lack of effort on the field I see as a lack of ability compared to the other team. The reality is, this team is playing up to it’s ability, just as last year’s did. Personally, expecting six wins is out of this team is unrealistic.
But, that doesn’t mean I like watching this team lose, that I’m not frustrated, that I don’t question RN’s decisions or wonder why we can’t at least get some of the fundamentals correct (tackling, for instance.) As far as the coach: His teams show a knack for playing undisciplined (penalties, particularly at key moments) and at times inefficient clock management. AND, why the hell Craft played instead of Breauhart while Prince was out. Still, RN is building a program. He’s bringing in playmakers and talent — he’s recruiting size and speed. These players will make the difference. There’s a reason why some teams are better than others. After that, it will be time to find out if RN is a championship callibur coach or just a very good coach that will get us 8 to 10 wins a year and an occasional New Year’s Day bowl game.
Next year will be better than this year. In the meantime, I will continue to watch an offense that is incapable of scoring touchdowns and consistently hits a wall at the 20 yard line. Talk about painful. I’m happy for Forbath’s success. But if he is never needed to kick a UCLA field goal — other than a last-second game winner — as long as I live it will be too soon.
by Bruin Die Hard on Oct 17, 2009 5:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Also regarding the talent
A lot of those guys he brought in that are going to be our future are still on the scout team.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 5:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see
lack of ability at all. I just see an inability to put the pieces together. Our defense has been somewhere between and good and brilliant all season. Our offensive line is super young and putting up superb efforts on the week in and week out. We’ve gone from numerous penalties at the beginning of the year to only a couple today. Franklin has been close to breaking big runs all year and finally pulled it out today. No one in the Cal secondary was able to gain a step on him.
Let’s look at the last 3 weeks. At stanford we lost Rahim Moore at the beginning of the game, we were playin our back up QB, we were committing penalties left and right. More than anything else I think our offense killed itself with penalties. We still ended up that game within 1 score and an opportunity to tie on the final drive. I don’t think Stanford was more talented than us, they were smarter and more savy.
At Oregon, our defense held possibly the best offense in the pac-10 to 10 points, but Prince was just coming back and he was completely rusty and understandably so. He couldn’t hit wide open receivers. Even so, we had opportunities to score touchdowns. We got flustered by the kick off return and then had a pic-6 and prince fumble. I chalk that up to rust, and there isn’t much you can about that. Again, I didn’t see Oregon in that game as the more talented team, AT ALL. In fact we pretty much dominated them the entire game.
I think Cal’s team is more on par with us in terms of talent, but really, we’re killing our selves with missed tackles and break downs on fundamentals. Also, a couple of their big runs came with Brian Price hurt and temporarily out of the game. Look at our defense we have like 3 mid season All Americans playing in that group. I guarantee Cal didn’t have that. In fact, today’s game seemed like a total fluke for this defense. I have no idea what happened to them today, but I really don’t think it was a lack of talent or size or speed.
by captainqtp on Oct 17, 2009 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just a couple observations
First off, it has become very clear to me that our offense definitely has what it takes to put points up on the board. However, our inability to do so on a consistent basis mainly comes down to the play in two, and arguably one, position/s: the QB and the WR’s.
Prince showed that he was more comfortable today. Though not all of his passes were on the money, many of them were. In fact, I recall two big passes that were missed by the WR’s. The first came late in the first quarter and came right before the first field goal attempt by Forbath. It was a pass to Rosario in the endzone and was thrown a little high. At first I thought it was out of reach, but when the replay was shown the ball could clearly be seen going through the hands of Rosario. It SHOULD have been caught. The other big pass came in the 4th quarter on a fade rate to Austin. The ball originally appeared to have been overthrown, but on the replay Austin was shown slowing down to adjust to an “underthrown” ball. Once Austin realized that the ball was actually on target he tried to make a play on it, but by then the ball was out of reach. Had Austin kept running, that would’ve been 6 points guaranteed. Perhaps CRN should be looking to recruit a couple blue chip WR recruits because we clearly need them.
No doubt 3 straight losses (2 at home) are frustrating, however, I would just like to remind everyone that this is year 2 in a rebuilding process. We knew exactly what the state of our program was when CRN took over and we all knew that it would be a long road back to glory. When all the pieces are place, THAT’s when we will start to see them go for 4th and 1’s/2’s without hesitation, THAT’s when we will start to see the offense open up, and THAT’s when we will be seeing reel after reel of UCLA highlights.
Stay relentlessly positive bruins. We will get there.
by OutOThsWrld on Oct 17, 2009 6:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
+1 on relentless optimism. It’s not time to give up yet.
Go Bruins!
by Harsha on Oct 17, 2009 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Coach Kezerian
He’s the towel waving guy. His strategy for winning was pretty simple. He said (in paraphrase) line up and beat the guy opposite you. I didn’t see that today by our defense. We were consistent only in that we would give up a 40 yard plus play on every series. We might make Cal go in reverse for two plays, then they would torch us with a trick play, like sending their best back on an off-tackle play, for 90 plus yards, or a trick pass play (and this will be confusing nomenclature for you newcomers) called a “post pattern.”
I don’t know if we were out coached, but our players were certainly out played. I cannot say that I see an brightness toward the end of the tunnel with the defensive players and coaches we have now. Who is our defense going to stop? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if out 3-0 start turns into a 3-9 season.
And what that means is that we must be even more supportive of our players. They are all good players. They were all great high school players, and they’re all busting their rear ends. Our coaching staff is trying its best, but things aren’t working. Let’s keep up the support for the team, while we try to talk Rocky Long into moving up the coast from San Diego. I have no confidence that the best our defensive coordinator has is good enough.
by Fox 71 on Oct 17, 2009 6:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree, his best isn't good enough...
Our defense is supposed to keep us in games, hoping that our offense can be decent enough to get us a victory. Today, it seemed like the exact opposite. Bullough just isn’t getting it done. Why are we only sending 4 on every play? It seems as if we are just hoping that Price can cause enough disruption up the middle to force a bad pass. His scheme doesn’t make sense. We send no one so every QB we face has all kinds of time to throw, and then we get mad when our true freshman CB gets beat yet again. The scheme that we run makes even the best of CBs look bad (Verner was beat a few times today), let alone a frosh. The best pass defense comes from the DE. IF your ends are avg to below (SEE UCLA), and no one is blitzing, its going to be a long day for the secondary. That’s just how it is. Send someone dammit, Send some one! Zone blitz, corner blitz, something! Change it up a bit!
Second, please everyone stop complaining about us not going for it on 4th and short. We simply do not have the horses to do that. Our running game is effective when we can catch the defense off guard- when they are not definitely expecting a run, or when we run counters, a la the 74 yard run today. But when we line up on the goal line and even Stevie Wonder knows where the ball is going, we are going to lose that battle 80% of the time. Our O-line is young with young strength, high school senior strength, 18 & 19 year old strength…going up against grown men. As much as we would all like to be able to line up our big uglies and tell the other team where we are running and daring them to stop us, we can’t. Our guys may be big, but theyre not ugly enough, at least not yet. And it is also made painfully obvious on passing plays when at some points during the game, there are only 2 receivers out on routes! With the QB throwing, that leaves 8 players staying in for pass protection! We can’t be successful like that. Again, it goes back to the lack of strength and experience of our Oline. But we have been keeping our QBs upright for the most part, so I definitely see the improvement. Getting back to the mountaintop is a slow process, but give it some time, we’ll get there.
by westwood78 on Oct 17, 2009 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Slight Disagreement With My Geezer Brother Fox
Here’s where we agree: For the past few years, both of us have been concerned about our D. Those concerns continue.
It’s interesting that in almost every loss, a vast majority of the posts here focus on our O. The D skates.
Although I agree with Fox that Rocky Long would have been the best choice for DC, I am hesitant to be too critical of Bullough because I’m not sure whether he’s playing the D he wants to play or the D that was semi-imposed upon him when he took over.
IIRC — Bullough was brought in to run the same DW D we had been running for the past few years. The idea was that we needed continuity on at least one side of the ball, that we had players experienced in DW’s D, and that now was not the time to make major changes. I think Bullough was quoted as saying that we would continue to do what had been done by DW with some minor adjustments.
And, that’s where I have a problem. I was never a big fan of DW’s D’s. And, we see the same remnants of DW’s weaknesses, today. Slow starts, sloppy tackling, a weak pass rush, giving up big plays (and none are more frustrating than 3rd and long), and stupid penalties (although for all of us who watched the game on TV — the face mask penalty that gave Cal a first down when they would have had to punt was a SPTR call — totally blown).
All of this said, I am not discouraged — I actually think we show improvement as a team, and that we have not lost a game we should have won. That we have lost games we could have won is encouraging in the sense that we are more competitive against good teams than was predicted. We knew this would be a tough season and it has been. But, when our young kids grow, get strong, and learn the college game, we will be where we want to be.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Oct 18, 2009 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good luck to you guys the rest of the Pac-10 season. I haven’t read many of the comments on here, but I’ll say I think you guys have some very good true freshmen, especially on your OL. This UCLA team is much better than the one that traveled to Berkeley last year (on both offense and defense), and I don’t see any way this UCLA team misses out on a bowl for a second year. Again good luck!
STAY THIRSTY, MY FRIENDS
by Thoroughbred on Oct 17, 2009 6:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not Horrible
Hi guys, new here, first comments.
I was pleasantly surprised by what I saw from our offense today. I’ve been visiting this blog for about a year and a half and never felt the need to post anything, however when our own fans are talking about a 3-9 season and the world is crashing down…I just needed to.
I gave Kevin Prince a break last week. He was back from broken jaw, played a horrible game. Without a doubt, the injury and the time-off from it, led to his bad performance last week. I expected a bad game because of the time off.
Other than some horrible throws, Prince looked good. He has the arm to go down field and he did. However, the receivers let him and the team down. There were many opportunities there, but many of the receivers just never made the plays. I see a lot of potential in him, he is developing and getting better, and by each game he will improve.
The surprise of the season, so far, has been the offensive line. I feel really good about them. They are getting better and better. The running game is getting better, the quarterback has time to throw. Can’t ask for more from those guys on the line.
If the defense can break the habit of starting slow and wrap up better when tackling , I think a 6-6 season is within grasp and ultimately that was the goal of this season.
A strong finish this season, and if Price stays next season, then this could be a good team next season. That’s the whole point right now, we’re playing for next season and the seasons after. A 6-6 season is never good, except when a team is rebuilding from the ground up.
GO BRUINS!!!!
by LoveMyBruins on Oct 17, 2009 6:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
4th & INCHES....
Better than 75% of the football games I’ve seen in my life turn on a single play or two.
My submission for you all today was Best’s 93 yard TD run in the second qtr. Prior to that Cal possession the score was 21-14; and it came as a result of a CRN/CNC decision to punt on 4th and inches at the UCLA 46. YES, it’s easy to second guess after the fact, but from where I was sitting it was obvious that we had captured momentum in this game after Franklin’s 74 yrd TD & that punt decision (in my opinion) killed it. That whole turn of events had me thinking back to Fresno State last year when the Bull Dogs turned a failed Bruin 4th & inches into points.. & they end up winning. I looked at CRN, heard the boos, but he had already made up his mind… once bitten twice shy.
My point- if we are going to play conservative our D better show up & shut people down! At that point in the game it was clear (to me) that they had not. The second half was better, but the damage was already done.
I’m probably going to get some BIG flak for writing this next sentence, but I don’t care… As much as I HATE USC, I ADMIRE THEIR 4TH DOWN MENTALITY. PC does not hesitate to go for it, because he knows the value of momentum & how to harness it. Of course he is not always successful, but I admire this mentality. It tells his team that he has confidence in them & they often respond with victories.
So, would that 4th & inches decision have changed this game?- no one but God knows the answer to that question. If we had failed, at least we would have showed Cal that we were not going to let them control the tempo of this game. Our D was up against it, & putting Cal on our 46 would not have helped, but I strongly believe the risk was worth the reward.
In the end Bruins, that 4th & inches decision was born from a lack of confidence & we can’t expect to win if we don’t turn that mentality around.
BTW: UCLA = HEART. You can hear from far and near the Mighty Bruin roar!
by Bruin4ver on Oct 17, 2009 6:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
If we go for it there and fail, Cal gets a short field and likely scores at least a FG. You can’t expect the defense to give up a 93 yard run, especially when Best’s other 17 carries went for all of 10 yards. Converting the 4th down would likely have still left UCLA in its own half, so while there may have been a bit of a shift in the momentum there wouldn’t have been a huge change in the actual situation. The real killer was the long run on 2nd down, which I don’t think had much to do with the decision to punt.
by SuperBruinMan on Oct 17, 2009 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We had done well the possession before on D
It was probably natural to assume that the defense had made the appropriate adjustments and feel comfortable trying to pin Cal back deep, which we did. Obviously they were wrong about figuring it out (even if that particular play was more a result of bad tackling), but it’s not the terrible call some are making it out to be.
Probably in any other situation after this year, I will agree completely with Bruin4ver, and maybe CRN will too, but I can’t shake the image of 4th and Goal from last week out of my mind, and I’m sure it was running through CRN’s mind as well when he called for the punt team.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank You Tydides
That goal line stall vs the Ducks, was an even better example.
BTW: UCLA = HEART. You can hear from far and near the Mighty Bruin roar!
by Bruin4ver on Oct 17, 2009 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll join you with the pitchforks next year
If we’re still doing this 4th and 3 inches kind of crap with a more experienced O Line. I promise you that.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said,...
we’ll never know will we? CRN was probably thinking the same as you, & Im saying momentum is key & punting pours a bunch of cold water over it.
BTW: UCLA = HEART. You can hear from far and near the Mighty Bruin roar!
by Bruin4ver on Oct 17, 2009 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
4th down philosophy
I agree with you that I greatly prefer PC’s 4th down philosophy. It is a confidence that I think carries over into the rest of their game. When your coach says “I dont think we are capable of getting a few inches” it is hard to have any confidence as a player.
However, our kickers are much much much better than USC’s since it appears that PC has no interest in recruiting any kicker with talent. Its great that Locke and Forbath are so dominate, but it also makes us play more conservative than we would if we didn’t have them as a crutch to rely on.
by bruinponcho on Oct 17, 2009 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ll agree with your general sentiment here. Midfield, Bruins trailing but having regained some momentum, I would have gone for it there, trusting your offense to pick up a short yard. And I do admire Carroll’s willingness to go for it, although I think he takes a lot of calculated gambles that generally aren’t huge risks.
The decision to kick the FG on 4th down later in the second quarter was probably the right one, though. Can’t get that deep into Cal territory and not come away with some points.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on Oct 17, 2009 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
2-0 start was a curse for our QB situation
I think it is pretty clear to everyone that this is a rebuilding year and that early thoughts of contending for a conference championship were very premature. As much as we on BN reminded each other to keep things in perspective, I cant help but wonder what the coaching staff was thinking after the Tennessee win.
I feel that CRN started to think that this team might have a chance to contend and made a short term decision rather than thinking long term when he went with Craft over Brehaut. It is entirely possible we would have lost to K state with Brehaut, but I sure wish he would have gotten a chance. Prince didn’t play bad today, but since CRN likes to always remind us that it is a long process, I sure wish he would give Brehaut a chance.
As it stands, barring a season ending injury to Brehaut that lets him redshirt one of the next few years, Prince and Brehaut will be graduating together. This means that unless one of them makes a clear separation, this QB dispute is going to plague the program for next four years. The way I see it, Prince was the 25th best QB in his class. Brehaut was the number 6 QB.
Seeing Barkley turn his talent into production just kills me wondering what Brehaut could also be capable of. Sadly, I think the solution to the problem wont be Prince or Brehaut playing amazingly, but a frustrated Brehaut transfering to another university where he will get to play and live up to his potential.
by bruinponcho on Oct 17, 2009 6:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure the situation is that bad
It seems that Brehaut is already pretty close to Prince as a true freshman, and he hasn’t had the luxury of running the scout team for a year. I think it’s entirely conceivable that he overtakes Prince this offseason, especially with the natural gifts he was able to show in our last game.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 7:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And if he doesn't
Then it’s clear that Prince is the best QB regardless of recruiting ratings. And he actually looked pretty good today apart from the pick at the end. 313 yards is far better than in previous weeks, and it should have been better if the receivers hadn’t dropped a few balls.
by SuperBruinMan on Oct 17, 2009 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uncertainty
My main point is that I would rather CRN given them both equal shots this year and get a pecking order established rather than have to deal with the uncertainty of Prince versus Brehaut for the next four years. Its kind of a catch 22. If one of them emerges and takes control, then problem solved. But if Prince struggles, then he is going to be looking over his shoulder while an anxious crowd asks for Brehaut. I just wish Brehaut would get a chance now than for us to always wonder “what if.”
Of course, if our receivers keep dropping passes, the issue is moot.
by bruinponcho on Oct 17, 2009 8:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I like having our depth chart relatively stable from week to week and that starts with deciding on a starter early, which to be fair to our coaches, is what happened both this year and last year. It just so happens that last year our top two QBs had season ending injuries before playing a single down, so the depth chart wasn’t as much of an issue as it is this year. I am confident all QBs on our roster will get a fair look in the spring.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
(Clears Throat)
If it ever happens, I will cry:
Rules Governing the Employment of 2QB Systems:
1. The Rule Against 2QB Systems. With only two exceptions, 2QB systems should be avoided like the bird flu.
2. The Evaluation Period Exception. A 2QB system may be temporarily necessary to evaluate the available talent in game situations to determine which QB should be the long term starter. The evaluation period should be as short as possible and should under no circumstances last longer than four or five games.
3. The Epinephrine Exception. Use of two QBs may be desirable on rare occasions when a starter is having a bad game and the team needs a change of pace and a kick in the britches.
4. The Waffle Exception to the Epinephrine Exception. You only get one shot of epi, and it should only be used with well-established starters whose confidence will not be shattered by the substitution. Beware of the temptation to use it with recent winners of a quarterback duel. If you absolutely must change your mind once a "final" decision has been made on a duel, YOU CANNOT DO IT AGAIN. If you yank your first "final answer" QB because he’s melted down, he’ll no longer be a viable option, so stick with his replacement as long as he’s anywhere in the vicinity of competent.
Early Warning Signs
If your team exhibits any of the following symptoms, do like Chicken Little and sound alarm:
1. T the he Sideline Captain. Beware of captains on sidelines. In other words, do not underestimate the power of leadership and experience, and do not overestimate the promise of potential.
2. The Early Success. Beware of early success using multiple QBs. It only delays the inevitable.
The Rotation Scheme. Beware of pre-planned rotation schemes. Getting a backup reps in a game is all well and good, see e.g., D.J. Shockley, but pre-game plans to rotate QBs must be subject to change. Do not commit to any systematic rotation of QBs, whether every other play, every other series, or every X number of series. Never break game rhythm by pulling a QB when he’s hot. A team employing a rotation scheme is not only splitting game reps between two players, but is also surely splitting practice reps, which, instead of preparing both players for games, merely stunts the growth of both.
Just look at Pryor/Boeckman 1-2 Slap (Not Punch)
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This season is the "evaluation period"
Like I mentioned earlier and we have all noted throughout the season, we aren’t contending for a championship this year. As harsh as it is to say to the seniors, if we are going to be outclassed anyway, why not put our talented and heralded young players a chance to sink or swim. As good as Austin has been for us, he is never ever going to be a playmaker. So why not put Thigpen or Know in his place on kickoffs and Carrol out wide more often.
As for our QB situation, I don’t think it is clear who “should be the long term starter.” Applying CRN long-term view to building a program rather than your “QB rules”, the long term goal should be to let both of them get their shots this season and see who performs the best. We might win and we might lose, but I don’t think it will make much difference overall. I’d just rather have both of them get some gametime so that way the fanbase can be placated and know that Prince or Brehaut is the QB of the future instead of merely projecting what we think Brehaut can or cant do.
by bruinponcho on Oct 17, 2009 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Only time...
will tell. Brehaut or not to Brehaut, I think this coaching staff is shelving that decision for 2010. I haven’t seen enough of him to say if that’s a mistake or not… but, then the question is- why burn his redshirt in the first place?
BTW: UCLA = HEART. You can hear from far and near the Mighty Bruin roar!
by Bruin4ver on Oct 17, 2009 7:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm sick and tired of CRN's timid decisions.
Is he trying to win or trying to avoid blame for the loss! If you don’t think your offense can get a couple of inches on fourth down at midfield, that sends a horrible message to the team. Fortune favors the bold!!
by BoltDaddy on Oct 17, 2009 8:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe he doesn't think we can get a couple inches...because we can't?
We saw it last week against Oregon; twice in a row up the middle, failing to get in the endzone. It’s one thing to be bold, another to be foolhardy. Fortune also generally favors the capable.
by jaffa on Oct 17, 2009 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, I suppose, but...
I was among those booing, because I felt that if we weren’t going to give it a shot then, when were we? That was a chance to grab momentum, and we weren’t doing a tired D any favors by putting them back out there. If we have a well-rested defense I say punt the ball and take your chances, but we needed to put together some sort of drive at that juncture.
And it’s also worth mentioning that the third and 1 before that was Derrick Coleman (if I’m not mistaken) running sideways. That just made no sense… we can DEFINITELY get half a yard running him up the middle twice.
by HailRover on Oct 17, 2009 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
CAN WE PLEASE STOP THIS DELUSIONAL TALK ABOUT HOW "GOOD" WE LOOKED?
WE SUCKED TODAY. I sat in the best seat I’ve ever had, right on the 50 yl up high under the press box. I saw a team that did not play with toughness and that blew it most of the time. I AM SICK OF SETTLING FOR FIELD GOALS. I am sick of weak play calling, what the F, is Chow still working for ‘sc? How come we can’t punch the ball over for half a g’dam yard if our O-line is “so good?” How come Rosario, “Mr Future” dropped 3 balls? Where are the running backs? Prince is so slow my dead grandma could run him down. I mean give me a break!! I’m sick of timid playcalling, I’m sick of Kevin Prince not showing up, I’m sick of not seeing Brehaut except when I do he can actually complete a pass, I’m sick of false start, holding, facemask penalties, I’M SICK OF THIS TEAM NOT PLAYING TOUGH, DAMMIT!! Karl D was a milktoast but Rick won’t chew them out except for secret discipline? I WANT A SMASH MOUTH FOOTBALL TEAM THAT INTIMIDATES and so far, these guys are NOT SHOWING UP. And stop this lame talk about how we sort of showed signs of progress, how so and so looked almost acceptable… WE LOST, DAMMIT and ALL 3 of these games were winnable IF WE PLAYED LIKE WE F-ING CARED !! I am sick of losing like this. I’m sick of unrealized potential. I watched Randall Carroll totally dog a route on a passing play where he should have been open. I’m sick of seeing Thigpen – THIGPEN!! – RUNNING INTO A STACKED UP LINE. I’m sick of this supposedly great defense getting MAULED on the line and giving up MASSIVE YARDS to opposing runners. And no I am not drunk. I do not drink. But this team is going to drive me to drinkin’ if they don’t stop SCREWING AROUND and PLAY WITH SOME HEART, DAMMIT !!
I WANT OUR TEAM TO BE THE ONE THEY SAY PLAYS WITH THE TOUGHNESS OF A BIG-10 TEAM NOT F-ING STANFORD. STANFORD??!!
Can you DIG it?
out
by UCLA Bruin on Oct 17, 2009 8:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
haha
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 8:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm kind of glad I touched a nerve because we need a reality check
and guys, it’s not personal. More below.
by UCLA Bruin on Oct 17, 2009 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It sounds like you're the one with a touched nerve around here
The rest of us are well aware of what this team should be capable of. It’s interesting that a post full of empty platitudes and devoid of everything but opinions and unreasonable demands constitutes a “reality check” in your mind though.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
welcome
I hope you enjoy your time here at BN, just wait until after this comment.
Let’s see straw-guy, where to start:
is Chow still working for ‘sc?Yes, I hope he is, because he was the greatest Playcaller in the history of USC football at his time.
How come we can’t punch the ball over for half a g’dam yard if our O-line is "so good?"Who told you that the O-Line was “so-good”, because they were obviously wrong. We’re decent, but not great.
How come Rosario, "Mr Future" dropped 3 balls?Nice nickname, never heard it though.
Prince is so slow my dead grandma could run him down.He’s actually faster than every QB on our roster so to speak, his escapability has been REALLY good of late.
I’m sick of timid playcalling
This was literally the first game under CRN that UCLA has gone for the deep portion of the field. There were no stops on the deep routes today buddy.
I’m sick of not seeing Brehaut except when I do he can actually complete a passIf you are comparing him to Prince, well think again, Prince gained 311 yards today through the air, and was literally a foot away from getting within 5 points.
I’m sick of false start, holding, facemask penalties,Actually, it’s a good point. The penalties did put a damper on matters, but the refs weren’t calling a “bad” game per-say.
I’ll stop there. I’m really tired. In conclusion, the team today was actually because the bizarro world opened up a portal at the Rose Bowl, making UCLA great on offense, and mediocre (at best) on defense. So, I’ll call this “The Bizarro Game”
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Must have been sitting right by me
And I saw much of the same. Prince seems just a half second late on many throws. Can we really not get the ball to Carroll? And Pressley needs to break one tackle before the year is over, right? Somebody has got to step up and soon.
by royobruin on Oct 17, 2009 8:58 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Most likely not
Carroll can’t catch, Pressley is a true Freshman against an All American Saftey, (I think we’re talking about the same play), but yes, we need a playmaker right now
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Presley is still thin
I’d be surprised if he’s able to break out of a leg tackle before he gets more meat on them bones.
As a side note, his middle name – Kalanianaole – is awesome.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha great name!
Pressley will be awesome – u can see his energy … I just want to see him bust one tackle and get into space. We have a tremendous problem getting the ball to our sperm in space.
Another note is why don’t we throw screen passes to anyone other than paulsen and moya? I re lize those can be sneaky but can’t we have some imaginative screens and swing passes? And whatever happened to knox – and ramirez getting absolutely no opportunities was frustrating too …
by royobruin on Oct 17, 2009 9:38 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Speed not sperm haha
I stupid iPhone changing what should have been SPEED to sperm …
by royobruin on Oct 17, 2009 9:39 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I just read that when you put the correction up. I was wondering if we were talking about the same game…
I’m guessing that the problem with a screen pass in our offense right now, whether it’s the TE screen or the WR screen, is the blocking. The positions that need to block may have problems getting blocks out in space. I recall Hasiak being confused on his blocking assignment in the Tennessee game the led to Knox having to make that spectacular juke move. There was the WR screen today with Austin that got stuffed because we couldn’t trick their corner into biting on it.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 9:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn young Oline
I think you’re right that our blocking assignments need to be absolutely idiot-proof right now and that’s frustrating but the way it is. The end of it all is playmakers must step up. Time to break some tackles and snap off some throws.
Somehow Carroll has to get the ball too – right? This waiting game for his breakout is getting old.
Another unrelated note – I like TA’s reliability but he’s just not a gamebreaket and it’d be fun to change it up a bit in our return game. Austin is great at finding that seam, being slippery, and not fumbling, but the breakaway speed just isn’t there.
by royobruin on Oct 17, 2009 9:52 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I saw an improved O line, today
When Eddie went down, Hasiak came in and did a great job.
Also, our pass blocking has improved dramatically lately, and this is probably the main reason Chow stretched the field today.
Good – we had a shot of being in the game if, with 5minutes left, Austin doesn’t misjudge the endzone pass or Prince doesn’t severely underthrow a wide open walk-it-to-the-house Paulsen (the pick 6 play).
Bad – 1st half defense…but to give them some credit, Riley played the half of his life – he’s never been and probably never will be that accurate again.
Ugly – 3 or 4 dropped passes by Rosario – that just ain’t gonna cut it.
by bornagainbruin on Oct 17, 2009 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's pretty much how I see it
Riley was playing pretty well before the past two games though, I gotta give him credit for stepping up.
by Tydides on Oct 18, 2009 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Presley was a beast
In HS, he was trucking people. He’s still a true freshman, give him some time to get into the Y spot on offense next year after the 2 TE’s leave
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
CRN is running out of excuses.
No matter how good of an excuse he can come up with, it is still an excuse.
Actions speak louder than words. The time has passed for promises. It’s time for tangible results.
by Bruin92 on Oct 17, 2009 8:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ok
So you were a Howland hater too?
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He may still be
After all, we don’t have a NC yet.
“Actions speak louder than words”
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ya
Howland is flat out terrible, at least Lavin can recruit people like Baron Davis and get to the Sweet 16
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where were all you people 5 years ago?
When we were underperforming with more talent and more experienced teams? Did our guys suddenly get a year older, a year stronger, another year more familiar with the playbook and with their teammates in the course of a week? I’m running out of patience…with our F-ing fanbase. With people who demand results with no sense of reality or of the situation we’re working with.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's definitely getting annoying
Since when did UCLA have disloyal fan base?
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
come on now
angry is not disloyal. I’m not angry, but I get that some people are. I don’t think it’s disloyal.
by captainqtp on Oct 18, 2009 1:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Besides, this is an "online sports bar" ...
and this is just venting after suffering a 3rd consecutive loss.
On Monday morning, emotions will settle and most of us will calmly remember that this is the second year of a huge, multi-year rebuilding project and that we must be patient. It sucks, but we must be very patient.
Although I don’t like bashing the man after he’s was fired, the previous coach destroyed this program by not recruiting 4 or 5 star talent, not developing the talent he had and (to cope with the outcome) instilling a philosophy of “Don’t Worry – Be Happy!” This continued for five long years and it took us from a dominant Pac-10 program to the gutless little Bruins. It will take a few years before its effects have been erased.
Just changing the coaches doesn’t fix the problems of the past five years. Neuheisel and Chow did not start with a blank slate – the team had a lot of self-defeating habits. They are trying to change the whole philosophy of the program not just make adjustments. Anyone who has tried to turn around an organization knows it is tough: the experienced guys were part of the old regime – with those attitudes and habits – and the new kids are … well, kids.
So, Sports Writers, give us a break. If we Bruin Fans complain about our team that doesn’t mean that we don’t love ‘em. We’re like fathers of teenagers who yell every time they bring home a ‘D’ (because we’re only human). Besides, this season is torture – CRN & CNC can get our team to play above their level – showing glimpses of the future – so we think we’ve turned that corner and then reality comes crashing in. Life isn’t a Disney movie.
by JonnyG on Oct 18, 2009 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was
12 years old and tuned in to the radio every time UCLA played.
by Bruin92 on Oct 17, 2009 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh
I was hoping 92 referred to your graduation year and not your birth year. But I guess this explains things. I was there for the KD era, in its painful entirety. His 5 years covered my entire time in college. I know the state of the program when it was handed to him and when he handed it off. There is a BIG difference between the two and it does not favor CRN.
I probably shouldn’t say this because I know it’s going to be taken the wrong way but it is because I had my college football experienced ruined by KD that I must and trust me when I say this is said in the most uncondescending way possible: Perhaps you’re not the best person to determine when the time has “passed” for promises.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Point taken.
I think I was speaking out of disappointment that another winnable game was determined by a few letdowns on both sides of the ball.
by Bruin92 on Oct 17, 2009 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we're all disappointed about today
No analysis needed there my man. Seeing their guys rip off big runs after shedding about six tackles isn’t my idea of a good time either.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think not!
Whoa! We know where this program was in Dorrell’s 3 last years. CRN came in and convinced talent to come to this program that Dorrell couldn’t recognize and appreciate. This is CRN’s first year with talent that he WANTED. Everyone needs to cut him some slack. Did you really think we would be 5-0. Yes, it hurts and is embarrassing to lose like this. One other thing, has anyone ever thought about a UCLA recruit reading what we say about this football team at this time and place?
by Raybru on Oct 17, 2009 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Related story
No matter how good of an excuse he can come up with, it is still an excuse.
My brother’s teacher once told the class that they had to turn in the homework the next day, even if they got hit by a truck on the way home. Sure enough, my brother’s friend gets hit by a (pickup) truck while walking home. I don’t know if he turned the homework in the next day, but getting hit by a truck was probably a good excuse. But as you say, it’s still just an excuse.
by SuperBruinMan on Oct 17, 2009 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When we stop getting better, that's the time to bitch
Beating Tennessee, K-State and SDSU might have seemed like a mighty accomplishment at the time, but in retrospect was just wishful thinking. Losing decisively to a mediocre Stanford team, badly a QB-less Oregon team and in a less than embarrassing fashion to a pretty solid (albeit disappointing) Cal team is moving in the right direction. No one likes losing. But our O-line is worlds better than last year and we have tons of young talent. And CRN and Chow called a better, albeit less than perfect game, relative to last week. It’s too early to throw in the towel on Prince – anyone remember Cade McNown’s early days? Even if he could have played better at times, today was not his fault. We’ll right this ship.
by Nocal Bruin on Oct 17, 2009 8:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I gotta tip my cap to Prince
I thought he played pretty well. Sure he had some bad throws and overthrows, but every college level QB does in every game. He also had 2 sure TD passes dropped, and that’s something I credit him for even as I demerit our WRs for not grabbing them.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 8:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
311 yards
and 2 feet away from a very important TD
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 17, 2009 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When I say results
I mean not making the same mistakes week in and week out. No I am not a Howland hater, he has had very good results. And no, I am not a disloyal fan but rather a disappointed one. I know how bad we were last year, and I know we have improved but I would like to see our D actually show up in the first series, our WR’s actually run their routes, and our tackling improve.
by Bruin92 on Oct 17, 2009 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, who wouldn't like to see that
But let’s be honest, most of the time they do run their routes (albeit not perfectly) and most of the time our tackling is sufficient. I can’t say our D has shown up in the first series yet though. It’s when they don’t do these things and we get burned for it that we notice it. Unfortunately, and this has been proven time and time again in any sport you can think of, the only thing consistent about young players like we have on our line and at our skill positions is inconsistency. There may be incremental improvements over the course of the season, but you develop consistency and timing with reps, and that’s one thing most of our players haven’t had yet.
by Tydides on Oct 17, 2009 9:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's what it amounts to:
We lost three games in a row at home to teams that deserved to be favored over us—teams that were nationally ranked at one time or another or were clearly further along. I admit to believing that we could win one of those games, but only if we played consistently well on both sides of the ball, something that really hasn’t happened yet in league play. I see the same mistakes and failures that everybody else does, and the same moments and stretches of good play, but I am going to resist the human tendency to state any generalizations or characterize our team or its coaches based on the data we have. Because it is of very little use. Of course we must piss and moan, or be hopeful and optimistic, as we choose, and that we have certainly done. But six league games remain. We should try to win each and every one of them. In other words, for the coaches, for the players, for the fans, the past is only useful as a source of mistakes to correct. Otherwise, it no longer exists. Learn and move on. That seems like the best approach, IMHO.
by ReineSeite on Oct 17, 2009 10:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
One correction
It’s two in a row at home. Our loss to Stanford was in Palo Alto.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Oct 17, 2009 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'M AS A BIG A BRUIN CHEERLEADER AS ANYONE HERE...but...
let’s be realistic…for the past three games we allowed the other team’s running back over 100 yeards, and in CAL’s case 2 runners over 100…DEFENSE was supposed to be our strenght…wasn’t it?…WHAT HAPPENED?…i actually has us losing to CAL and OREGON…so in my book we were to have been at this point 4-2…so 3-3 is not that far off…IT’S JUST THE WAY WE ARE LOSING THAT KILLS ME…we give up BIG PLAYS on defense…why???…don’t we have 4 or 5 potential ALL-AMERICAN’S on defense, or so we were told…i am totally depressed now for the third week in a row…this harkens back to the KD teams who NEVER LIVED UP TO THE HYPE…
by bruincheerleader on Oct 18, 2009 7:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What happened?
Just caught the stat layout on TiVo, but the Cal Offense gained something like 300 yards while Brian Price wasn’t on the field. Still trying to finalize that. Plus, you have to see that this team HAS no hype. It never did (7-5 isn’t very hype like).
Re Defense: this was basically the same backfield that Cal had last year. It wasn’t like this year where we had a chance to stop them on a consistent basis. We improved more than they did IMO
There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.
by ucla13_usc9 on Oct 18, 2009 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I stayed up late
back east and caught the ASU-WASH game (back and forth between the Angel disaster). The receivers on both these teams seem to hang on to the rock when a good ball is thrown their way. What a concept!
by BruinFanGA on Oct 18, 2009 7:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 




















