The Scariest Part About 0-5

by rfirpo on Nov 1, 2009 9:33 AM PST Comment 21 comments

The Scariest Part About our 0-5 record this year is, in my opinion, how good the other teams in the conference look. We are battling WSU to stay out of the cellar, while the rest of the conference is playing pretty good football and is both competitive and showing improvement. Even scarier, it seems the balance in the Pac-10 is the result of some good coaching hires (Chip Kelly and Harbaugh just to name two) and some good young (or new) quarterbacks (Barkley and the kid from Arizona come to mind).

Who knows what UCLA has in store for the next few years, and Coach Neu might turn out to be the best of the best. But looking around the conference, we have a road to climb, and competing for 10 win seasons seems many years away. As for our quarterback situation--another huge question mark if you ask me. I'll let others talk about "silver-linings" and the fourth quarter. Sure it looked good, but doesn't every team shine at least one quarter in the year? We were due, and TJ Simers nailed it this morning (assuming you can appreciate humor at our expense). Of course, that doesn't mean Prince isn't our future. I hope he is. I just can't put much stock in one decent 4th quarter against a middle of the road Pac-10 team. Consistent performance and year-long data sets drive my opinions (sometimes unfortunately for my psyche).

The one good thing I can say about Prince and the 4th quarter is that maybe it will end this year's qb controversy. I say that because, in my opinion, this season will be largely wasted if Prince isn't the guy next year. Consistency and growth at QB is something we need desparately, and if we go into next year not knowing who the QB is, it's another year of blah if you ask me. If Prince is the guy next year, maybe 6 wins (or better), a bowl game, and significant improvement is possible. If not, scary-big question mark.

Congrats to Oregon, though it's too bad the balancing of the Pac-10 hasn't included UCLA thus far.

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

0 recs | Comment 21 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Good for your in reading Simers

I am not going to read assholes who genuinely hate our team, fans and our coaches during this time.

by Nestor on Nov 1, 2009 9:39 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Also r. Chip Kelly

He has done a great job with Bellotti’s recruits. However, its kind of funny that you conclude that he is a “good coaching hire” based on data points coming from little more than half a season. Looks like you are not exactly consistent in your argument in dismissing our fourth quarter come back.

He might turn out to be a good coach but I will hold my final judgment until I see what he does with his own recruits.

by Nestor on Nov 1, 2009 9:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Lavin looked great his first year

I think that’s the best arguement agains evaluating assistants who are taking over players coached up by his predecessors.

Kelly did do a good job keeping the team together after the BSU debacle, and he is a good play caller, but it will take three years before we really know what he is made of.

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

by silverlakebruin on Nov 1, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yup

I’m willing to say that Kelly has done 98% of the things right this year. He’s done a tremendous job in 2009. Whether that continues into the coming years, that remains to be seen. He doesn’t have a track record as a head coach from which to judge, but I will say that when it comes to coordinators being elevated to head coach, he has an impressive coordinator resume and is the type of guy who deserves the first time head coach shot.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 1, 2009 11:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is Kelly's 3rd year in the program

So I assume a lot of the offensive players are already his recruits, especially since his system is so specialized.

by bluebland on Nov 2, 2009 12:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Let's see what happens

When Coach Kelly doesn’t get the kind of player, like Masoli to run that offense. I’m not saying that Chip Kelly isn’t a good coach, because he certainly is. What would he do though if he had QB’s who couldn’t run. I thought about that after watching Oregon destroy SC. Cade McNown definitely made Bob Toledo look good. It gets back to the fact when you get great players, they make a coach look that much better.

by Bruin37 on Nov 2, 2009 6:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

But that was his 6th game as the head coach. It’s hilarious to me that you all are so antsy to jump on Kelly’s bandwagon while looking to attack Neuheisel any way you can after a year and half.

You do remember how Neuhiesel did his first two years at Colorado after taking over for McCartney. Right?

by Nestor on Nov 2, 2009 6:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Slimers

nailed nothing this morning. He called UCLA’s team a “disgrace” among many other insults.

We have lost 5 in a row but we are not a disgrace.

Slimers is a disgrace.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 1, 2009 1:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Really?

After SUC’s worst loss in decades, THAT’S his story of the weekend? Pathetic. I can’t wait till the SUC Times goes out of business.

by Tydides on Nov 1, 2009 2:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh yeah

Probably his all-time worst column ever or at least in the top 5.

At least once in awhile, Slimers reminds us that there is no such thing as a “tragedy” in sports when, for example, a team loses. His greater point—which is true—is that sports is a diversion and that too many people take it way too seriously.

Yet, he has no trouble writing scathing personal attacks on CRN and calling the football team a “disgrace,” even though he admits he didn’t see either of the TDs we scored.

He’s a hypocrite, a mediocre writer who aims only to shock, and a jerk. And he’s the disgrace for calling out 18 to 20 year old kids who seemed to me to try damn hard to win that game. No one who wore the UCLA uniform on Saturday seemed disgraceful to me.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 1, 2009 5:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hear hear

Let’s go technologic overhaul… or regress into Bruins Nation Times!

There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.

by ucla13_usc9 on Nov 1, 2009 6:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I respectfully disagree with that characterization

Merging the Times into Bruins Nation would be a surefire upgrade for the Times…and a possible regression for BN.

Also, I realize I wrote “worst loss in decades” when I meant “worst loss in a decade”. Oh well.

by Tydides on Nov 1, 2009 6:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hahaha

No making the website into a print version is what i was saying.

There's no one in the world that wants to beat UCLA more than _______.

by ucla13_usc9 on Nov 1, 2009 7:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't read his column

But for what it’s worth, I did notice in the print edition a byline saying “from Corvallis, Oregon” so he was probably assigned to write about us well before either even happened.

by jaffa on Nov 1, 2009 6:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

More like

He was assigned to go up to Corvallis to do a hit job on UCLA. The Times editior knew Slimers despises everything about Neuheisel and they also knew Bruins were staring at a 5 game losing streak. So they most likely decided to send TJ up there to rub our noses in it. And it’s kind of pathetic to see someone use TJ to make a “point.” What a joke.

by Nestor on Nov 1, 2009 6:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Both the 'wrap and Simers are irrelevant.

Section 210 of the Evidence Code defines “relevant evidence.” In paraphrase, it says that relevant evidence is evendence having any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence. Both the fishwrap and its alleged reporters fail that test. The writers have nothing to say that is of consequence, and as a medium the ’wrap publishes fundamentally nothing that has any tendency in reason to prove or disprove anything.

Bottom line for me is that I don’t care what the ‘wrap says any more than I care who some celebrity is dating this week. I know that others consider it important to track the ’wrap because of the perception that negative or inaccurate statements about UCLA have a negative impact, but I disagree. I really can’t think of anyone other than fishwrap staffers and their parents who still think the ’wrap is a significant journalistic organ. I can only hope that I live long enough to see the ’wrap come to its well-deserved demise.

by Fox 71 on Nov 2, 2009 3:14 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Strong Pac-10 teams good for the conference

Yes, I am disappointed by our winless conference record to date, but I am happy that the Pac-10 is looking strong this year. We have 4 teams in the Top 25 and most of the teams in the conference are playing good football. Hopefully, the conference gets more national exposure and respect (although it may be wishful thinking).

I just hope Oregon handles its business and wins out the rest of the season. They have a very outside chance of playing for the NC if they win out. I just don’t see Florida or Texas losing at this point. I can see Oregon getting in if all of the following happen: 1) LSU beats Bama this week and then beats Florida in the SEC title game, 2) Iowa loses to Ohio State this week, 3) Cinci loses to either West VA or Pitt. Although TCU and Boise State will most likely win out, I don’t see them getting selected for NC if all the above happen.

Getting back to my original point, a strong Pac-10 is good for all the teams in the conference. It pushes all teams to elevate their games.

by Kerckhoff405 on Nov 2, 2009 11:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Pac 10? What's that?

Here in Tampa, the Pac 10 doesn’t get a lot of air time. Most everyone thinks that just$c* is an independent, starts every year at 10-0, then plays Notre Dame. But absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing, will diminsh the sheer magnificance that is the SEC. The worst team in the SEC would be the best team in any other conference, blah, blah, blah. There’s a lot of sentiment here for Florida against any other SEC team for the NC.

by Fox 71 on Nov 2, 2009 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Pac-10 is the Best Conference this year

I’ve been saying that on these pages for sometime now. The evil 4-letter will push the SEC on us till death parts them from their contractual arrangements. Nestor, boys; you guys can’t let Simers push your buttons so much. He clowns every team in town. It’s just what he does for (little) entertainment. Just think how great it’s going to be in a couple of years when he get’s it shoved down his throat.

by BruinAl on Nov 2, 2009 4:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Or we could just deny him access

He’s not a reporter. He’s a professional troll. I see no reason why he should have access to our program. If he wants to see our games, he can buy a ticket like everyone else.

by Tydides on Nov 2, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually agree w you

Re. not letting Slimers push our buttons. That’s why I think it’s fun to mock him for being the asinine tool that he is right here without giving him the benefit of puffing up his ego by giving him page views or filling up his inboxes.

by Nestor on Nov 2, 2009 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs