At Least We Have Better Cheerleaders Postgame Thread
I'm going to cling to our cheerleaders because at this point, that's all we have. Outworked? Check. Outplayed? Double-check. Outcoached? Triple-check. ND is making a run at worst string of performances by a UCLA player ever and I'm more than aware of the Lavin era. That's how bad it has gotten. JA took a major step back and he wasn't that far forward to begin with. ML's revamped jumper looked awful and defensively, we were torn apart by a great shooting Portland team. The Pilots are no joke and when a good team plays well against a bad team playing poorly, you get 74-47. Here's the box score.
The most depressing part of the game is that the players looked fantastic compared to the coaching job of CBH and his staff. CBH has done a remarkable job with the UCLA program and the guy has a looooooong leash for everything he has accomplished. That doesn't mean that he can't do a pitiful job in spurts though and calling the job he is doing right now pitiful is being charitable.
It's been said for a while that CBH's biggest weakness is how stubborn he is. That has bitten him in games before, but never for a stretch of games like it has this season. CBH is running his same system and making no adjustments, despite having a team unlike anything he's ever had and skill sets unlike anything he's ever had. Coach Wooden was most revered from a basketball standpoint for his ability to play 15 different styles to fit 15 uniquely different teams. CBH is showing none of the flexibility as he continues to attempt to fit square pegs into round holes.
That doesn't even begin to get into the minute allocation issues. I'll leave that to you guys in your comments below and fanposts if you have more extensive thoughts. For now, I'm too upset to go any more in depth. I'll leave that for tomorrow. At least we have our cheerleaders...
95 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don't have any of our cheerleaders
I’d feel much less miserable if I did
Does anyone know
what time we play tomorrow?
"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel
6:30
I’ll be there at 5! General seating!!!
Oh UCLA you sweet bitch, you've BRUINed me for anything else.
by bruin8uclap on Nov 26, 2009 10:22 PM PST up reply actions
Game before it is at 6:30
That means our game definitely won’t start before 9 and probably later.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 27, 2009 12:32 AM PST up reply actions
Ah yes
this is true. Sorry everyone for the faulty info. I am still going to be there early!
Oh UCLA you sweet bitch, you've BRUINed me for anything else.
GM used to be the most successful carmaker in the world.
They were stubborn to and didn’t adapt…
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 26, 2009 10:21 PM PST reply actions
I just hope this team improves during the season and play with passion.
There is no doubt that talent is lacking and our most experience players are not the vocal leaders and even the best players. I hope CBH grows this season as a coach and becomes more flexible in his methods.
by UCLA Championships Made Here on Nov 26, 2009 10:22 PM PST reply actions
Very fair writeup
Here’s to hoping that CBH has a chat with Wooden, or is inspired in some other way to go back to the drawing board. If this game can act as a lesson to CBH regarding the flexibility required to succeed year after year, then it’s more than worth it IMHO.
This reminds me of something.
I believe it was 2006 when we were blown out by Memphis in a pre-season tournament? Mind you, Portland is not Memphis, but I think we can all agree that they are a very very good team this year. Anyone remember what happened in the rematch? Not saying it will happen this year, but do keep in mind the way Howland’s teams experience sometimes miraculous growth later in the season. I will reserve my praises/criticisms of Howland for sometime mid Pac-10.
Oh UCLA you sweet bitch, you've BRUINed me for anything else.
Nope. We lost 88-80, with one of their guys making 7 threes in one half
And that was Memphis, a no. 1 seed.
Ah yes
now I remember. But without that mad run towards the end we’d have been blown out. I am only trying to make the point that I reserve judgment until about mid-season. Did I like what I saw today? Not at all. Did watching the game give me any hope that this team would improve to an acceptable UCLA level anytime this season? I honestly can’t say that it did, but like I said before Howland has his method and it usually doesn’t come into fruition until later in the season.
Oh UCLA you sweet bitch, you've BRUINed me for anything else.
by bruin8uclap on Nov 26, 2009 10:49 PM PST up reply actions
i remember that game.. it looked disappointing
then we barely squeaked a victory out over drexel. BUT we had fight in our team and coaches that cut that game to 8 points. Where was the fight tonight? That to me is the most disappointing. In some way I could see us losing to Portland, but the way we lost was pitiful. I think we went a few years there without a blowout loss (nothing more than 10 points for a couple years I believe). Getting killed by Portland in the OC (where MR and JA hail from is pretty embarrassing. This isn’t a nice team but not like Kansas or anything.
by realfabfive on Nov 26, 2009 10:57 PM PST up reply actions
I think the team will mature and improve during the season. However, remember that team in 2006
had very good players in AA, JF, Ced, Luc, etc. Our starters this year are the most experienced players, but they are really role players in a “normal” year (e.g. Roll, Dragovic, Keefe, Anderson). We just simply lack talent (esp. offensively) and athletic ability especially in the backcourt. Moser and Stover are were recruited solely for their defense.
by UCLA Championships Made Here on Nov 26, 2009 10:31 PM PST up reply actions
Loooong leash
How long should the leash be? I absolutely agree CBH has done a lot to bring the program back from the Lavin shambles, but our performances in the three final fours have been less than memorable and last year’s game plan against Villanova was terrible.
The players that we had Love, Westbrook, Farmar, Afflalo, Mbah Mute, Holiday, and Collison are holding their own in the NBA, yet CBH could not deliver better than getting blown out by Florida (twice) and Memphis? Then getting hammered by Villanova? Has CBH gone as far as he can with his grinding half court, nonexisant zone offense, and pressure D?
Long enough that I'm not even thinking about
considering the possibility of maybe bringing up the vague thought of him kind of not being the right guy for the program.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 26, 2009 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It took John Wooden 16 years to win a National Champtionship.
And his team didn’t even get to the final four until the 16th year. Just give CBH some time. The bright side of things is other than ND, we won’t lose any players this year, and it takes time for CBH to bring out the best defense in his players.
But,
Wooden did not have to follow himself. Although my expectations for the team have been really tempered for this season, I don’t believe that most of the Bruin faithful will be that patient. Expectations for UCLA basketball are at times too high, but CBH wanted the job. The pressure will only increase and getting blown out in your last game of the season for the past four seasons will not help.
well fans like you don't make it easier to begin with.
Seriously would JH stay in the team if fans weren’t as vicious against his effort as they were? He did well for a freshman, yet fans kept blaming him for every lost we had last year. As much as I love UCLA, I would leave the program if all my effort weren’t appreciated. It feels like every time UCLA starts to be good, the fans end up ruining it for everyone else. There are good years, and there are off years. We’ve been to the final four four times already. So what if we don’t make it this year? There are off years, but Howland has been able to show success even when people don’t expect it.
Plus, remember in Wooden’s 5th year coaching, he only won half his games for the season. He was 18-7 for his 6th year coaching. If that was now, you’d probably be calling for his firing too, and we never would have won those 10 championships.
If you think Howland sucks, then sure, go ahead, but what will we end up with next? Another Lavin? I’m happy with the performance Howland has shown. I consider this the 5th Wooden year. It’s time to end the Wooden curse. No one can live up to those expectations, not even Wooden himself. Every time we show some promise the fans always seem to drive away good coaches. That’s why we’ve only won 1 national championships since Wooden.
Fans had absolutely nothing to do with JH leaving
he left because he was a lottery pick. period.
I’m not upset with the losses. I expect to lose games. The absolute futility and terrible play is another thing entirely though, and should be criticized.
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 26, 2009 11:20 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah you could criticized plays, but it's another ting to criticize players personally.
Some of the criticism I’ve seen were nasty and unwarranted. The same goes for how fans have criticized Kevin Craft, when most of the problem last year was not Craft as much as the poor offensive line. Did Craft make mistakes? Yeah, but a lot of those mistakes could have been avoided if Craft had more room to throw.
We showed Collison much more love than we did Holiday, and Collison chose to stay to try to win a championship. As fans, I think we should do as much as we can to show the love for the players. Make it as enticing for them to stay as the lottery. Yeah, most of the time they’ll pick the lottery, but when they stay committed to the school, then we have a winning formula for continual success.
Did I personally attack CBH?
Sorry if I did.
No, but
I think we sometimes have too high of an expectation for our team, and that ends up doing more harm than good. Some of the comments by fans are unproductive. Reactionary than proactive comments.
We may be passionate, but sometimes too harsh, and the players end up being frustrated and distracted when they play. ND was good last year. Maybe current events resulted in his poor play. Either way, we don’t want this game to end up sending destroying his carrier. I have faith that Howland will be able to fix whatever went wrong, and that ND will be mature enough to get over it.
Do you really believe that?
I don’t think our athletes lose any sleep or even care what we say. They might read a front page entry, but I would hope they have the good sense not to take “teh internets” too seriously. These kids shouldn’t give two cents about what an anonymous internet commenter says about them.
Easy there tiger . . .
. . . What’s wrong with my criticism? Do you find that my points are not without merit? Did I say he sucked?
Don’t attack me for being a “vicious” fan. I have no problem with what CBH has done and it’s been great, but “UCLA only hangs championship banners”. That’s not fair, but that’s what every coach that takes the UCLA job knows going into the job.
Sorry for being too rough. I'm just annoyed with other fans that are too quick to judge.
We’ll have to see how this season goes. If we loose more than half, then yeah, I’d say CBH should be put on notice. If he repeats that next year, then yeah, he should be let go. But it’s November. It’s too soon to judge or to consider firing him.
As for the vicious fan part. You’re passionate, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but we have to realize we can’t expect the impossible. This year’s team is not in any way as good as last year’s team. The level of talent is very immature and still needs time to grow. CBH is good but he’s no miracle worker.
passion is good and I hear you.
Plus, we have yet to see Honeycutt in action. He may be our John Wall (I Hope).
It's not about time
It’s about savvy and luck. If, like Wooden, CBH had all his players four 4 years (the last three eligible) he would have at least two NCs right now, maybe 3. If Florida didn’t return their entire lottery lineup, we would’ve won in 07. If Afflalo stayed as a senior, we would’ve won in 08. If Luc and Love and RW stayed last year, we would’ve been a major contender. If, if, if…
The big thing he blew was the Memphis game, when he let DC guard Rose. That was a big chance to blow, obviously.
Florida
What about the continuos doubling of the post and letting Humphrey cream us with open 3’s? No adjustments in the second half of that game and worse, none in the second game. That’s part of his stubborness.
UNC, Kansas, MSU, seem to reload every year and be competitive every year and I’m sure they have problems with one and dones as well, but they have much more success. I’m sure they have there share of what if scenarios as well.
We had no chance against Florida
If we didn’t double inside, they would’ve eaten us up inside. Remember, we were playing them with the likes of Lorenzo Mata and Ryan Hollins. We had no inside presence at all against Florida either year. Both seasons were major, major overachievements.
UNC has a much higher talent level than we do year by year. And, yes, if that Kansas player who declared for the draft didn’t get injured and return, they wouldn’t have won that year (and shouldn’t have won it anyway, if not for a classic Calipari choke job). That was major luck. MSU has definitely had to reload many times over the years. Remember how long it took Izzo to get his one title?
Also, look at Florida after their players did leave
They’ve missed the tourney 2 years in a row. They’re no lock to make it this year. All of that being the case in a sucky SEC.
If I'm CBH
I’d rather give the open 20 footer over the dunk and foul… One seems a higher percentage shot. They had better players… PERIOD.
Dustball!
Time is a factor
As much as we expect him to grow and improve his players, we also have to give him time to grow himself. He’s been able to deliver NBA quality players in 2 years of coaching, he just needs some more time to develop as a coach. Sometimes, a devastating lost is a good thing, for you learn much more about the limits of your team. It’s recognizing what went wrong, reflecting on the loss, and implementing improvements that makes a team better
memphis game
the memphis game is one that irritated me to no end. I can’t accept the fact they dominated us. Again I don’t expect to shut down an excellent college team led by a talent like Rose no matter who we put on him. The fact of the matter is we need to beat top teams like that particular Memphis team and the 2 Florida title teams by being able to score 70+ points sometimes. I found it difficult to swallow that a team with Love, Luc, Collison, westbrook and shipp could not muster enough on offense to compete with them. We should have learned from the Florida experiences that the elite teams can’t just be held under 60 or even under 70 for that matter.
Grinding out games is a conservative approach that can be successful when you have guards and wing players like afflalo, farmer, westbrook, collison and shipp to bail you out. But when you have what we have now our offense is showing its real limitations. Clearly time to get creative and I do not believe we have a total lack of talent. We also have one of the top shooters in the country in theory against a zone in Roll, but have yet to figure out how to get him consistent open looks even against a zone. I think one good shooter is enough to create space on the interior to expose the weaknesses of a zone. You do need players who can catch and shoot or make good decisions however when they catch in there. Unfortunately Roll may well be the best decision maker in that spot at this point also. Keefe could be capable, but he plays scared and is horribly indecisive. I almost want Howland to force him to shoot 20 times in a game without thinking just to give him a kick in the ass.
Zones are a lame gimmick that are successful against mediocre offensive teams. Kind of like a defense that can’t stop the wildcat in football. Sure you can sneak some defensive zone sets on a team to throw them off rhythm, but they have been way to successful against UCLA over the years. Lastly would we really at this point be any better against a man-to-man?
Memphis also had a record of cheating.
NCAA violations ring a bell?
sorry
I can’t take solace in the fact that their freshman star was later ruled ineligble. Now if I found out they had paid the refs off or poisoned our food the night before I would accept that as cheating in a game they played and beat us soundly. And they did not win it.. had they won it the NCAA probably would not have shown the cajones to give them that record of cheating. Although they have done it I think once by vacating a syracuse lacrosse title. Ohio St with all the litany of Clarett issues from a star freshman that helped them win a title did not vacate a title.
All I'm reading is excuses. We didn't win - period.
Coach H had enough NBA talent to win in his 3 Final Four opportunities. UCLA lost to a Memphis squad that had one Derrick Rose while UCLA had DC, K-Love, Westie and Luc-Richard. All four of those ex-Bruins are having better NBA success than Chris Douglas-Roberts and Joey Dorsey. As good as Rose was and is now, Westbrook should have been guarding him like he did with OJ Mayo that year. You have to stick NBA-level talent on NBA-talent.
PS. Robert Dozier is playing in Greece and I have no idea where Antonio Anderson is. The bottom line is that the talent was there to win it all.
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
and Harrick?????
Took him about seven years to win it all.
No, I simply cannot agree with you
Because that was exactly the argument of the Lavin apologists, so aptly named Lavinistas by someone, in making case against sacking him. Fortunately, our AD Dan Guerrero didn’t buy into it. And now you said the same thing.
Howland is no Lavin. We all know that. But he IS NOT flexible. That is plain to see by now.
Lavin didn't even get to the final fours
You’re really comparing apples to oranges. Howland is no Lavin. The record speaks for itself.
I think the problem is not CBH’s lack of flexibility as much as his swaying away from time outs. I’ve noticed that he’s calling them less now than he did in previous seasons.
Thank you, SportsCenter feature on John Wooden
for making me feel better. Let’s move past this debacle and start turning things around tomorrow. Seniors: pick it up. It’s your job to remind this team that they are UCLA Bruins. Coach: I have faith in you; time to start figuring out the zone. Freshmen and sophomores, are you going to take us back to the Final Four? You have that ability, let’s see the poise, the passion, and the pride. Let’s go, Bruins.
our offense needs work
We need to find a way to work with the players we have. The half court, stagnant offense against the zone tonight isn’t going to work in my opinion. If thats all teams need to do to beat us (play zone) then we are in for a long season. Who is our go to guy by the way?
We've been through the zone argument before
It’s very, very difficult to beat a zone when you can’t shoot. You can attack it through the high post, but ultimately it requires making open shots, which most good teams can do. If somebody knows a way to beat a zone without being at least decent from outside, I’ve yet to hear it.
that is true
you also need a low post presence who demands the zone collapse, thereby opening up the players on the outside. Clearly Keefe and Dragovich aren’t going to demand anyone to keep them honest in the low post.
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 26, 2009 10:50 PM PST up reply actions
Of course that makes it much easier
Still though, you need to be able to convert. That only leaves the outside shot even more wide-open, but it won’t make any difference with our perimeter guys. How many wide-open looks did we airball or clank against Fullerton? It’s not just the missing — I haven’t seen this many brick parades since I can remember.
true true
Can’t even run a high – low pass with the absence of bigs, but just passing the ball around the perimeter is not an improvement. I don’t know, he’s had problems with the zone for a long time and this really is not new. Remember, West Virginia and their 1-3-1 that killed us everytime? We had decent bigs and good shooters and ball handlers then, but were still ineffective.
I don’t know anymore.
-Confused and winded
We've done fine against the zone once we got used to it
This has been an annual argument here. We start slow because we don’t really practice against it. Then we’ve adjusted and did fine.
Did we ever once lose in the tourney because of a zone? No. Has our performance against a zone cost us one pac 10 title? No — an inexcusable shitty performance against WSU’s man last year did.
what zone's have we performed well against late in the season?
I’m not questioning you, I just don’t have a great memory. I think we did well against the zone with Klove because he was such a great passer out of the collapse but I don’t remember us being any good any other years.
We also had the wait to the last second and have DC create something offfense against the zone last year.
It seems both relied on an exceptional individual effort rather than a great offensive scheme to counter the zone…
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 26, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions
Arizona almost always played zone against us
And apart from that nightmare in Tucson last year (which was just a generally horrid performance) we’ve completely picked it apart. Most of the Pac 10 teams played zone against us more often than not, and usually without success. Yes, we’ve had some glaring losses against a specialty zone (WVU, ASU at home last year), but the problem is that only the glaring failures are remembered, never the successes.
I just don’t think a great scheme is the recipe for a zone. The zone forces you into fundamentals. Exploiting the holes, making good passes, hitting outside shots. Our biggest problem has been that we’ve never had a balanced offensive team except in 2008 (and even then, we were missing a key outside threat from the wing). When you’ve got at least 2 players on the floor who can’t create any offense, a zone allows the D to concentrate on what you do have. For most of Howland’s tenure that’s been the case.
Hey Silverlake
Keefe is only good for a reserve role. That’s all he can do. Drago’s been so inconsistent, spoardic in his career at Pauley that I am not even sure if Howland and company can do anything at this late stage.
Not helping Dragovich’s performance on the court is of course his latest brush with the law. Regardless, it has got to weigh heavily oin his mind these days.
That said, I think we are better off staying with Gordon and Nelson. They can play, if only the rest of the team would go along.
The Portland coach said
he didn’t think it would be like this. I didn’t either, because I thought we would score 55. I didn’t think we could beat a strong senior team, but I didn’t think Roll would disappear on offense. He can catch and shoot, but he was playing as though Shipp or Collison or somebody else was going to do the heavy work. He worked hard on D, but that was all. Of our seniors, only Keefe deserved the minutes he got. Howland can’t just demolish the structure he is building and start over, nor should he. Besides, you can only teach what you know. When I counseled myself and others to have faith, I don’t think I realized how much would be needed, but it nows seems realistic to believe that, at this point in the season, we cannot be expected to beat any team in this tournament other than, maybe, Long Beach State. But things will come along. CBH will have to make a decision about who is going to play and who is going to sit. I don’t see that anyone’s job is completely safe. But I would tell this team that those who want to play will enter the game intending to have some positive impact and will find the courage, determination and skill within themselves to do it. Don’t panic, don’t quit, don’t sulk, just play basketball. I do believe it will get better. I do believe, i do believe… Wait a minute, is that Kansas?
Keefe? what exactly did he do?
His offense hasn’t improved a lick in 4 years, and he’s very slow on D. He seems to work hard, but so do trial lawyers.
It's not fair to pin anything on Roll.
The Portland defense didn’t give him anything. Sure he missed his open shots but he contributed six assists which is more than the rest of his team mates (not named Lee or Gordon). Coach H needs to tweak the offense to get Roll better looks when he’s facing a well-coached defense.
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
1. It seems that the talent we do have was overrated. Before / beginning of last season, I was under the impression that this class would have more potential than any of BH’s previous teams; in reality it has less.
2. The style of offense does not fit the team well. Safe to say, even with a perfectly-customized offense this team would have difficulty advancing deep into the tournament. But the current BH offense hasn’t adapted to the team, exacerbating their weaknesses without utilizing their strengths.
3. Substitutions have not been made wisely. Many people point to a lack of experience: last year our freshman should have gotten much more court time. ND should not get any time. If our team is going to have down time, we might as well use it to train for the future.
4. Portland is good, but not THAT good. They’re underrated but not a top 10 team in the nation.
5. Part of this is on recruiting gaps. Kevin Love’s year had only him and Stanback (and Stanback was mis-evaluated as well). He would have been an upperclassmen on this year’s team. Jrue Holiday was a one-and-done going into the program, and could not be counted to be here this year. Even if Westbrook were here last year he would be gone this year. Keefe isn’t a leader. ND is doing a disappearing act a la Vujacic. Roll is pretty decent but not someone who can carry a team.
6. =(
Dokein, you' re correct
in saying the rapid turnover rate of players Howland counted on as his foundational players is now throwing Howland & company off balance. Yes, he seems to expect his new players to fit the same mold as those departed, and therefore play the same way as those before them. That’s why his game plan and strategies always appear the same, through thick or thin. This is why someone said he is inflexible.
I am sure right now, as we speak, when you and I are kicking back, relaxing our system after the horrific caloric intake, a perennial affair we called Thanksgiving, he must be burning the midnight oil, poring over the game tape to find out ways he can train his players to perform in his system, but not some other strategies that can best utilize their strengths a la Wooden.
LOL. This is awesome.
ND is doing a disappearing act a la Vujacic.
Wow…two of my LEAST favorite players used in comparison. Great stuff, dok! LOL.
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
No pun intended but I do think Roll is a great Role Player.
I say the offense needs to go through Malcolm Lee and Commissioner Gordon with Roll as a third option. I don’t think Roll is an efficient scorer when he’s the Bruin’s number one option to score. That’s just not going to work.
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
That was tough to watch
Drago really looked lost out there, and everyone was pretty ice cold. I’m interested to see if TH will make a difference when he comes back. If things don’t seem to take shape this year, I hope we see the freshman getting a lot of game experience, but its much too early to throw the towel, I know this team will improve. Lets hope for a sharper performance tomorrow night and maybe some different offensive scheming.
William Doolittle at your service, a.k.a. will do.
I'm not sure if we will see some more bloodbaths
But the sickening thing is to hear none other than Lavin c ommenting about our " frigid, anemic offence " and, as if he wasn’t done yet, listing all those teams scheduled to play us in December.
We, or rather the whole western civilization that ever heard anything about UCLA athletics, know and can still recall, with furious temper barely under check, about those monumental Lavin defeats. I felt like vomiting just to hear him saying those words so deliciously. Regardless of how ugly tonight’s game ever was, nor some future games likely would be, this is one human being THE LEAST QUALIFIED TO SAY ANYTHING, EEEEVER !
According to SportsCenter
This was our largest margin of defeat under CBH and largest since 2003.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 26, 2009 11:40 PM PST reply actions
birght side?
If Honeycutt turns out to be an immediate producing ballplayer despite the announcers who were concerned about signature early wins UCLA would get a pass if Honeycutt turns out to be a difference maker once conference play begins. I am hoping badly that he is a ballplayer and CBH certainly has the opportunity to mold a decent team. That being said it appears to be wishful thinking at this point, but time will tell.
And the last thing we need to do is take Lavin’s horrible advice to make things ugly and drag out possessions to shorten the game. I believe in bizarro Lavin coaching, so if he said that then clearly we need to spend every second we can when we gain possession to get a good shot as soon as possible.
Honeycutt wont make a difference if -
CBH continues to keep his players operating within his narrow system. The best thing for Honeycutt, Lee and Gordon is to let them freelance every now and then. I believe in structure and all but the Bruins have athletes that can dominate in the open floor.
One of the reasons Coach Calipari is successful is that he let’s his stars dominate the ball and score at will (see the dribble drive offense he used/uses with Rose, Evans and now John Wall). It isn’t the team basketball we know and love with UCLA but sometimes it’s necessary when the ‘system’ isn’t working.
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
Calipari's teams succeed because of D
They score in bunches because their pressure defense causes turnovers and rushed shots which lead to early offense. Also, Rose, Evans and now Wall have all been vastly superior athletes compared to the guys we’ve had on the floor. I love DC, and you can argue the Westbrook is in their class, but those guys are something else altogether. They don’t run a “freelance” offensive system. Those guys are just faster, stronger and better leapers than anyone they ever play against. When you are that athletically gifted, you can get to the rim a lot easier.
Dustball!
I'd say Westbrook is in Rose's class.
He might not have been as skilled offensively at that time but he could have certainly defended him in that loss.
As far as that whole Memphis squad is concerned I don’t think they were that much more athletic than the Bruins with exception of Rose (we’ll agree to disagree on Westie). UCLA was simply out coached, out executed and out hustled that game. If Memphis was defeated by Kansas in the Final, they could have lost to the Bruins as well. Chalmers is only Kansas player playing well in the NBA right now and Cole Aldrich was hardly the player he is now.
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
Westbrook
just lacked the same physical strength that Rose has. That is where I think one might argue he is not on the same level. He may still end up being the better player, but at the time they played each other I thought Rose physically over powered our guards.
Dustball!
recruits
Our sophomores should have gotten more playing time last year. CBH was stubborn in playing the seniors. But we knew last year’s senior warriors would not be able to get us to the elite level.
Also, our two 5 stars from last year are non factors. Holiday is gone and JMMorgan is definitely not a 5 star recruit. And our third 5 star from this year, Honeycutt, is injured.
I wish we played more zone. With the current speed , er, i mean non speed, we would be better off playing zone defense. Will CBH bend with the talent he has?
And I agree with a majority of the posts, I think ND should be getting a fourth of the time that he does. It would be better off playing Nelson, Lane and Moser. They will be better next year and later this season for it.
CBH and inflexibility
While CBH has stuck with the same system year after year and taught players how to succeed in it, it’s actually worked every time right up to this point. I doubt that any changes he could have made last year would have put us past the sweet sixteen. And even though it’s worked, he’s made changes every year to tailor the program to the players he had.
With Farmar, we played what was essentially a half court offense. With DC, we ran a lot of fast breaks thanks to his steals and his speed, and we got away (at least somewhat) from the ugly, slow offense that we ran with Farmar. Enter Love and suddenly the offense is less catch-and-shoot and more about getting the ball inside.
These aren’t huge changes, but they were changes that CBH made without prompting, and despite success with his previous offense. Of course, the changes we need now are of an entirely different magnitude, but my point is that CBH actually has made small changes to tailor the offense to the team. Let’s at least give him a chance to realize that he needs to adopt another system before we write him off as stubborn and inflexible.
some guy in the NBA
has won 10 championships running the same system with different players.
Dustball!
I don't remember Coach exactly the same way
I don’t believe Coach EVER played zone. There might be a guy drilling shot after shot from outside, but Coach stubbornly insisted on staying man to man. Some guy named Austin Carr dribbled by everyone on the court, plus everyone on the bench and scored layups, but Coach stubbornly insisted on playing man to man. Then there was his stubborn insistence on (a) his values, (b) his coaching methods, © his haircut philosophy, etc.
Coach went from a high post offense to a low post offense twice. That was his great coaching changes. But other than that, he was one absolutely stubborn guy.
I’m not saying Coach didn’t change things ever, because he did. I’m not saying Coach Howland shouldn’t change things, because he should. Coach was a great coach and a great teacher who had a great way to get the most out of great players, and that was enough almost all of the time. But Rye and the rest, don’t use Coach as the paragon of change and flexibility, because he just wasn’t.
Being able to use everything isn't the test of change or flexibility
No person can master and teach everything, not even Coach. Personally, I believe man to man is far superior to zone so it’s not that direction I’m calling for. The closest Coach ever came to playing zone was a zone press and that’s not really the same. Coach played very different defensive and offensive styles throughout his career though depending on his players. I’ve watching enough games of his to know that there were very different systems employed by Coach throughout his time in Westwood.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 27, 2009 11:38 AM PST up reply actions
He really didn't play different defensive styles, Rye.
He played man to man, period. And he only used two offensive styles – high post and low post. (There was some question as to whether he would be able to coach a low-post offense to take advantage of Alcindor’s peculiar skills.) The full-court zone press was used to create offense, not as a defensive scheme. We wanted to make the other teams run, so that whether they made the short or missed it, our team would already be running and in transition. What the zone press ended up doing – always, in every game – was to create at least one massive run of 18-4 or 17-2 or something like that. And that would end the game. When the other team managed to get the ball into the front court, we always, always, always played man to man. Coach believed in it (and so do I) and he did not play zone. For the longest time we couldn’t, with a bunch of small, quick players, but when we could (with big tough players, a la Wicks, Rowe and Patterson) we didn’t. And that was because Coach believed in man to man. And he was very stubborn about it.
Just like Coach Howland is perceived to be stubborn in many ways.
I’m willing to let Coach Howland run this team his way. We are a basketball school (among other things), but that does not mean that every schlump who posts something necessarily knows something about our team that has eluded Coach Howland. We were more than content to have Coach Howland running things when we had great success. He isn’t a worse coach now, in my opinion. But if enough people think he’s not the right person for the job, then it’s your duty to the school not to let things slip as they did under CHP. Start a “Fire Coach Howland” site, and explain your reasoning. I’m not ready to join that group just yet.
As Didier Drogba once said:
It’s a [redacted] disgrace.
Great Frakkin Post, Ryan!
I really enjoyed this recap. I guess only authors of this blog are allowed to question Coach Howland’s strategies and substitution patterns without being called an ‘idiot’ or ‘ungrateful Bruin fan’.
The following paragraph speaks the truth:
It’s been said for a while that CBH’s biggest weakness is how stubborn he is. That has bitten him in games before, but never for a stretch of games like it has this season. CBH is running his same system and making no adjustments, despite having a team unlike anything he’s ever had and skill sets unlike anything he’s ever had. Coach Wooden was most revered from a basketball standpoint for his ability to play 15 different styles to fit 15 uniquely different teams. CBH is showing none of the flexibility as he continues to attempt to fit square pegs into round holes.
If Howland keeps this up, future All-Americans will not want to play for a coach that won’t allow them to showcase their talents. The history and name of ‘UCLA’ will not be enough to attract recruits if the Bruins are struggling in the Pac 10 and not making the NCAA tournament. Coach Howland needs to evolve as a coach and be a lot more creative with the offense.
I wasn’t even going to mention the distribution of minutes for this game but can anybody explain why Nikola got 22 minutes when he traveled twice and clearly didn’t do anything positive on the court? We needed help on the boards and Reeves Nelson only gets 15. Go figure. The Bruins were a minus 9 on rebounds, allowed 58% shooting from 3, and only made 42 percent of their free throws. Something or someone has to give.
But I agree, our cheerleaders are definitely better. :) Go Bruins!
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
Reeves can't guard the perimeter
and when you shoot as poorly as we did and your opponent shoots that well, you are going to lose the rebound battle. There were 37 defensive rebounds available to them compared to the 22 available to us. The same principle explains why we out-rebounded them 14-9 on the offensive glass.
As for Nic… no clue! Maybe CBH thinks we need him to play well this season and wanted to give him an opportunity to play himself out of his funk.
Dustball!
a couple of things
We aren’t losing because of our offensive system. ML and JA can’t stay in front of ANYONE! With the players we have, there is no way we can outscore our defense. Against older, more polished offensive players with greater confidence in their sytem, we will lose every single time until our guards buy into playing defense.
Sometimes “stubborn” is simply making a point. Lee is hearing he’s a pro.. NOW? I think letting him drown in his own arrogance is fine if gets him to commit to the kind of effort we need from him.
Finally… I think the only area we can really criticize CBH is in his recruiting. Maybe it is because of how clean he runs this program (I think he is viewed nationally as about the cleanest coach you’ll ever find at a major program). If you can say anything about the failings of the program, it has been that in ALL our tourney losses we are clearly athletically inferior. He recruits good character guys, and I think we all agree too support him in that. The downside is that some of the guys who cheat on SATs, or expect thousands in cash and benefits are phenomenal athletes. Westbrook aside (and was almost completely ignored by recruits), we haven’t had many guys who just stun you with their physical abilities.
I believe that we will win the right way. I am willing to wait a little longer to make that happen. We know these players improve. We know his teams have light bulb moments. It will come.
Dustball!
Just a comment about Coach and flexibility:
He played zone on one famous occasion. After losing to Houston, he went to a diamond and one gimmick defense in the rematch, and won, but that is the only occasion I can remember. Of course, the 2-2-1 zone press was a trademark, as was the high post offense; something that never really changed. I would say Coach had a system, but was flexible enough. I agree that CBH is not completely inflexible, but, at least on the surface, is not highly flexible, because he believes what he teaches is the most effective way to play basketball at the college level. But I also believe he is no fool and will do what can be done with what he has. I have to agree, after seeing some of the other teams in early season games, that we don’t have the physical specimens they possess. But that just makes playing within a system even more important. So, knowing that this season cannot be pretty, I am still signed on for the long haul, and completely in support of the Bruins and their coach. Now, if someone would just make a shot….
I'm not saying that Coach would overhaul everything
each season and start anew depending on his players. That wasn’t the case, but you could see clear difference between a style and system from year to year. Even the high post offense that he loved so dearly would be altered in some years with regards to where the cutters were going and when to adjust to his players. There are principles and there are systems. Principles can you stick with (as Coach and CBH have the man to man principle), but you have to be flexible with your system.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 27, 2009 11:41 AM PST up reply actions
If Wooden were coaching today
Much ado about the Wizards record but how do you think he’d fare (won lost wise) in today’s world? Not any better than many other coaches around, IMO. Of course he’d have won with Kareem in his freshman year (when he didn’t in reality cause LA wasn’t eligible), but then how would he have done the next year when he was lost to the NBA? Same for BW and on and on. In todays world you better be planning for one and done’s and BH has not learned that yet.

by 





















