UCLA's Bowl Hope Improve? Notre Dame Players Reportedly Vote No On Bowling
by Nestor on Nov 30, 2009 4:46 PM PST
in Football
Email
PrintPer SBN's Ryan Hudson it sounds like ND's football players have voted against going to a bowl game. If this report turns out to be true and the Irish end up deciding to bypass a bowl game, it will potentially open up a slot for UCLA
BTW for the best perspective on Charlie Weiss firing, I'd recommend SBN's Rakes of Mallow or Blue Gray Sky. I know lot of people hate Notre Dame. I am not one of them. Lot of the emotions those guys express around their football program is very similar to what we have experienced with our basketball team in the past.
In any event, it looks like Bruins' chances of going to a bowl game looks a little better this afternoon.
GO BRUINS.
54 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As long as a Clausen is a quarterback at that school,
I cannot like them. It’s the Georgia fan in me and all.
Also a few very good ND freshmen from SoCal
are rumored to not like South Bend and are looking to tranfer closer to hom.
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 30, 2009 5:06 PM PST reply actions
that's true
but aren’t we near a limit for the amount of transfer we can have coming in?
Apparently they don’t want to go bowling with an interim head coach (can’t blame them for that decision)
Though we lost the game, Alabama’s 2006 Independence Bowl game with an interim head coach against Oklahoma State ended up being incredibly entertaining and fun. We ended up seeing stunts like a designed lateral pass to left tackle Andre Smith for a TD and a ton of other craziness. We lost the game by a FG with less than 10 seconds left, but it was an insanely entertaining game. That’s what those guys should do in my opinion, accept the bowl bid and just let it all hang out.
We also went to our bowl game in 2002
with Coack Ed Kezirian (aka “Coach K” in Westwood) as an interim head coach. It was a lot of fun too and we won the game.
We lost the Las Vegas Bowl in 07
With an interim coach (DeWayne Walker) and we also lost the game on a FG in the final seconds…although in our case we were the ones kicking and we got blocked. I, for one, hope the kids at ND don’t heed your advice :-)
Different situation for ND
Their firing is not a universal sigh of relief, after which you can relax and have a ball in anticipation of a better future. The players liked the coach, or so it seems, and it wasn’t an extreme disaster like either of our two changes or many others around the country.
Also, a low-level bowl game could only lead to further humiliation for ND, with no upside
If they win, nobody cares. If they lose, it’s another national punchline.
Hate ND, No. Hate Mr. Weiss, Yes.
Other than in basketball way back when (notice the “Signs” at basketball still say “Digger is a Wimp” on the back) I have never hated ND until a few years ago.
First, they let a coach that was doing OK go for CW. Then CW arrives, plays that coach’s players and wins…he is annointed a God. He then never lives up to the hype.
CW belongs in the pros. With him gone, I will be able to root for ND to beat SC and everybody else without any ambivalence!!!
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Nov 30, 2009 5:26 PM PST reply actions
Tyrone was not doing ok
As his sterling run at UW proved. They should’ve never hired him in the first place. That doesn’t excuse the insane CW contract, but still. Please.
Speaking of which, you know how media lackeys are always bitching about coaches not being given enough chances? I’d like to see a study of all times a coach has survived the hot seat and excelled, and how many times the misery was pointlessly extended when losses could’ve cut. Coaches are almost never given up on “too early.” Whittingham at Utah is the only exception I can think of (who got the extra year and prospered).
Meanwhile, how many futile experiments are hopelessly prolonged? Terry Donahue’s lasted an extra 16 years.
Doing OK is a relative term
Experience at UW proved he was not the right coach for UW and probably not a great coach for any college program. But his record at Stanford did seem to signal he had potential.
That said, I agree with your premise that once a coach gets on the hot seat, for whatever reason, the probability of a turn around in college is quite low. I suspect there are more instances of coaches pulling themselves of the hot seat but very few. I think the real killer is recruiting; a coach on the hot seat is just one more reason for a recruit to chose another university.
So I think I agree with your premise but felt in this particular situation TW should not have been in the hot seat yet.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Dec 1, 2009 11:17 AM PST up reply actions
I was just looking for info on the vote
I hope this is official. Would love to see us in a bowl game this year (what a contrast from the KD years…)
any chance we say no as well?
Not unlike a few years ago, we opted not to go. I believe the reason was economic feasibility. The climate is much worse today. The coaches can attest given their recent pay cut.
by misfit15 on Nov 30, 2009 5:31 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Had we won our last game I would have preferred to turn down.
But as of right now, there is still work to be done for the young offense that the extra few weeks of practice and game situation is worth the investment.
"If you don't take out his battery, he's going to keep going all day."
any chance we say no as well?
Not unlike a few years ago, we opted not to go. I believe the reason was economic feasibility. The climate is much worse today. The coaches can attest given their recent pay cut.
by misfit15 on Nov 30, 2009 5:32 PM PST via mobile reply actions
My understanding
Our options would be among the Humanitarian Bowl, the GMAC (after New Year’s Day games? WTF?) and the Eagle Bank Bowl (in DC if Army doesn’t make it perhaps). Haven’t really studied it up to be honest.
Today's Sporting News, Pg. 22
Has a writeup relating to Notre Dame’s chances of getting in a bowl. If they opt out, we would be next in line. It says there are 4 available spots in bowl games for at-large teams, 3 of which will go to teams with winning records (Middle Tennessee and two teams from the MAC). In order for Notre Dame (read: UCLA) to get in, Army and Hawaii both need to lose their final games so they don’t get automatic priority. Thus Wisconsin needs to beat Hawaii and Navy needs to beat Army (and that game isn’t until Dec. 12).
This doesn’t answer which bowls are available, but related nonetheless.
by gradstudentbruin on Nov 30, 2009 8:39 PM PST up reply actions
BTW, is it really true
That a bowl in Idaho would have to offer a team like Middle Southwest ITT Tennessee Tech Anchorage just because it has 7 wins? Is the rule that universal? If so, it’s absurd.
If it were a 9 win rule, that would be more understandable.
One thing that will hurt us
is the common belief that “Bruins don’t travel” — that our fans don’t leave beautiful Los Angeles to go to bowl games in cold or less “glamourous” places.
Seeing as how we don’t fill up our own stadium, I am concerned that we will be passed over not because we aren’t worthy, which I think we are, but because we don’t give the local bowl community the economic bump it needs to support the bowl.
I really can’t call BS on this theory. I attended two Rose Bowl games against Wisconsin in which those wearing Red and White outnumbered those of us who lived there and wore Blue and Gold.
Turns out, our ticket holders were selling their tickets for a profit and watching on TV.
Scum.
sjh
Won't matter for these tiny bowls, I don't think
Middle South Tennessee won’t bring 30,000 fans. These tiny bowls are always scarcely attended — it’s the TV appeal that should count most.
That usually matters
but this year it looks like if a bowl passes on us, they’re left with very small schools. It’s not like they have a good traveling team with a large following to choose from if they pass on us.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 30, 2009 6:57 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed
From what I read earlier, the minor bowl organizers are rooting against any of the ‘lesser’ teams making it to 7-5 and knocking us out of eligibility.
by britishbruin on Nov 30, 2009 7:21 PM PST up reply actions
You have an excellent point, even if it may not matter this year
Despite the passion on BN, UCLA does not have a loyal and rabid following especially for geographically remote events. Final 4 games — we have not consistently sold our allotment of tickets. Bowl games.
We do pretty well in the Bay Area, Phoenix and San Diego (i.e. driving distance) but not farther out.
I believe there are few reasons for this:
1) Poor sports marketing from UCLA
2) Poor student ticket policies (they are tied to students id’s now so can not be passed to another student when necessary).
3) LA lack of passion about sports teams (all relative to other areas etc)
I went to the Cotton Bowl when Cade was playing. There were very few wearing blue in that stadium. Dont blame Bowls for not inviting us.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Dec 1, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions
I agree with you, Nestor
I’ve never really hated ND. With the exception of our stupid losses (where we blew it in South Bend and relied on a 12th string walk-on QB that turned it over 5ish times), I’m indifferent to them. In fact, I’ll root for them when they play the thugs across town each year.
I’ll be glad if we get a bowl this year. I just hope that those pricks at the Mausoleum fired up our team as much as it did us on this board and we take out our anger on whatever unfortunate opponent we draw.
You don't need to hate Notre Dame...
… to wish them every failure.
I have nothing against the school, but their unduly privileged position re: the BCS system, continual overhyping, and success in recruiting talent from our heartland will always make me cheer against them in all but one of their games each year.
The more Notre Dame fails, the better the situation is for the Pac-10 in general, and for us even more so. Maybe if the Big-10 traditional powers get themselves together, then Notre Dame’s schedule will be tough, but recently that just hasn’t been the case.
The players voted not to go bowling, but the decision rests with the AD.
He did say he would take their vote into consideration, however.
I think it will boil down to the economics. If they feel they will make money, they’ll go. Although I do agree with BlueBland. They may decide not to risk another bowl loss to their precious heritage.
Like Karl Dorrell, I wished Charlie Weiss all the luck at Notre Dame and thought this was a guy who could come in and wipe the smug smile of Cheat Carroll’s face. When he not only failed to do that, but failed altogether, it became a question of “why does he get the benefit of the doubt that Ty did not?” It was his time to go. His recent comments about having more friends in the NFL, and knowing which school his son was not going to go only cemented the belief that this is an arrogant self serving Pr!ck.
If he loves his school as much as he proclaims, he should have resigned, and saved them untold millions to re-invest in the school. Even if it meant going to hire the new coach.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
They're already gonna bleed money by buying out Weis
Whatever money they lose in the bowl game will probably be a drop in the bucket compared to that.
I Would Like To Think That The UCLA Name Would Be Enough
Or at least I hope so.
But I can think of one year in particular where we got snubbed with a 7-4 record – 1977. We lost to ’SC 29-27 which knocked us out of the Rose Bowl. Washington went instead with an identical 7-4 record (and we beat them that year 20-10 IIRC). Two years before that, ’SC got an invite to the Liberty Bowl with a 7-4 record (after we beat them 25-22). Then, of course, in ’76 we had to settle for the lousy Liberty Bowl with a 9-1-1 record when we SHOULD have gone to the Orange Bowl. Definitely got screwed there.
But somehow I think we’ll be going somewhere during Capital One Bowl week.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Nov 30, 2009 7:32 PM PST reply actions
yeah
I hope he cut a deal. If they really have to pay him $18 million for the remaining 6 years… then maybe I’ll feel a little bit sorry for them (and the mess they made for themselves by rewarding a close loss to U$C with a 10 year contract.)
I don't.
They agreed on it, that many years on a contract is crazy. Anyway, I’m sure their alumni will step up and absorb it as always.
right
I meant, I hope he is a big enough man to have cut a deal and has the professional pride not to demand $3million a year to not coach Notre Dame.
Hell, if you pay me $1 million a year not to coach Notre Dame, I’ll be grateful.
by britishbruin on Nov 30, 2009 7:44 PM PST up reply actions
its a good year
when ND goes 1-11 and SUC goes 0-12
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 30, 2009 7:53 PM PST reply actions
flip that and I totally agree.
Go Bears Go
by Rocksanddirt on Nov 30, 2009 9:01 PM PST up reply actions
The enemy of my Enemy
Is my friend…
I have been a life-long ND fan. Love them next to the Bruins. I enjoy the fact that ND has administered more beat downs on the Enemy than I can remember.
For me, the perfect year is the Bruins beating $UC*, but the icing on the cake is them taking another loss from ND. The 1990’s are not ancient history and it will happen again.
Troy will fall...again, again, and AGAIN!
Hey, if by some miracle we get the GMAC Bowl...
… then that means CRN will have gotten us to a JANUARY Bowl in his 2nd year. It’s a little funny, but I’ll GLADLY take it.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
I'm already jacked for the bowl game
You just know that the guys are going to be fired up after the SUC travesty. I could definitely see us come out firing and roll to a big win, building some early momentum for 2010. Humanitarian Bowl please?
They seem to want us
The bowl commissioner (or whatever he is called) went to the SC game. The fact that we are thought to travel poorly might actually be considered a “plus” as our most likely opponent would be Idaho, so that means more tickets available for the “home” team. (Boise is definitely a BSU town, but there are plenty of Idaho fans here) . Plus BSU is a relatively small stadium, the record is 34,127 for the Oregon game earlier this year, so even if there are only 7 – 10k UCLA fans that travel that would probably be considered a success.
The only problem is most are projecting only one spot for 6-6 teams which means bowls will have to decide between us and ND. While the Humanitarian Bowl may want us, I’m not sure what order the bowls pick teams, so if another bowl picks first and chooses ND we’re out of luck no matter how much the Humanitarian may want us.
The reports now are saying
That the players haven’t held a vote yet.
FWIW
Heard on Kansas City sports radio this morning that the ND players would vote today. Don’t know if it’s accurate, and don’t know if the school president will care about what the players vote, so take it for that.
formerly AZBruin
Went to the football banquet last night
and these guys want one more game BAD. Especially after the way their last game ended. I have heard we need to root for Navy to beat Army and Wisconsin to beat Hawaii. If Army and/or Hawaii win they become bowl eligible.
I hope we can get to a bowl and if so, I’ll be there!
GO BRUINS!!!
"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel
Sounds like we will have to put up a bowl thread this Sat
11 – if you have general thoughts to share about how the team is feeling after last Sat (without giving any thing that is supposed to be off the record away) that would be really cool. Again, no biggie if you can’t but as you can tell we love hearing your perspective on what the boys are thinking.
If Army wins...
Marshall is the team that gets screwed. Army-Navy doesn’t affect us.
We do need Wisconsin over Hawaii tomorrow night though.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
