More Long Term Perspective On Ben Ball
by Class of 66 on Dec 5, 2009 9:41 AM PST
Email
PrintBumped. GO BRUINS. -N
Credit: AP Photo: Nick Ut
There are some themes running through the basketball thread all of which deal with the question as to whether CBH is the right man for our job.
Some talk of replacing CBH if he does not succeed. Some act as though he is a dinosaur whose style and time have passed. And, still others, posit that he will leave on his own for the NBA so we should line up a replacement. (Don Mclean? I love Donny Mac. But, really? Do you think he'd support the idea of replacing the Caretaker?)
More insidious is the allegation that he cannot recruit players because no one wants to play his "style" of basketball.
Not one of these themes accurately reflects either CBH's history here, or the reality of who he is as a man and coach.
First and foremost, no one in his or her right mind should be talking about replacing the nation's best "teaching coach" and perhaps the man whose personal values most resemble Coach's. He is called The Caretaker for a reason. He has brought us back, the right way. This is UCLA. We win championships, in all sports, with honor and integrity. There is no one in the world in whose hands I'd trust this program more than CBH. Leaving for the NBA? CBH has said that the UCLA job is his dream job. Don't think he's had opportunities to jump to the NBA or to other schools, for a lot more money? There have been rumors that he has and he didn't. Now, let's revisit history a bit. When CBH was hired to replace the impostor, there were segments that wailed and whined that we had hired the wrong man. That his style of basketball -- grind it out D and low-scoring victories -- was boring. That this was the west coast and we demanded run-and-gun, show time basketball -- or we would be bored.
(Sound familiar. That wailing can be seen in several threads on BN. "Let the kids run!" is the battle cry. For those with any sense of history, that is exactly what the lizard did -- as he ran the program into the ground.)
As CBH put his system into place, two things happened.
We started to win.
AND, people began to appreciate the beauty of well played D. And, as our D got better, and our rebounding stronger, we got to run in transition and score.
Just as classical music is an acquired taste for those who started with rap or rock, fine D is an acquired taste. And, those who took the time to learn how to see it learned to appreciate it.
And, more people began to appreciate it when we started winning and made our "3 straight" run. Then, the comments in the threads were about our lock down D and how great it was. These kids didn't come here playing that kind of D. They bought in, learned it, and played it -- to our benefit and theirs.
You know who else appreciated it? The NBA coaches who inherited the kids CBH trained. The lunch bucket kids who were never projected -- out of high school -- to be first rounders, became first rounders. And, starters. Why? Because they were fundamentally sound and could play D and rebound. Think the NBA doesn't care about D so that recruits shouldn't? Read what the coaches of our first rounders are saying. And,read how much credit these NBA coaches are giving CBH for his work.
Let's talk about recruiting a bit. If you are a hot shit high school player -- one that can run and gun -- and you think you will be in the NBA soon, where should you go to college?
Probably a place like UCLA where you can round out your game and learn to play D.
If you're the parent of a hot shit kid, where should you advise him to go? Probably to a school like UCLA and a coach like Howland. And, because both UCLA and Howland are unique, you would send your kid to UCLA.
That's how KL came into our picture. This was the hot shit kid of his time. His parents and family friends knew more about basketball than most. And, they had their heads on straight. They were not living through their kid or interfering with his basketball education. I'm sure they rankled as he sat on the bench during early crunch times -- but they kept their mouths shut and watched as he quickly developed into the player he is now. Why did he come to UCLA, to learn lock down D -- which was the missing component in his high school game.
Every once in a while there will be kids who don't fit -- whose expectations or those of their parents -- are not IMMEDIATELY met by our system. That happens. (I changed majors at UCLA several times. I did not blame the departments I left -- I just realized I belonged elsewhere. And, bless my parents, they did not go to the department chairs and demand curriculum reform so that I could learn the disciplines my way.) And, notice that I said IMMEDIATELY. I like DG. I like his passion. But, he is a kid and apparently, like many kids (and some of us adults) lacks patience and has some sense of entitlement. If he does not want to be here. Fine. Not everyone should. But, I sure wish he had decided that at the end of last year and that it didn't appear that one of his main reasons for leaving was that we (or as his parents put it "they") were losing games.
All that said, I really don't hold CBH accountable, in any way, for DG. Not for recruiting him, not for his patience in trying to work things out with him, not for his refusal to change his system to accommodate this "gifted" player (he didn't do that for KL or anyone else), and not for ultimately letting go in a most graceful way.
I won't repeat the outstanding points that gbruin made in his front page article. And, in many ways, this is a response to some of the comments in that thread. And, I don't want to debate them here.
I just wanted to add perspective. Some times, I think that the comments in that thread are made by people with no institutional history. And, then I realize that that's probably true. They may not have been around during the times that we cite to give historical dimension. I think it a Geezer's responsibility, especially one who was around when the first banners were hoisted, to hold a long-term perspective and, once in a while, to share it.
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.
37 comments
|
9 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm in agreement
that Howland has earned a lot of rope given his accomplishments with this program during his 6 years here. He should definitely be given the benefit of the doubt in the Gordon situation, and a big picture perspective is warranted when assessing where this program is at this point in time.
That being said, UCLA and its fans deserve better than the product that has showed up on the court the 1st 6 games of this season. Having the staying power to withstand early departures, graduation, and youth movements are what separates the elite programs from the others. I do not expect Final Fours and Pac-10 Championships every year, but I do have minimum expectations for this program that, currently, we are not achieving. I don’t think anyone who regulars BN can argue that point.
The question comes down to this: How much of an indictment on Howland should this season be? Obviously, the season needs to be played out before anyone can give any sort of credible and honest position on that. Perhaps, even then, one season, no matter how it plays out, should be an indictment on a coach like Howland. I think that is a matter worthy of debate.
Personally, I am looking for some sort of clarity on the direction that this program is headed. I am looking to how the players develop, improve, and respond to their coach. I am looking towards recruiting and the type of player(s) Howland is bringing in that will shape our future and get us back to the elite. The cold hard fact is this: When you are 2-4 at UCLA, you can expect the fans to all have a keener eye on you.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
"Earned a lot of rope"?
“Rope” is offensive. So is “leash” as used by others here.
The Caretaker deserves far more respect than that. He’s not some barn animal or dog that needs to be held in check by a fickle fan base or anonymous posters on the ’net.
CBH is his own most severe critic.
Not happy with 2-4. None of us are. And, neither is CBH. He throws himself under the bus, not others. He is, perhaps his own most sever critic.
This is not just aimed at you Blue - this post was aimed at a whole bunch of people -
Who in the fuck do you think you are to talk about putting CBH on a leash, or how much rope you’d give him? What have you done to come close to a point where you’re in a position to say things like that?
In some ways, you all sound like DG’s parents. Entitled. Entitled to second guess the Caretaker and make demands on how he coaches this team.
Criticize coaching decisions — that’s fine with me.
But don’t demean him by talk of putting him on a rope — no matter how long — or a leash.
sjh
Don't know why some of the text is crossed out. Didn't mean to.
This is to a lot of people, not just Blue.
sjh
Relax dude
The term “rope” wasn’t meant to symbolize anything demeaning. I was merely trying to articulate the point that your entire post is trying to make. If you are asserting I used the word to intentionally reflect a negative, disrespectful imagery of Howland, than you are way off base. There were about 400 other words in my post, and thousands others in previous posts, and you chose exactly 1 to go off on a rant about . I think I’ve earned enough “rope” with my history here to deserve better.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
Perhaps a Generational Gap
For people my age, the “rope” brings back images of lynching and degradation. It’s not a word one uses in expressing trust and confidence, but rather symbolizes control and domination.
And, I think I made clear it was not aimed at you.
sjh
I understand your point
and feel free to mentally delete “rope” from my post and insert any non-offensive, politically-correct, morally benign word you can think of to replace it. If you disagree with my take altogether, that’s fine too. That’s what this forum is all about, right?
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
Have to agree with BlueMe
66, I do think this is an issue of generational gap here. I have to think I have used the same terms before number of times when it comes to sports and probably other issues and didn’t think it in that context.
Anyway, obviously agree with the points you made in your main post, but BlueMe’s concerns are also warranted. Sorry can’t offer more to this thread right now because I am souped up on painkillers a bit.
Let’s carry on.
I might be out of line on this one, but
Coach Ben Howland makes 2 million dollars a year, and is the highest earning employee of UCLA. He works hard, yes, but that’s 1.6 million more than one of our star Nobel-prize winning professors, Dr. Louis Ignarro. By the way, Dr. Ignarro is probably his own harshest critic as well but if he submits an NIH grant, every single reviewer will be poring over it for weaknesses.
I support basketball: it is a profitable sport for UCLA, and revenue-generating. Its existence allows UCLA to support other, non-revenue sports, and creates a great environment for students. CBH’s ability to maintain a great program means he deserves a salary which is competitive in his field.
But let’s not forget that in the end, sports is entertainment. Part of sports entertainment is armchair quarterbacking and feeling entitled. There is no need to get worked up defending CBH’s imaginary feelings.
As for recruiting athletes of character, I am very glad our program is not USC. But let’s be realistic, if we really wanted to admit the most upstanding people, we would hand out scholarships to a few more students who have demonstrated extraordinary service, independently of whether they played basketball or football well.
I agree with Nestor’s attempts to maintain intelligent discourse on BN, but let’s not get too worked up insulting the fans and commentators here when they have good points to offer, based on slight offenses to CBH.
Very good points, dokein
One disagreement, however. You said “As for recruiting athletes of character, I am very glad our program is not USC. But let’s be realistic, if we really wanted to admit the most upstanding people, we would hand out scholarships to a few more students who have demonstrated extraordinary service, independently of whether they played basketball or football well.” Don’t we already do that, and call them academic scholarships? I’m sure some of our academic All-Americans may have been able to qualify academically, but our athletes are being admitted specifically for their athletic skills.
It would not be particularly “fair” under any definition of that word if I had received a football scholarship, because I’m not a good player. I would have been keeping another, more deserving football player from trading his skills for an education. The same applies if I had been given an academic scholarship, because I’m not particularly smart, and would deprive an actual smart kid from getting an education.
OK, end of rant.
Maybe miscommunicated
I agree with you—if they’re athletic scholarships, they deserve to go to athletes. But in a convoluted way, what I mean is that the number of athletic scholarships we have (e.g. 85 for just the football team, plus extra tutoring and counseling and facilities etc.) would probably be reduced in favor of increasing academic / service scholarships if the major sports were not part of a very profitable entertainment industry.
Therefore, we should not choose a borderline team of extremely high character—because if character were the point, we would be recruiting different people—over a championship team that meets basic UCLA standards.
My point might be completely moot: I don’t think anyone is really saying this, CBH is not borderline by any definition. But recently, in response to some people and schools and organizations willing to accept any behavior as long as the player is talented, I feel (or perhaps imagine) some undercurrent of the pendulum swinging too far the other way—willing to accept any performance as long as the team “tries hard” and acts mature.
If Coach Howland doesn't learn his job pretty soon, I'm going to demand that we hire three wealthy and influential alumni to be our coaches
Coach Howland better learn how to coach, and real quick. He has to recruit the people I want him to recruit. I want no recruits who have less than a 40 point per game average. If we average 150 points a game, that should be enough to win the whole thing. It worked for Loyola a few years ago. They ran and gan(?) (runned and gunned?), scored about 150 a game, and won lots of NCAA championships. And it was really fun to watch, even though you have to be a bit disappointed when you score 187 and lose by 15, but who wants to watch defense?
And he has to start who I want him to start, and give the correct amount of playing time to the players I want him to play. I’m just as important as any kid’s parents. I just want what’s best for these kids, and have wanted what was best for them since they started dunking the ball in the 6th grade. That’s why I provided limos and drivers for them from Junior High on.
I’m giving Coach Howland a really short leash. He has to start coaching the way I want him to coach, since it’s clear that his way doesn’t build championships or character.
Give me those three wealthy and influential alumni as coached, with Bill and Ted in the background giving sage advice.
Thank you, Steve.
I gotta go now. A local high school basketball coach just trotted in carriying his (short) leash, and I have to take him for a walk.
Wins and/or Character
There seems to be an implicit assumption that you can choose winning or having character and integrity. Coach Howland has clearly shown that we can have wins and high character players. Clearly it is difficult to do both at the same time and much easier to choose one or the other (see Calipari, Carroll, etc). Given that it is very hard to do both, we must expect that there will be times when we do not have both.
The question for us as fans, alumni, and students is which factor will we tolerate a lapse and which factor must always be present. I believe that Coach Howland will always require character and integrity and that this past week seems to be a pretty clear example of that (DG seems to have integrity but not necessarily the character to play for UCLA and Coach Howland).
I am happy with Coach Howland’s choice of which factor to require because you can win or lose games, but you can only lose your character and integrity. Given that, I accept and expect seasons with fewer wins than I would like although I am still quite surprised by this season so far. I trust that the program is in good hands because Coach Howland is building based on the Wooden Pyramid not on jump shots, limousines, and hospitality girls.
LOL
And, bless my parents, they did not go to the department chairs and demand curriculum reform so that I could learn the disciplines my way
FOR WHAT ITS WORTH - MY TWO CENTS
Losing and especially to less than stellar teams will always bring out the debaters (even some of the master debaters). For the past four weeks BN has been actively and often vehemently debating what’s going on with this years team. Like 66 pointed out the debate has centered on CBH’s style of play, recruiting abilities, judgment of character, and, bottom line, his innate ability to coach an “elite” team in this day and age.
I would posit that this debate or argument is really a waste of time. Again, like 66 said, its one thing to debate actual coaching decisions, another to debate what essentially is ideology. There are not going to be many concessions made. Let me pose two hypothetical outcomes to this year and then pose a rhetorical question:
(1) On the positive side. The team suddenly ‘gets it.’ Whether it be due to DG’s departure, some degree of embarrassment for past performances, more practice time, better chemistry or whathaveyou, the whole thing turns around. We show up quite respectfully this Sunday v. Kansas, play some solid D, take good shots and make a respectable % of them, and hit free throws. We lose, but we hold our own. Then we pull an upset against either Miss ST. or ND (which is happening all over the country this year), and go into Pac 10 play feeling pretty good. We improve week after week, JA starts to live up to his hs potential, TH really is damn good, Bobo even starts to play like many exected him to. And its all stemming from a solid defensive performance. We beat Wash at home and finish 2nd or 3rd in Pac 10. Get a tourney invite and maybe even go to Sweet 16.
2. On the negative side. The team really is as bad as some believe and CBH refuses to alter the game plan. Bobo drops out. Kansas pulls an Alcorn State on us and the guys can’t even show up for classes on Monday. It goes from bad to worse (well, how could it get worse) and we go into Pac 10 play with a 2- 8 preseason record (not counting Concordia and that other one). Since we’re so bad, even the Pac 10 is a problem and we manage to finish with a 6-12 record and lose in first round of the Pac10 tournament. Overall something like 8 – 21.
Questions: (1) In scenario #1, would the “we need to play run and gun; BH can’t coach, we need change” crowd concede they were dead wrong? Or at best would we hear alot of “well this and well that and it doesn’t really change my opinion of this and that and bla bla bla”
(2) In scenario #2, would the “give the Caretaker the benefit of the doubt” crowd be less willing to support him? Would one really bad year change anything for them?
I think not in both cases. Ultimately the reality of 2009-2010 is going to be somewhere in between and the debate will go on endlessly throughout. My hope is that those who make the big decisions will not succumb to the pressures of winning every year and make the mistakes made in the decades following Coach’s retirement. I still think Gene Bartow got a raw deal.
by classof67 on Dec 4, 2009 12:44 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
67, you are one of a very few who remembers Clean Gene Bartow.
And I agree with you. I think he was a fine coach, and was the kind of coach (and the kind of man) that the school should have got behind and stayed behind. But the way things were, even if Coach Wooden had succeeded himself, he would have been booed out of town.
Addressing the point you made about our guys being NBA-ready
It’s just worth pointing out that LRMAM, who wasn’t seen as that valuable coming out of college because of his lack of a dominate offensive game, is starting in Milwaukee and garnering huge amounts of praise from his coach for his effort and relentless D…and JH, a star-studded, much-lauded prospect with a world of potential, is playing three minutes a game for the Sixers, who also just decided to sign 68-year-old Allen Iverson to start for them instead of bumping JH to the starting lineup. What I’m trying to say is this: I wish DG all the best, but I’m pretty sure he’s going to regret his decision.
18 year olds never regret decisions
until they’re middle-aged. I don’t think Gordon is any different from any of the rest of us at age 18, other than physically.
some attention needs to be turned on players...
As much as I hate watching our guys lose, I cannot imagine a better coach or face for our program than CBH. I think we’ve already said how much he values Coach’s values and beliefs. Second of all, I have no doubt that CBH can coach and develop players. Take Ryan Hollins and Ced Bozeman, for example. Prior to CBH arriving, they were pretty insignificant. Hollins, especially, didn’t have any idea what he was doing on the court. That last year from Hollins was awesome.
But we clearly see a difference between Collison, Bozeman, Hollins, and the other guys, and this new group of players. The previous had respect. They listened. They believed in CBH. They know if you continue to follow the plan, good things will come. I think this group is too busy believing in themselves. They are busy doing what many in here are doing and that is continue to question his abilities rather than believing in him.
If there is anything we can fault about CBH is the fact that he did fail in recruiting players with more dedication and character. So far, I’ve seen very little heart from these players.
If you really want long-term perspective on Ben Ball
All you really have to do is consider the probable starting lineup for next year:
McCallum/Zeigler (one of the top guard recruits in the country)
Lee (or Lamb if Lee transfers/declares; either way, we can’t go wrong)
Honeycutt (I think he’ll be our best all-around player this year when he gets up to game speed)
Nelson (I see nothing but good in his future)
Smith (more athletic KL without the outlet passes)
Obviously we don’t KNOW how McCallum/Zeigler or Smith will do, but the odds are strongly in favor of: Very good. And that’ll make UCLA one of the top 3 teams in the Pac-10 next year, possibly even the best if the young guys exceed expectations. So yeah, this year may suck (or hell, it might even NOT; we’re a very young team, it’s still only been 7 games, our #1 recruit still hasn’t seen the floor yet, etc etc), but it’s a critical building block to future domination, so I can handle it.
Watching Calapari's Recruits Destroy NC
Wall is sensational.
But, does anyone think he belongs at UCLA?
sjh
Not as much Howland's fault
One year guys, one year…. next year by this point we’ll look far better and make the tournament. I’m not blaming Howland on this one, based on his track record in the past. What we have here is a complete failure of multiple recruits stepping up there game to belong in a program of UCLA’s caliber. That combined with an early departure of Jrue has left us in this state.
Howland is not a psychic, who knows what kind of crap regarding a recruits potential gets feed to him before they even arrive here. The world isn’t ending, he’s not going anywhere soon, I HOPE! Let him push the reset button and get things back on track. If he needs to modify a few things on offense, I’m sure he will to keep things moving.
F**K, its saturday morning and I’m having UCLA football withdrawal w/o basketball to trun to.
Middle Ground
After suffering through several years of mediocre UCLA basketball post Larry Brown through the beginning of the Howland era, 1995 being the exception, no one is more supportive or grateful for Howland’s arrival than I am, I don’t think. But that doesn’t mean he is above reproach or beyond questioning. I recall the rapture that surrounded Bob Toledo his first few years, until he stopped winning and it occurred to us that his failure to field strong defensive games were costing us on the field. My point is, we eventually cut the cord on a coach that in the beginning won, and won, and won — until he didn’t and didn’t and didn’t.
Howland has earned our strong support. This is why losing on our home court to Cal State Fullerton, losing to Long Beach State for the first time in our school’s history, losing to other lesser programs, have not changed our feelings about the coach. We still strongly support him. But it’s fair to ask why this is happening, why top flight recruits from last year’s frosh class have all failed to develop according to how highly they were heralded, and whether this is just a fluke of an overrated recruiting class or whether this year’s class is also failing to progress (something we admittedly won’t know for awhile yet.). Again, it’s fair to ask these questions.
What Howland has done for this program can’t be over-stated. But the honest truth is, if we were to continue to lose games like we have this pre-season in the coming seasons, and if future recruiting classes were also to go bust, we would all eventually turn on the coach, regardless of the success he had his first five years at UCLA. Now, I don’t think this is going to happen. But if it did, we would eventually demand that the administration find a coach who delivered us back to where we belong.
As an aside, there is nothing wrong with the style of play Howland coaches. His offense values efficiency, fundamentals and offensive rebounding. His defense needs no defense, if you will. Great defense breeds fast breaks. I’ve had performance issues with certain players during our Final Four runs. Coaching style was not the problem, no matter what a bunch of East Coast hacks had to say on Lavin’s home network. Should Howland prove unwilling to be flexible and coach to the team he has this year, we’ll find out soon enough and that will be a legit point of criticism.
The key is:
" But the honest truth is, if we were to continue to lose games like we have this pre-season in the coming seasons, and if future recruiting classes were also to go bust, we would all eventually turn on the coach, regardless of the success he had his first five years at UCLA. Now, I don’t think this is going to happen. But if it did, we would eventually demand that the administration find a coach who delivered us back to where we belong."
by Bruin Die Hard
Exactly, before burning him at the stake like Toledo this mistake needs to get repeated.
Didn't Toledo
Inherit talent from the previous regime, whereas CBH inherited a pile of dog feces from The Lizard and built a dynasty? I’m not sure if the part about Toledo is true, but if it is, I think that’s the main difference between the two situations.
And at any rate…yeah, I’m going to stick with “Ben’s only misstep thus far at UCLA has been the 2008 recruiting class, when he only recruited talent and not guys that would fit his system” as the reasoning behind this probably-doomed season. But as I pointed out earlier, we’re very likely to have one of the three best teams in the conference next year, and then all of this questioning of Howland will be gone from BN and wiped clean from everybody’s minds. I have no doubt.
Tyler Honeycutt
Not that i expect a major impact in a first game back from injury, but is he playing soon?
Cleared to play tomorrow
I don’t know how much, if at all, Howland plans to use him, but he is expected to be available against Kansas.
formerly bruinhoo
thanks
would be nice to see his skills and demeanor.
Expectations
Coach Wooden did not win his first championship until he was 17 years into his tenure, I’m glad the MSM, alumni, etc. did not try to run him out of town before 1964.
Roy Williams and Jim Boeheim did not win a championship for decades. Let’s get some perspective Bruin fans. We need to appreciate what CBH has done so far for the program, and what he will do.
I just have some expectations from this year’s team:
1) Play hard and don’t give up despite the score of a particular game and regardless of their record
2) Respect the university, program, and Coach Wooden & CBH
3) CBH works to evolve as a coach. A teacher is also a learner; hopefully he desires to grow and develop his coaching skills.
Thanks 66!
by UCLA Championships Made Here on Dec 5, 2009 12:53 PM PST reply actions
You know who else appreciated it? The NBA coaches who inherited the kids CBH trained. The lunch bucket kids who were never projected — out of high school — to be first rounders, became first rounders. And, starters. Why? Because they were fundamentally sound and could play D and rebound. Think the NBA doesn’t care about D so that recruits shouldn’t? Read what the coaches of our first rounders are saying. And,read how much credit these NBA coaches are giving CBH for his work.
Like I said in a previous post: I think any player worth their salt should know that if you come to UCLA and you’re successful, you’re gonna make that paper in the League.
There is no need here for part time psychologists.
No need for babysitters.
The player should never have any say in how the team is run. Having fun in college is well and good, but if you’re a one and done player lets face it, you have a LOT of future money on the line. So, if you want to make all the money you think you deserve you’d better be prepared to put in some serious work. So a better offensive system will showcase your talents more effectively you think? By all means, go to a place where they have what you think is a better offensive system. There, you can alley oop and no look pass to your heart’s content.
The question you want to ask yourself is do you want to impress SportsCenter, who will pay you in air time and youtube clips, or an NBA scout who could be the difference between you signing a huge first paycheck or you toiling away in the NBADL?
Brandon Jennings I think is a good example of a player who had the right attitude post high school and is now reaping the benefits. He used his one year of NBA exclusion to sign a contract with an Italian team, where he rarely got into any games and was not treated like the NBA superstar he looks to be on his way to becoming today. Yet, he worked hard in practice (twice a day as opposed to the limited practice time the NCAA allows) didn’t complain, and just focused on where he needed to be come Draft Day. He has said himself that it was a very sobering experience. Now, he is starting for the Milwaukee Bucks alongside our own LRAMM and is an early frontrunner for the ROY (another frontrunner being our own Darren Collison).
The point here I am trying to make is that when you choose to go to an institution you put yourself at the mercy of whomever is tasked to educate you. What the coach says goes, and if you don’t like it there might be another school out there for you that will facilitate all of your dunking fantasies.
Oh UCLA you sweet bitch, you've BRUINed me for anything else.
Thank you
I’ve been very critical of CBH recently, specifically with regards to his scouting/evaluation, but we’re not even remotely close to discussing whether or not he’s on the hot seat.
Formerly ryebreadraz
Eloquence.
Sir, you were born with it.
Great job at putting things in perspective ’66.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Absolutely, 100% Spot On, '66
I could not agree more. Coach Howland is the second-best coach of all time at UCLA. He plucked our men’s basketball program out of the damned ashes. There is no one out there who could do better at his job, and whiney parents are just, apparently, learning life’s hard lessons of reality the hard way along with their spoiled brat kids. (I daresay the fact that basketball is a team sport has completely eluded them, somehow.)
I could be wrong, but..historically, very few successful teams are put together in one season, which is essentially what Coach Howland begins with this year. (Not all “new” players, I know, but this is, undeniably, a brand spanking-new team.)
I think that if the concept of “heart” has a place in sports—and I believe it does—it belongs not just in the athletes, but in the fan base as well.
Thank you for writing and posting this, ’66. It needed to be said, and you say it so perfectly.
Love My Bruins
So True
Thank you for making this post. All great points and echoes my feelings. It takes time to sharpen the CBH blade, but once the players get there it is a shining beauty. These players will get there too.
UCLA '08
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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.
