Winning 26 Games In A Rebuilding Year = Not A "Successful" Season?

by Nestor on Mar 22, 2009 1:16 PM PDT in Media Watch Comment 44 comments

Let's see Bruins lost three upperclassmen to the NBA, worked in five freshmen and upperclassmen who hadn't played as starters in previous season, and yet they almost won the Pac-10 conference and put together a season featuring 26 wins.

Coach Howland rightfully thinks we had a successful season:

"It's a tough way to finish the season, which I thought was a pretty successful season overall," Howland said. "But now we don't feel as good."

And yet Brian Dohn (a graduate of basketball powerhouse Rutgers Univerisity) doesn't agree with Howland's assessment of 08-09 season being a successful one:

The Bruins finished in second place in the Pacific-10 Conference, were ousted in the semifinals of the conference tournament and for the first time in four years didn't get through the first weekend of the NCAAs.

That shouldn't be confused with success, but it certainly was a realistic expectation entering the season.

Dohn takes the same shot again towards Howland at the end his "column" today:

"Even though we didn't finish in first (in the Pac-10), we had a chance to go back to the NCAA Tournament," Howland said. "Obviously, we got one of the tougher draws to get sent back. But that's the luck of the draw, too. If we had won a couple more games that we had chances to win, especially at home, we probably would have had a better draw."

So, a "pretty successful" season?

No. But an expected one.

Huh? Exactly what is the standard of success for Mr. Dohn?

Before this season started we laid out a baseline expectations of a 21+ win season based on our extensive concerns about the roster of the 08-09 season.

By my account despite the tough loss from yesterday I am all right with how this season turned out. And I feel more than at ease knowing we have one of the best if not the best coach in the country in charge of our program who has another great recruiting class coming in and commitments lineup from the class right after.

So exactly how can a season in which a team in "rebuilding" mode won 26 games, barely missed out on winning it conference can be dismissed as "not successful"?

GO BRUINS.

0 recs | Comment 44 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yet another reason

Doh! should keep his editorials to himself. Every time he strays away from reporting verbatim what someone else says he makes an ass of himself.

by Tydides on Mar 22, 2009 1:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yesterday

He was sitting next to Plaschke. Perhaps that’s why he caught the Plaschke bug? He has been doing all right recent wrt to reporting but when it comes to offering “analysis” and opinion on state of UCLA athletics, he once again fell short. Sad .. that right now … he is considered to be the most competent traditional media reporter covering UCLA sports.

by Nestor on Mar 22, 2009 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yet another reason Doh! should be ignored on this blog

Ty and Nestor, you know I have nothing but the deepest respect for each of you.

But, you keep touching fire and then act surprised when you are burned.

Doh! is a worthless piece of shit and not worthy of the title of reporter. Ty there is no clean line between “editorializing” and reporting, verbatim what someone says to him — especially when we all know that reporters paraphrase and don’t report verbatim AND many of us question whether he actually has sources for what he says.

Yet, somehow, many here want to trust him when they like what he says, and then cry foul when they don’t.

I am not advocating censorship. He can write all the shit he wants. But, there is no reason BN should not ignore him. He needs NUMBERS. We are a strong, organized Nation and every time we quote him or post some of his writings, or go to his Blog — we give him the numbers he needs.

If we just ignore him, we will hurt him. And, maybe, force him to do a better job.

It’s probably because I am so old, as is Fox, but I am truly stunned that Fox and I appear to be the only people able to resist all things Doh!

Again, no disrespect intended, but for you younger folk, listen to us old guys when we tell you it is really time to just say “no to Doh!”.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Mar 22, 2009 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oops! I wish there were an edit button.

After I shut down the computer and went downstairs to go to bed, I thought about how harsh my post was and how unfair it was to single out Ty and Nestor in my remarks.

Sorry, guys.

Here’s my frustration. The moderators, here, do a very good job of weeding out the trolls — the name callers — the people full of BS who really don’t have a constructive approach toward all things Bruin and who say things just to flame or create reactions.

Doh! is a troll who buys ink by the barrel and is paid to flame. Were he an everyday poster here, he’d have been banned long ago.

Frankly, my Mom taught me long ago that “sticks and stones might break my bones but words would never harm me” and I have litigated free speech issues and against censorship all of my professional life.

But, the fact that someone has a right to speak does not mean that we need listen or republish it.

I’ve been amazed at some of the long threads like Bob and Ted and the reactions they’ve drawn. Sometimes posters in those threads have been banned.

Doh! is far worse than any of them — because he consistently flames.

Is it wrong for Ty and Nestor to post him. No, this is their site. And, because of that I apologize for making my remarks personal to them.

But, in general, I do think it is time to “just say no to Doh!”.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Mar 22, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I may be in the minority in posting this

and I mean this with all due respect. I realize I’m not a longtime poster here, but I’ve been a consistent reader of Dohn and of Bruins Nation for the past couple years.

To put it simply, I think Dohn is a huge asset to the UCLA community. Is there anyone else that covers UCLA Athletics as extenisvely as Dohn does? Anyone else that offers a blog that has as much information as he offers, day in and day out? Just look at how many times you guys quote Dohn during your write-ups, He provides so much information for all of us, and to throw him under the bus just because we disagree with a few things he says is ridiculous.

Dohn is a journalist. He’s an unabashed, unbiased reporter when it comes to UCLA Athletics. He has stated time and time again that he doesn’t care whether UCLA wins or loses; he doesn’t love the Bruins like we all do, which means his view on the program is certainly going to be different from ours. As he has said in the past, because of covering our programs so extensively, he can pick out our flaws moreso than with any other program, and that often affects his views.

I get that some of the things might come off as being flaming, anti-Bruin, whatever. But is it? In all honesty, there has never been one thing Dohn has ever written that has pissed me off. Does he editorialize every once in a while, instead of just reporting the news? Sure he does, but he’s entitled to that. If you disagree with him, ignore him. But don’t discredit him and call him a hack of a journalist just because of a few points you disagree with.

I realize this post is not going to change anyone’s opinions, and I’m not trying to start any sort of argument or whatever, because that would just be pointless. But I think it’s shameful and ridiculous to use every curse word in the book to describe someone. He’s not Hitler; he’s a journalist, for Christ’s sake. You guys at Bruins Nation do an awesome job for the UCLA community 95% of the time, but it’s the 5% of nonsense like this that often gives you guys a bad name. Just as we should be classy at games and with other teams, win or lose, so too should we be classy towards the one journalist that covers us more than any other.

For the record, I’m not a massive Dohn lover like this post might make me out to be. But I think it’s absurd the amount of vitriolic nonsense I’ve read in this thread. Maybe I’m in the minority, or maybe not, but I think the other side of the argument most definitely needs to be heard.

GO BRUINS.

slow down, look up

by Point Guard 08 on Mar 22, 2009 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs

I have no problem

When he brings the actual news. Quotes from people that I’m interested in. Injury reports and the like. These things need no further explanation. I have no interest in his editorials. I have no interest in his ideas on what defines success for our programs. I’d like it if there was a whole lot less “him” in his reporting and more “UCLA”. It’d be easier to ignore him if he didn’t have a perch from which to blast his editorial ignorance. Because he has this perch, ignoring him does not make him go away. Pushback though, does mitigate it somewhat, and that’s what is happening here.

by Tydides on Mar 22, 2009 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm fine with you guys criticizing him

But I think you risk alienating a large portion of the Bruin community when you take it to the extreme that you have been known to do upon occasion. That’s all I’m getting at. Just realize that, even though you guys obviously have good intentions in trying to defend the Bruins, their season, their reputation et al, you might also be driving some readers away. That’s all I’m getting at.

Again, criticize away. Just please, do it with class and respect, not necessarily towards him, but towards the portion of Bruins Nation that may not completely agree with you. And realize that taking the extreme point of view and using vitriolic, hateful language only exacerbates the alienation of the rest of the community. K, I’m done using big words.

slow down, look up

by Point Guard 08 on Mar 22, 2009 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think that's making way too big a deal out of this

Dohn is nowhere near big enough or important enough to be a focal point of deciding where to draw the line as far as criticism. This site is about all things UCLA, and we’re talking about a beat writer here. Small potatoes. If Dohn has followers that are sensitive enough to be Dohn fans over Bruin fans, then who freaking cares? Dohn said something stupid and he got called on it. That’s where this particular episode ends. I’m sure it won’t be the last time this plays out.

I think I’ve made my position clear, and the individuals that have expressed themselves have made their positions clear. BN is not one entity, it is a collective group of people, and if what you’re implying is that suppressing people like Class of 66 is worth not alienating some unknown and unspoken for group of people then I flatly reject that notion.

Quite frankly, I’m not enamored of a large portion of the Bruin fanbase either. All I see is you applying a massive double standard here. You think that behavior that you find so outrageous three posts up doesn’t exist elsewhere? Have you seen Dohn’s comment section? Have you seen the BRO boards? Welcome to the Internet. I guarantee anyplace that bemoans BN as a place of “vitrolic” “nonsense” is just as guilty of the same if not more so, because I’ve been to all the boards and I’ve seen it with my own eyes. To tell me otherwise is to lie to my face. Does that make this place “better”? Of course not. That’s subjective. If these “readers” are driven away by that then they’d be driven right off the internet.

by Tydides on Mar 22, 2009 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

the biggest problem with Dohn is that he doesn't take

any sort of constructive criticism. If you challenge his opinions, he will tell you he doesn’t report opinions, just facts.

If he wants to become a better journalist, he would learn to question himself.

I will say he is great at reporting detail and facts.

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

by silverlakebruin on Mar 23, 2009 7:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Search BN for Dohn or Doh!

and you will find multiple examples of Doh! being simply wrong on the facts and/or using unattributed sources to state factual propositions that prove not to be true. He is hardly an “unabashed, unbiased reporter” as you state. Take a look at his coverage of CTS and the hiring process that followed the firing of CTS. Take a look at the stories on DW and his “offer” from UW.

And, if you want to talk about Blog etiquette, take a look at the snarky shots Doh! has taken at BN and individual members at BN.

Unlike BN where anyone can post, for a while (I do not know if he still does it), Doh! censored posts that were critical of his positions or writing — he reviewed them all and only posted “approved” submissions. Hardly the way to foster a critical dialogue.

If Doh! thinks he is being treated unfairly here, he can come here and post to defend his positions. When some of us were critical of him, he denied us the same privilege. And, let me make one thing clear, he was censoring based upon content, not based upon the quality of the writing or because people were using offensive language.

The fact that Doh! may write more words about UCLA sports, in the MSM, does not make him a journalist. It is more a statement of the sorry state of sports reporting in the Los Angeles area. Being the least rotten apple in the barrel does not make him palatable.

The truth is that the moderators and writers at BN offer more fact based, empirically driven writing and analysis than any of the local “reporters”. Compare the depth of coverage of all things Bruin here — particularly Rye’s coverage of non-revenue sports — to any mass media outlet. Take a look at the empirically based presentations of people like Blink and Hoo. None of Doh!‘s or the MSM’s work comes close to the depth and quality of work that the volunteers do here.

I have chosen to tune out Doh! My loss.

If people choose to tune out BN because some of us are critical of Doh!, their loss.

Frankly, when you compare the body of work here to his body of work, those who choose to close their eyes to BN are losing a lot more. But, hey, that’s their choice.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Mar 23, 2009 4:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Steve has said it all

We don’t need Doh!. Doh! needs us. He needs to be perceived by his boss as someone who causes people to buy the fishwrap or cause the internet numbers to increase. And we’re enabling him by making this place a forum which quotes him and links to him. I will never understand why there is such a fascination with all things Doh!. He’s not a particularly witty writer. He’s horrible at analysis (as evidenced by his take on the season. But the biggest bone I have to pick with him is use of anonymous sources. We have only his word for the fact that he has any sources, and in my opinion his claim that he really has sources cannot withstand strict scrutiny. He really should be writing for one of the grocery store tabloids. (Oh wait. He already is, so I take that back.)

The BN does not link to Bill and Ted or people of that stature. I see no real difference between Doh! and Bill and Ted. I think the BN would be doing a public service by invoking the moratorium on Doh!. Sure, I know, I know. If I don’t like the way you’re doing things I should start my own blog. Unfortunately, I don’t have the energy or the skills that you young whippershappers have, so that’s out. In the meantime, I will continue my voice in the wilderness routine, and plead with people to ignore Doh all while turning the sound down on the volume down on the TV.

P.S. I had the unfortunate duty to go to LA over the weekend to attend a funeral, and I took the chance to go out to the campus. It is so monumentally different from when I started. Anyway, the purpose of the visit was to get a simple hat with the proper color blue and UCLA in simple block letters. (Many of the people here in Florida can’t read the script lettering.) I found the good hat and wore it proudly as I came back to Tampa (with a convenient stop in Detroit.) Question: Why all the hats with the Red Saaax version of a “B” on it? Use a different font, please. Anyway, it was great to get back to the campus.

by Fox 71 on Mar 24, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fox, that "B"

has been in use (first by the baseball team) for many, many years and is a well-established Bruin tradition.

by bru79 on Mar 25, 2009 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Success

CBH got the best from the team and the team gave their best. Clearly they were not perfect and had their ups and downs. Mistakes were made by freshmen and seniors alike, but through it all they gave their best. I expect nothing more and with CBH at the helm I expect to see nothing less.

by EdtheBruin on Mar 22, 2009 2:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

CBH still the best.

Completely agree with the above comment. I’m disappointed but they never stopped playing hard and that is all you can ask for.

by sth on Mar 22, 2009 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We've been over this before...

A few weeks ago I commented (similarly to several others) that we would win 1 or 2 games in the tournament, then go down, and that if we made Sweet Sixteen without 3 starters who left early for the NBA, that would be quite good. — especially without a center Coach Wooden refers to playing to your potential, and i think this team pretty much did that. If Jrue comes back, then they would have a good chance to win 1 or 2 next year. The year after — then we might be something special.

by ucla7477 on Mar 22, 2009 2:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Doh!, Plaschke, and the rest

Should ask Florida what happens when you lose 3+ starters from a final four team to the draft. IIRC they struggled to get 20 wins and ended up in the NIT. Makes what CBH did look pretty amazing

by Sideout11 on Mar 22, 2009 2:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm sorry, but...

FUCK him.

I don’t need a lazy tape recorder who poses as a columnist to impose expectations on the fan base of a school other than his own alma mater.

We need to let it be known, loud and clear, as loudly as we let it be known that CTS was the wrong coach for UCLA, that Ben Howland is the best coach for UCLA.

We were one win, ONE win from winning the Pac-10. So FUCK YOU Brian Dohn. I’ll take the transcriptions of your meetings with OUR coaches and players, but keep your damn stupid ANALysis to yourself.

Now I’ll go wash my mouth with soap.

But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.

by tasser10 on Mar 22, 2009 3:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

LOL

I wonder if the USC beat writer will put together a column about the Trojies having an “unsuccessful” season?

by Nestor on Mar 22, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wonder if Plaschke will make another declaration

Pulled straight from where he got his last one: his ass.

by Tydides on Mar 22, 2009 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

He will have no idea what to write tonight. So the Trojies barely make the tournament by winning the worthless tournament and then bow out in the second round in what is supposed to be the best season in years.

And here we are at UCLA … putting together a 25+ win season in our rebuilding year … after losing 3 starters to NBA (2 of whom were lottery picks).

Somehow they perspective will be completely lost among everyone who work for the traditional media in Los Angeles.

by Nestor on Mar 22, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No problem

They’ll just go back to pretending like they weren’t supposed to be there in the first place, despite the fact that they couldn’t wait to anoint them as second weekend bound when the brackets came out. No lose situation for SUC, no win situation for us.

by Tydides on Mar 22, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

Yep. Splashme and rest of the So Cal media will grovel all over this moral victory in second round forgetting how somehow Floyd once again underachieved failing to take advantage of pro prospects such as Gibson and Derozan, both of whom probably going in the first round.

by Nestor on Mar 22, 2009 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Underachieved

That’s for sure. They were ranked pre-season top 25 for a reason. If $C had been playing the way they did the last 6 games all season then they probably would have had a great shot of even winning the actual conference championship (and a lovely new banner for Galen Center). But where was everyone calling them out for the way they performed when they lost 6 out of 7 games or whatever it was during the middle of the season.

by turs12 on Mar 23, 2009 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's pretty unbelievable

What “expectations” is he talking about? Did Howland ever say anything? Did the players? Did we? No. The people who set the expectations were most of the morons in the MSM, they’re the ones who ranked us in the top 10 to start the season. So it’s THEIR expectations that we didn’t meet…and I don’t give a pluck about that. They had Wake Forest as the #1 team in the country, stupid schmucks.

ps: the two other 6 seeds lost in the second round (to a higher seeded team), and the third one didn’t even make it to the second round. It’s tough to admit after getting shafted so badly, but the committee actually did a decent job overall with the seedings if you look at the teams that have advanced to the Sweet Sixteen…even Arizona is looking like a wise decision, though I would have to say that their opponents have been less than stellar so far.

But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.

by tasser10 on Mar 23, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seeds

With all the statistical data (and I’m guessing increased accessibility to it via the internet), the top seedings seem to be getting more and more accurate in the last several years – which is making picking upsets in the office brackets a lot less interesting.

greg in denver - UCLA guy for life

by gbruin on Mar 23, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lack of upsets

Given the home (or near home) locations for the top seeds, I think the fact that the high seeds all advance is a bit self-fulfilling. The pod system just adds another layer on top of the advantages for the top seeds. They don’t necessarily always identify the best teams for those seeds, but if you put them at home, they’ll do a bit better, and might look more like the best teams. I don’t mean it as a conspiracy, I’m just a little skeptical of the committee suddenly becoming way better at choosing teams.

by jaffa on Mar 23, 2009 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

good point

I hadn’t considered that specifically, but it definitely gives an extra advantage to the higher seeds (like, say, ummm, Villanova, for example). To papraphrase Louis XVI, “It’s good to be the top seed.”

greg in denver - UCLA guy for life

by gbruin on Mar 24, 2009 7:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What are you talking about, SC was 9-9 in the Pac-10. That's very successful for SC.

by wingsabre on Mar 22, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

rofl

That is very successful for JustSC. My bad.

by Nestor on Mar 22, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or atleast very successful for SC without OJ

by wingsabre on Mar 22, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

By Dohn's logic

Since Carolina was expected to win the national championship, if they do, their season will not be successful, because they just met expectations.

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

by silverlakebruin on Mar 22, 2009 4:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

typical

Wouldn’t be surprised to see him turn around and talk about UCLA fans’ unrealistic expectations and demands for only national championships each and every year.

by Dienekes on Mar 22, 2009 6:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm content with what we did, it's better than getting the national championship from the NIT

by wingsabre on Mar 22, 2009 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, sometimes it cuts both way

Hazzard did what he could with what he had, went to NIT and beat Bobby Knight’s Hoosiers that won the big dance the following year. So there was some consolation of being " the best of the rest ", sp to speak.

by Htse005 on Mar 22, 2009 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A season to build upon

Overall, a pretty good season. I was really hoping to reach the Sweet 16 though. We were definitely spoiled by three straight Final Fours, which is probably why some would not consider this season a “successful” one. More importantly, this was a season to build upon. We have enough returning players (with or without JH) and incoming freshman to be even better next year.

by Bruins93 on Mar 22, 2009 6:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The MSM: Triple Yawn

Let’s recap:

Washington won the Pac 10 and got as far in the tournament as we did. Was their season “unsuccessful”?

Cal choked in the first round. Unsuccessful season?

ASU made it as far as we did.

SC—the darling of the local hacks—made it as far as we did in the tournament. And, arguably, they have 2 guys heading for the NBA next year.

Frankly, I think those of us who actually follow UCLA and who realize what talent we had, and more importantly, what talent we lost, have had their expectations in check this year. By that standard, the season was a success.

(Kind of OT. How’s this fantasy: Imagine this year’s team with Kevin Love and Russell Westbrook, assuming they had not jumped to the NBA. Oh man.)

by Barnes2JJ on Mar 22, 2009 6:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

And the Prince...

Starting five would be Kevin, Luc, Josh, Darren, and Russell. Bench would be Alfred, Jrue, Nicola, James, Michael, and 4 other frosh. I would think there’s at least a slight chance they would have scored 1 more point in regulation against ASU and 2 more against WSU and won the Pac-10.

by ucla7477 on Mar 22, 2009 7:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

My bad

For some reason, I forgot that Luc left school early.

Not only would that have been the starting 5, but Luc, Kevin and RW would have been even that much greater.

Would have been a dynamite team. Coulda, woulda, shoulda, I know.

by Barnes2JJ on Mar 22, 2009 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

which, incidentally

is exactly what happened for teams like UNC, UConn, Pitt, etc.
the only team that is truly rebuilding and in the sweet 16 is Kansas.
who got (a little :)) bit better draw than we did in the Tourney (deservedly)

by glassbruin on Mar 22, 2009 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This Season (and Last)

I think CBH is a good, but not a great coach. I have never understood his timeout management. And I think last year we should have won it all since we had 3 players who became NBA starters this year.

Also, while CBH was very good at preparing his team when he had 5-6 days, he was less than stellar when he had a Saturday after a Thursday to do so. And some teams simply mystified him, like Michigan and Villanova.

When even CBH admits he was outcoached it’s time for others to smell the roses, too.

While 25 victories is respectable, we need to be competing for the National Championship every year, like those football professionals over at the University of Second Choice.

I’m not sure next year is going to be any better.

Bleeding powderkeg blue and gold for 55 years. Go Bruins!

by Digdog on Mar 23, 2009 5:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs