Spaulding Roundup: Football News & Notes
by Nestor on Apr 29, 2009 5:21 AM PDT
in Football
Email
PrintChris Dufresne in the LAT leads his weekly football column by channeling fanshots from BN:
USC canned UCLA in the annual spring game, 11-0. The Trojans scored on three first-round NFL picks, two seconds, a third, two fourths, a fifth and two sixths.
Makes you wonder what Karl Dorrell was doing all those years in Westwood while everyone was out recruiting.
It also renders more astonishing UCLA's 13-9 win over USC in 2006 and Stanford's upset win over USC in 2007. Stanford also had no players drafted this year.
The loss to Stanford was particularly amusing given the sheer disparity in talent. I never thought our win that game was that big of a shocker. In my book whenver we play those clowns in the Rose Bowl we should always be in the mindset of expecting a win. As we argued and laid out endlessly that specific season and the two weeks leading up to that game we had enough talent and potential to win a rivalry game like that on our own home turf. What transpired was inspiring but too bad like a typical Dorrell coached squad, the team wasted away all the momentum and positive energy through a humiliating loss against Florida State in the following game.
Anyway, let's get back to the present because it's lot more pleasant. Here are our team captains for next season:
Reggie Carter and Alterraun Verner on defense and Logan Paulsen and Terrence Austin on offense. Rick Neuheisel told the team after yesterday's scrimmage.
Looks like logical choices to me. Speaking of next year's team, while the coaching staff hasn't issued a formal depth chart, Adam Maya from the OC Register drew up the dept charts for both offense and defense based on his day to day observations from practices.
Elsewhere, two more Bruins signed free agents Ks following this past weekend's NFL draft:
Two more football players from UCLA have been invited to mini camps with NFL teams.
Punter Aaron Perez is headed to camp with the New England Patriots and safety Bret Lockett has been invited to camp with the Cleveland Browns.
Good luck to those guys. Again I wish they didn't have to wait till this past year to get competent coaching and leadership from the program. As mentioned above if the 13-9 was any indication, the ability and desire was always there. It's just too bad they previous leader wasn't able to get the very best out of the entire team on a consistent basis. I am not saying that if we had competent coaching we would have bunch of first round picks. I am suggesting that if we had competent coaching during previous regime we had enough talent and ability in the previous program that would have prevented the dismal showing on Saturday.
I will end with a followup on yesterday's post re. Auburn with an interesting note from the Athens Banner Herald where the Georgia Bull Dogs are apparently in very preliminary discussions with the Georgia Dome about the opening game of 2010 football season. As I said, it is extremely early but here is what Coach Marc Richt had to say about it (emphasis added):
"We're working a deal that could possibly happen," Richt said. "Maybe even the year after this. A lot of things have to come together for that happen."
A proposed nationally televised UCLA-Auburn game in 2010 was turned down by Auburn, the Los Angeles Times reported. UCLA declined an offer to play Georgia Tech.
Richt said somebody currently on Georgia's schedule would have to agree to come off the schedule to make the deal work, and he wasn't optimistic that would happen.
Richt said Georgia would essentially lose a home game if it played in Atlanta.
"We think we have one team that everybody would be excited about, but if I say who it is it will probably blow the deal," Richt said without giving more details on the team.
Paul over at Georgia Sports Blog thinks Richt is possibly referring to UCLA but the idea is a "longshot." Kyle over at Dawg Sports who in "principle" is "in favor of playing the Bruins", is vehemently against the idea of a UCLA-Georgia matchup in Atlanta:
You may put me resolutely in the "no" column on this one. I’d be more than happy to see the Bulldogs and the Bruins play once in the Rose Bowl and once in Sanford Stadium, but I see no point to meeting them in Atlanta for any purpose other than picking them up at the airport as a show of Southern hospitality before hosting them between the hedges.
I am not sure UCLA is going to be all excited to play Georgia in Atlanta without a home and home engagement. If they rejected the idea of playing Georgia Tech in Atlanta, they should do the same if they are approached about playing Georgia. So I am in pretty much in agreement with Kyle on this point. I'd love UCLA to take on Georgia but I want the Bruins to take on the Dawgs in between the hedges and then invite Kyle and rest of his friends back to LA to tailgate on our golf course.
I wonder though perhaps Georgia Dome should be approaching other teams from the ACC or the SEC if they want to feature a matchup with UCLA. I'd be more than excited about a potential matchup with Spurrier led USC, Clemson, Butch Davis's North Carolina or any of the Florida schools. Your thoughts?
GO BRUINS.
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Playing Devil's Advocate again.
I don’t understand why we should turn down games against either Georgia Tech or Georgia. So, they are away games, so what?
The motto of any football program should always be, “Anybody, Anytime, Anywhere.” To approach scheduling any other way is contrary to the spirit of competition. The only consideration worth evaluating otherwise is the loss of income from losing the return game at the Rose Bowl. But, not all decisions should be made with the bottom line in mind. If this is truly a preseason bowl game to kick off the College Football season, both teams should split revenue. That would be my only reservation.
PLAY BALL!
A coach is someone who can give correction without causing resentment. John Wooden
Not quite Anybody
but anytime, anywhere, sure.
However, there are a few things to consider:
- Georgia Tech probably does not really recruit nationally, whereas Tennessee does, as does Auburn to a certain extent. So that will lessen the “exposure” benefit.
- Georgia Tech football does not have the same following as Auburn and that game would just not generate as much hype. That’s a long and expensive way to travel for an uninteresting matchup, and with a lower attendance the revenues would not be as enticing, even if they were split.
Virginia Tech might be an interesting opponent..
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I agree
I wish we would have taken the Georgia Tech matchup, if for nothing other than exposure.
I'm all for new opponents
and for road trips, in fact. A home and home series is probably the most appropriate way to go about it.
While playing Georgia Tech may not have the same ring as playing Auburn or Tennessee, perhaps, they would still make for an interesting matchup. Georgia would definitely be more interesting than GT, but then again, Georgia might really pound us.
I’m not a player so I don’t know and can’t speak as to how they feel, but I imagine they would also be excited to play an away game, like at Georgia or Auburn, for example. From a fan’s standpoint, an away game at Georgia or Auburn or Tennessee, etc. would be an exciting opportunity.
If offered, I think we'd take the game with Georgia
While we assume that we passed on Georgia Tech because we didn’t want to play a game in their city without a return date, I only half buy it. We didn’t want to play a game that would essentially be a Tech home game because Tech isn’t a big enough name to make it worth it. There may in fact be more Auburn grads in Atlanta as there are Tech grads and playing Auburn in the Georgia Dome would be as much as an away game as a Tech game. Auburn has a bigger profile than Tech though and playing Auburn would be worth what would essentially be a road game, just like I think that Georgia would be a big enough name to make it worth playing what would be a road game in Atlanta.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Apr 29, 2009 1:08 PM PDT reply actions
Agree
Tech is a good team and would probably beat us in Atlanta, but the are not marquee enough to justify a loss. Georgia on the other hand, who the MSM loves, is likely to have us in pre-season and end of season (with regards to Georgia’s RPI) discussions on WWL and others, so even if we go there and get our butts kicked, the program will still benefit. Plus a game against Georgia in the Rose Bowl would be huge and just the kind of exciting competition (along with Texas) that this program needs to wrestle SuC out of the LA spotlight
I'd Like To See A New Marquee Opponent As Well
I’m bummed out about Auburn’s decision to turn down a nationally televised game against us; I hope that they’ll possibly reconsider as a UCLA vs. Auburn clash would have huge national interest IMHO. Also very intriguing would be UCLA vs. LSU.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Apr 30, 2009 4:49 AM PDT reply actions
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.
