Call to Action: Tough Measures for Tough Times
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 7:39 AM PDT
in Football
Email
Print
As we started discussing in Nestor's write up on "waiting for the train" that is UCLA football, there are a list of things, some small, some radical, that CRN needs to do if he plans on righting the ship and getting these Bruins to six wins and a bowl game.
Time and time again, we've heard about how the Bruins needed "to fix the little things" or make "minor adjustments" and are so close to finally breaking through and being relevant again. Well, talk is cheap, and the proof is in the pudding. Youth is an excuse that only goes so far. Stupid penalties, sloppy execution, bad reads, all of that is the kind of stuff you can write off to inexperience. That kind of stuff will happen.
But that's not what's killing the Bruins. Yes, Sheldon Price can't seem to do anything without drawing a PI flag and our execution is poor at times, but the problems with UCLA go a lot deeper than youth or inexperience.
It's time for some radical change. It's time to stop being Donahue-esque and complacent. If we're going to win and go to the next level (consistently challenging for the Pac-10 title), then we need to break from our mediocre past and do what is necessary to win.
The steps I'm advocating for after the jump.
1. It's time for accountability, from the top to the bottom. Let's start with Sheldon Price. He needs to see nothing but the bench in Eugene. Hell, I wouldn't even let him dress. If I was CRN, I'd sit Sheldon down and tell him he can play again when he knocks the taunting bullshit off and does his job. When you get burned time and time again, you don't get to celebrate the one time you did your job. It's like he's the anti-ATV: doesn't defend well and acts like a jackass on the field. If you're reading this Sheldon, here's some information for you: you are not Darrelle Revis. Stop acting like it.
2. Moving from the secondary into the linebacker corps, it's time to bench Sean Westgate. He's a good guy, a hard worker, all that Rudy-type stuff. He's a great special teams player, but simply put, he is not a Pac-10 quality linebacker. He doesn't have the size. He doesn't have the speed. Yes, he gets a lot of tackles. That's not hard to do when other teams are running it down the Bruins' throat and running right at Westgate since he's the weak link at the second level. The knock on Bosworth was his lack of speed in coverage. At least Bosworth could hit and play run defense. Westgate not only can't play run defense effectively, but as Shane Vereen showed us yesterday, Westgate gets burned on the same routes that Bosworth got burned by Jahvid Best on. Anthony Barr has the size and the speed to be a very solid OLB. Using him as a glorified run blocker, short pass catcher, and very occasional ball carrier is a major waste of his talent. We need help at OLB. Use him there. Or hell, throw Love in there, because at least he can hit. Westgate is getting owned out there.
3. Switching to the offensive side of the ball, what the hell is with Jet Ski and holding on to the damn ball?! I thought the fumbles were a thing of the past (especially after the Texas game), but once again, he can't hold on to the rock. The upside to Jet Ski and Coleman was, that while they didn't have the pedigree of Malcolm Jones, they were reliable hands who held on to the ball. Obviously, that's not true, so why isn't Malcolm Jones getting at least 33% of the carries? Look at Lattimore at South Carolina. There are more experienced, more senior guys in the Cocks' backfield, but Spurrier brought in a five-star running back in the Class of 2010 and is using that talent. The kid is killing it. Malcolm Jones was a five-star running back in the same class, and yet, he's sitting on the sideline, doing nothing. Never mind that Jones was the Gatorade POY. When did CRN turn into Ben Howland? Jones fumbles the ball a few times and we haven't seen him since. That's a great way to shatter a kid's confidence. The bottom line is that Jones is big, fast, and a damn good running back. He's our running back of the future, so the smart move is to give him experience now, especially since he is just as good as our current crop of backs. If he fumbles, he fumbles. I mean, it's not like Jet Ski is holding on to the ball, and he's still getting carries. At worst, Jones is no better than Jet Ski with ball security. At best, he works it out, figures out the problem, and develops into the best UCLA running back not named Skip Hicks.
4. Why is Taylor Embree playing? He's slow. He can't get separation from anyone. Worst of all? He can't catch the damn ball. He was given a scholarship for one purpose: to catch the f**king football. He's failing, so he needs to be benched for guys who can hold on to the damn ball. That means Jerry Johnson needs to play. Now. At the expense of either Embree or Rosario, it doesn't matter, but he holds on to the ball on the few occasions that Prince can manage to pick the right read and hit him in the numbers.
5. Staying with our receivers, how is Josh Smith, one of the most dynamic playmakers on the roster, not getting the ball more often? If I was running this team, I'd be trying to get Smith as many touches as possible. End arounds. Bubble screens. Crossing routes. Whatever it takes to get him on the field with the offense and get the ball in his hands needs to happen. The guy can make plays, especially if he is given any space. He needs to have the damn ball. A lot. I fail to see why Taylor Embree, who is fielding punts for his allegedly "sure hands" is continuing to get to touch the ball. Punt returns and kick returns both need to be for Smith and Smith alone. The more he touches the ball, the higher the chance he breaks something big and gets us 7 points.
6. Accountability needs to matter. And that includes QB. No one should be immune from being pulled. Not only is Prince not getting it done, but his leadership is abysmal. He's no Rahim Moore, that's for sure. You want to laugh when you're getting your ass kicked? That's fine. Enjoy the pine the next game. And Kevin, make sure you leave room for your buddy Rich B. because he won't be seeing the field either. Darius Bell, it's time you get your first Division I start. If you're half the warrior your brother was, then maybe we'll be okay. Besides, in all likelihood, Oregon is going to flat-out murder us. It's going to be a major ass-kicking. Because, let's be real: Oregon is going to break it off in Cal's ass and we all saw what Cal did to us. Since the spread is going to be laughable, why not unleash Bell and see what he can do (if anything)?
7. Accountability isn't isolated to the field. It goes all the way to the coaching staff too, and if CRN wants to keep his job, it's time to shake up his coaching staff, in major ways. Where to start? Fire Chuck Bullough. I shouldn't have to explain why Mr. Candy-Ass Soft Prevent Defense needs to go, but just as there were retards defending Dorrell, I'm sure there are people who like Bullough. He needs to go. Now. Not at the end of the season, but now. Put Clark Lea in charge as the interim DC. While we're at it, Todd Howard needs to go too. Hundley can stay, but if Price and Hester continue with the bull, then he should be looking for a new job next year too. It's time for CRN to cut the ties to past regime and dump the last Dorrell/Walker guys out of the program. Lea might do a good job this year, he might not. But no matter what, he can't do worse than the soft-ass defense we've seen so far. Hell, maybe Lea will be dynamite and will save us the time and expense of going out and hiring a top-tier college defensive coordinator.
8. But let's be realistic: Lea probably isn't the answer. We're going to need to go out and lure away a top-tier defensive guy from an established program with a solid defense. It's going to cost us money, which in this economy, is not going to be easy. Where will the money going to come from? Here's the radical idea we need:
Let Norm Chow go at the end of this season.
That's right. I said it. Yes, Chow is a legend and yes, he's developed a few Heisman quarterbacks during his tenure. But let's face facts: Prince is not going to be the next Heisman winner. Moreover, the pistol is not exactly a system Norm Chow has found success with. And, I hate to say it, but there's probably a reason no program has given him the big job. For all his success, doesn't it anyone find it odd that programs would sooner hire a no-clue "coach" like Karl Dorrell or Dwayne Walker (who combined have only one good thing on both of their resumes: 13-9), than Norm Chow, who is reportedly the offensive guru of college football?
Neuheisel is an offensive guy. He can take the reins of the offense the next season and focus on developing the next great Bruin QB. So far, we've scored 16 TDs in 5 games. Throw in Kai's FGs and we've put up a total of 136 points (22.7 points per game). Last season? 286 points total (22.0 points per game). Chow is pulling in $400K to $500K per season. In other words, last year, Chow made between around $1,400 to $1,750 per point. If we continue at the pace we're going this year (with a laughable improvement of 0.7 points per game despite an improved running game, offensive line, and a new offensive system designed to cure our offensive problems), then we'll put up between 272 and 295 points (depending if we make a bowl game or not for the extra 22 or so points). Which means Chow will have made between $1,470 and $1,840 per point.
In comparison, Oregon had the most points per game (at 54.3 points per game, or a total of 706 points last season), while their offensive coordinator, Mark Helfrich, made somewhere in the neighborhood of $203,600 last year. In other words, he made around $290 per point. Obviously, Helfrich doesn't have the track history of Norm Chow, and in reality, Oregon's offense is really the product of Chip Kelly and the stockpile of talent that Bellotti left behind. Still, it's a stark contrast what we're paying Chow for the number of points our offense is putting up.
The point behind all of this is that Chow is making a ton of money. With Neuheisel, an offensive coach, at the helm, it makes more sense to take the Norm Chow money and use it to replace Bullough with someone who actually knows their ass from a hole in the ground. It would be nice to have a defensive coordinator who has something more than empty space between his ears. Since Chow really isn't doing a lot for us on the offensive side of the ball, it's time to invest the money where we need it.
9. While I'm tearing apart the offensive staff, Reggie Moore needs to be fired. Now. Our wide receivers are terrible, despite having raw talent. In fact, it almost appears that guys like Embree have digressed over the years, which is a pretty damning indictment of Moore's ability to coach that unit. I know he's a good recruiter, but what is the point of having talent if you can't develop it, or worse, cause the talent to slide downward?
10. After we find a defensive coordinator who understands basic concepts of football (such as you blitz on a third and long situation since it shortens the amount of time the QB has and doesn't allow the long route for the first down to develop, forcing either a sack, an incompletion, or a short dump-off pass that gets stopped a few yards short of the first down marker), use the rest of the Chow money to hire away a younger offensive coordinator, someone preferably well-versed with the pistol offense that we've installed, such as Nevada's Chris Klenakis. After all, Klenakis is the coordinator, who with Ault, totally pistol-whipped the Golden Bears with supposedly "lesser" talent and size. The guy does know the new system we've committed to (by bringing in Bell and now Brett Hundley) and he knows the kinds of players we'll need to bring in to run it right.
Like I said, it's time for radical change. Albert Einstein once said that insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." We've become insane folks, because we continue to be stuck in the same mediocre, Donahue-esque mindset, afraid to take a leap or make a radical change. Until we decide to do something drastic, something to really break with our mediocre past, UCLA football will continue to be nothing more than a Southern California version of the California Golden Bears: a perennial also-ran pretender, always coming close, and always falling short of the Rose Bowl.
Fire away with your thoughts.
GO BRUINS.
111 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
agreed.
posted similar stuff in the “empty passion bucket” thread after the game yesterday. laughers and celebrators should see the pine for a long, long time. i didn’t quite get to the coaching staff since i think a few personnel decisions might improve our status, but if not – hey coaches, consider yourselves warned.
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." --John Wooden
Not defending Prince and other laughers, but...
have you ever been a part of a one sided game you weren’t on the fun side of? It’s not fun, and once things go south, you kind of check out. it happens. I think it’s an emotional defense mechanism. Look, maybe it’s not the right attitude, but I don’t think it’s as big an indicator of lack of interest as you might think.
I’m not saying prince and co. should have laughed. He’s a leader, so he should lead a little better than that. I’m just saying it’s most likely not a big deal.
by Captain Leebeard on Oct 11, 2010 2:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Disagree.
As the leader of the offense, KP should be scowling on the sidelines, pissed off, and with the resolve to work to get better. Keep the emotional defense mechanisms to yourself until you are among family or friends not associated with the UCLA football team. That type of behavior sends a terrible message to the freshmen that either: (a) these types of losses are acceptable; or (b) no one cares whether they win or lose. So either the freshman gets a bad example set for him or he decides that he doesn’t like that type of culture and transfers to a different program where that type of behavior would not occur.
by orlandobruin on Oct 11, 2010 4:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Quarterbacks
don’t get to check out. They are supposed to be leaders. It’s not always fun, but it goes with playing that position. That behavior is absolutely unacceptable from a QB.
by stuckInBayAreaHell on Oct 11, 2010 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions
quarterbacks also
need to think like an assistant coach…. observing and processing information at all times in order to improve the team’s performance… rather than just become a role player
Defense mechanism
You have point about the context of the laughter. Understandable but not the best practice by a long shot given the fan reaction.
I would like to hear CRN’s take on it.
My only point to add is that we needed to come back and score when the laughter occurred and score again and again and again. Coming back from 28-0 is unlikely but it can be done. And it needed to be done.
by peggysue69 on Oct 11, 2010 6:37 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Rough, but true
Barring some crazy turnaround of fortune (unlikely to happen) I see CRN either choosing to or being forced to make some changes to his coaching staff. It’s obvious that the current one is not working, from the week-in, week out poor execution at positions like WR and CB, as well as general schemes in general on the offense and defense.
One more point I’d add – I don’t understand why we adopted the pistol in the first place since we lack the personnel to run it. We don’t have the ultra-fast QB with great ball fakes and a strong arm, like Oregon, Nevada, etc have. Right now it feels like either there is no long-term plan, or Neuheisel and Chow really missed the mark in assuming it would fit with our personnel.
The 'long term plan'
is named Brett Hundley.
Assistant Coaches?
Hey, I can agree with a number of your points, but after awhile…I mean I’ve just got to ask, isn’t firing a bunch of assistants the last refuge of a head coach on his way out? With all the understandable gripes, where’s the criticism of CRN? This is all on his watch, including the f***ing pistol!
As I see it...
…part of being a good head coach (which is basically the CEO) is knowing when you have subordinates who aren’t up to the task and knowing when to let them go and to bring in the talent that is capable. It’s no different that recruiting these kids out of HS, which is something that CRN has shown us he can do very well.
Now, he needs to show us he has the courage, foresight, and ability to identify which of his subordinates aren’t performing to the level of expectation set out before the season began and show them the door.
Likewise, he needs to also show that he can bring in talented assistants who can help him turn this program around and back into a winner.
If he can’t, then as Nestor has said, it’ll be time for CRN to be shown the door too. You’re right: ultimately it all comes back to CRN. But first, we need to see if he can do what it takes to adjust and correct the problems.
by Bellerophon on Oct 10, 2010 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions
That's what Mike Stoops did
Two years ago in Arizona. Brought in a brand new OC. Worked out well for him.
i hate the Fn pistol
maybe it works next year when Hubdley arrives?
"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's" - John Wooden.
Letting CRN go
probably won’t happen for another 2 years. I’m sure Guerrero is going to give CRN the 5 year plan just as he did with Dorrell. I’d hate to see CRN go to be honest with you because he’s brought in great recruiting and gave us some hope of a future in UCLA football, even if it was all talk.
I do think CRN needs to take into account some of the accountability on his staff. I agree with most of the staff changes on this post, including even probably letting go of Norm Chow. I don’t understand what that love fest between him and Prince is all about. Clearly this Saturday should’ve been tangible proof that Prince is crap. Anything that Chow says to defend Prince should be disregarded.
When it comes down to it, I think there is really something wrong with the coaches in trying to bring out the motivation in these guys. Why isn’t the team playing with the same mentality they had when preparing for Texas and Houston? Do we always have to get our asses handed to us for a wake up call? Why isn’t there a sense of urgency for EVERY game? You’d think the fact that Washington State almost beat us would be an end to all the cockiness that came out of the Texas game, but apparently it takes a great humiliating loss for our team to finally wake up.
If my theory is right, this week’s humiliating loss should result in a win next week in Autzen. After that, our team will think it is invincible, become super cocky, and then lose the rest of their games until USC, where they will once again be super motivated after being embarrassed 4 games in a row and we will end the season beating ’SC.
And that’s all that matters to UCLA right? Beating ’SC?! /sarcasm
+1
Agree. I’ve questioned Chow in the past, I do agree its just not working out. Unless some progress is shown yes changes do need do need to be made.
CRN is an enigma though, though to see if he needs to go or stay. I love his recruiting, but the attitude and accountability on the field is abysmal given where we should be. He falls into the trap of being too “nice” and friendly when a more disciplined approach may be needed. Same retarded crap from the same people keeps occuring.
Anyway, lets see if another rabbit can be pulled out of the hat for Oregon.
When failure is guaranteed ...
you have the freedom to try anything.
And trying new things can sometimes lead to success.
Our team is headed for a losing season and it would take multiple miracles – of biblical proportions – to get to a bowl game. No matter what we do, we need huge doses of luck, so why not experiment? Why not try stuff – crazy stuff. Let’s play every friggin’ player who suits up! (I’d like to see some of these kids play – but let’s not burn Redshirts foolishly, there is next season) If some 3rd stringer makes a big play – then he’s our guy that day. If everyone fumbles it away – we get beat by a a few extra TD’s, so what? We’re not going to a bowl game this year and we’re not going to win many more games this way. Honestly, how could going a little nuts and mixing things up make this season any worse?
Maybe we’ll stumble into something big – it’ll be harder prep for us and injecting some some crazy creativity will make the games watchable.
Nothing radical about letting Chow go
in my mind.
You have a finite amount to spend on assistants, and you are spending half of it on a guy doing a job you have a lot of experience with, and spreading the rest out for things like a DC, that you really need help on it because its not your area. I’ve been saying this since last year. Its business 101, if not football 101 ;)
Totally disagree on Brehaut. You have to give the guy a chance before saying you won’t play him. He has started one game this season, and did ok, not great, but we did score over 40 points. He deserves the nod and a chance to show what he can do with real time.
Why do you want Howard to go? He’s done well except for this year, where he has had to replace all his starters with new players. You don’t fire someone who has done well for his four years here because his unit is struggling after replacing all its starters.
Clark Lea has almost no coaching experience. Putting him as interim DC doesn’t make a lot of sense. Promote Howard over him.
and one small quibble: firing reggie moore should be number 1 on your list. The guy has accomplished nothing over three years. None of our receivers improve.
by silverlakebruin on Oct 11, 2010 12:30 AM PDT reply actions
Thoughts on QBs
If we were running last year’s offense, I’d be the first to ask why Brehaut’s not getting a fair chance. We’re not running last year’s offense, though. From everything he’s done before here, Bell is more suited to the pistol than Brehaut. We brought him in, it’s time to see what he can do.
I think part of Bellerphon’s problem with Brehaut is him laughing while we were getting our asses kicked last week. He’s got a point there.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Disagree
But can Bell pass? Brehaut may not be as mobile but if he can get some positive yards with a gashing here and there, that’ll suffice. The Revolver was implemented to assist our running game by making defenses account for all 11 players. Most of our yardage on the ground is going to come from the TB position anyways. We need a QB who will make defenses respect our passing game.
Well stated
If you like at Nevada’s stats, they run the ball well in the pistol and average more than 200 passing yards a game.
What we are missing isn’t a legit run threat from the pistol, but rather a legit passing game.
by silverlakebruin on Oct 11, 2010 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Brehaut is gone after this year
Can’t say I’d really blame in. He was recruited to run a pro-style set and now we’re running the frickin’ veer. Add Hundley to the mix and the writing is on the wall. I feel bad for the guy.
Respectful feedback here ...
But it’s a little weird when you go over at other Bruin communities and bad mouth the frontpagers. Nothing wrong with participating in all forums but it’s pathetic when you talk sh!t about us somewhere else and then come back here to participate.
If you don’t think frontpagers here don’t have “football knowledge” then you probably shouldn’t waste your time here.
For the sake of those who aren't BRO premium subscribers, here is what I said
Take it for what it is worth. And I stand by it.
Getting rid of Chow makes a world of sense, particularly when you look at the amount of money for position coaches that is allocated to him, and then realize RN is very comfortable running his own offense. We need to spend serious money on a DC and let RN hire an OC to assist him in running the offense. He doesn’t need a Chow.
However, some of the ideas on there are comical. Fire Todd Howard? Really? The guy has had 4 solid seasons with us, and lost all of his starters last year. You fire him for struggling in his 5th year because of that?
Promoting Lea to interim DC? Really? His only other experience before here was as an assistant at South Dakota State. He has ZERO experience.
I can go through and point out some other enthuasistic, but underthought suggestions. Seems like a passionate fan without a lot of football knowledge
by silverlakebruin on Oct 11, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Okay
So what the heck are you doing here if the posts here are not up to your standards filled with your idea of requisite “football knowledge”? If you are going to be so condescending towards us, as I said above perhaps you should stop reading us.
Thinking one post is not well thought out does not mean I find
zero value in the forum. I say good things about bruinnation on BRO and defend your right to run this sight as you see fit when others say you are too autocratic and don’t tolerate dissent. Individual posts run the gamut from very good to very poor. The posts are good more often than they are bad. This one I thought had some good points, but some of the ideas were so poorly thought out, I found them showing an inexperience anaysis of football.
And as always, it is your forum and if you don’t want me here, just say so. I respect your ownership of the forum and its your right to do with it as you see fit.
by silverlakebruin on Oct 11, 2010 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions
We appreciate
That you respect our right to run BN as we see fit. Most people don’t.
That being said, you can’t be critical of my “football knowledge” without explaining how it is deficient. Moreover, you can’t be critical unless you are asked (as I do below) to explain and respond to the points raised.
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
There is nothing wrong with disagreeing on BN
It is happening all the time. Shoot Classof66 just put up a post disagreeing Bellerophone. britishbruin is writing one right now. DC Bruins and I viciously disagreed during the hoops season and he is not a frontpager.
So to argue that dissent is not allowed on BN is absurd (not saying you asserted that directly but your implied by calling this place “too autocratic”). Of course we are not going to allow anyone to insult the moderators. Do you think Pierson is going to be ok if people call him names and attack him on BRO? Don’t think so.
What is disappointing is that instead of offering your reasons on why disagreed with B … you belittled his “football knowledge.” That is talking behind our back and frankly is not very cool. No problem with you offering different takes but it’d be nice if you show respect for the people who keep this community running. It’s petty to attack people behind their back.
Instead of "blasting" me on BRO
Why don’t you respond to the points I’ve raised below?
Todd Howard has not had four “solid seasons” with us. He’s been lucky he had guys like Brian Price, Brigham Harwell, and Bruce Davis to mask his lack of coaching acumen. I’ve not seen any of our defensive players develop under him. I don’t see their technique improve, their moves to beat their man aren’t getting better, etc. He’s not a great X and O’s type of coach and I don’t see how you can say that’s a “solid season.”
I recognize Lea has zero experience. Who cares? Can he possibly do worse than Bullough at this point? Doubt it.
Why don’t you read through the rest of my posts (esp. what I just wrote on our offensive line and zone blocking) before commenting on my “football knowledge.”
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions
The funny thing is
Happens a lot. He is not the first one to talk behind our backs (while participating here as a member of this community). It’s kind of pathetic.
People know full well we are actually huge fans of BRO and especially their moderators and writers. It’s kind of pathetic people who sometimes participate here feel the need to talk down this community at other places. Hypocrisy is a little ridiculous.
HIlarious
Oh, I know. I see asshole posts about how BN is “like North Korea” and we’re all a bunch of Commie-Nazi KGB-Stasi-Gestapo assholes who censor everything we don’t like (nevermind that britishbruin and 66 have put up full on FanPosts disagreeing with my takes here, offering up an intelligent counterpoint) all the time.
The best part is that the dickheads who blast BN on other places like BRO turn around and come here to enjoy the content and engage in the discussion.
Chumps.
Always amused w both Commie and Nazi comparisons
Pick a side guys. :-)
To be fair silverlake wasn’t doing any of that. However, it was still silly for him to sound so condescending without bothering engage in a thoughtful way here first. Anyway, hope silver sticks around and participates in good faith from hereon out.
GO BRUINS.
I agree...
…that it wasn’t him that was the problem (although I don’t like my “football knowledge” being criticized but when challenged, said criticism disappears), but it is annoying to see so many people doing that kind of crap.
@silverlakebruin: guys who think losing is something to laugh at don't get to play
That’s why I’m saying Brehaut needs to be benched with Prince. He thought it was all chuckles when Cal was breaking off their foot in our ass. That is never acceptable and he needs to be taught that lesson the hard way.
But even if he wasn’t laughing, Brehaut is not a pistol QB. Period. Bell might be. He’s at least a running threat and his passing ability can’t possibly be worse than Prince’s, so why not give him a shot? 40 points against the worst defense in the conference doesn’t count for much, especially when Brehaut only threw for 128 yards and 0 touchdowns. You don’t get to take credit when the running backs are the reason the offense is chugging along.
Howard is a Dorrell guy. It’s time to purge the program of all Dorrell guys and any Donahue leftovers. I know CRN is a Donahue guy and he needs to make the decision to break with our milquetoast past and break from the Donahue mindset at Morgan Center. Besides, what exactly has Howard done? Let’s be honest: his defensive line only looked decent when he had NFL or All-American talent to work with (Brian Price, Brigham Harwell, and Bruce Davis). Without those guys, his unit has only looked average at best. A good coach knows how to take an otherwise average group of players and maximize their abilities, develop their talent, or otherwise motivate them into playing better than average. Take those three guys out of the equation and the Bruin defensive line has been nothing but average during his tenure. You can’t rely and hope you’ll get a special NFL talent like BP or BD to shore up your shortcomings. I haven’t seen our defensive line develop: I don’t see the guys learning how to shed blocks any better, their moves to beat their man aren’t improving, and I haven’t seen any real technique improvement either. The bottom line is that he’s a mediocre coach who has gotten lucky that he’s had some really special talents to mask that fact.
Clark Lea, on the other hand, is getting a lot out of a unit with only one really talented player on it. Larimore has been a real revelation this season and he’s make marked improvement from last year. Under Lea, I can see Larimore developing into the next Christian Taylor type MLB for the Bruin defense.
Howard is a Walker guy. I don’t need more soft-ass prevent cover zone defense. That was Walker’s problem. Now it’s Bullough’s problem. Under Howard, it’d be the same problem. Lea is young and might do something different. Hell, he can’t do any worse than Bullough. Our defense is already getting manhandled by Pac-10 competition, so hell, let’s roll the dice and see what Lea can do. Maybe we find the answer (15% chance of doing so), but probably not. It’s still better odds than sticking with a Walker disciple (Bullough or Howard, with whom we have 0% chance of finding the solution to our defensive woes).
Apparently...
…those folks with superior “football knowledge” are free to criticize, but can’t seem to explain how any of the above points are wrong or address why firing Howard is “comical.”
Sorry, had to step away for work.
But of course I will respond.
1) Suggesting a twentysomething whose sole coaching experience prior to his six games this season was one season here as a general assistant and two years as a linebacker coach at South Dakota State be named interim DC is quite a leap of faith. I am not a big believer in the anyone is better type of thinking. Its not well thought out. If you do replace someone midseason (and I am not opposed to that in the right circumstances) you should replace him with someone that is ready for that type of job. It hurts not only your team, but also the individual to put someone in a job they aren’t prepared for.
2) Most people that played or have coached football are aware that different players handle different situations in different ways. A 15 second clip of Prince and Brehaut could have been about anyhing. Some guys need to laugh during a tough game because they have nerves, or their frustration is hurting their effectiveness. Not every player is going to respond the way that makes fans the most comfortable. To suggest someone shouldn’t start because you don’t like the way he and another player talked on the sidlines is really making a lot of assumptions about what was going on. I have played with people (only played in high school, not college) who are deadly serious the whole game and others who are relatively light hearted, with both being committed to winning, just with different personalities. I don’t think its fair or accurate to judge someone based on that part of the game. If they are always goofing off, or never serious at the right times, thats somethign else. But 15 seconds on the sideline is not a fair way to evaluate.
3) Much like number 2, justifying firing someone midseason because of who he coached under previously is unmoving. He has done well with great players like you stated. He also got a lot more out of the Korey Bosworths of this world than anyone thought they would be out of high school. The guy has a pretty strong track record across the board on the DL. What do you think he has failed at specifically, other than being hired by a coach you don’t like?
4) Lastly, I have given this some thought, and I do apologize for what I wrote. I shouldn’t have said your post sounded like it was written by someone with high enthuasiam but low football knowledge. The rest of the post I stand by, and for the reasons listed above, I think you threw out the baby with the bathwater on some of your suggestions and they are reactionary rather than well thought out.
It certainly wasn’t my intent to write something on another board I wouldn’t write here, which is why I copied it here. I didn’t mean for it to be insulting. I was just writing a quick response to another post. God knows I am not known for my previewing or self editing, but I probably should have thought through how it would come off a little better.
by silverlakebruin on Oct 11, 2010 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions
fwiw
If we were to let Bullough go at mid-season the guy I would probably want to take over is strictly as an “interim” basis is Tim Hundley (who was a Neuheisel hire). Of course I am very high on Clark Lea.
However, our next DC needs to be someone who is not connected with Dewayne Walker. Thanks for the apology silver. I am sure you guys can hash out your other disagreements. Cheers.
Good takes but I still have to disagree
As I mentioned elsewhere to Nestor, you are not the kind of poster that is the problem, merely that what you did is something that other, less savory folks tend to do on a regular basis. I’m sorry you had to work on Columbus Day/Indigenous People’s Day/whatever the current PC term is for today: that kind of sucks. No apologies necessary: we can disagree all we want and I know that often what I type is not exactly what I meant.
I do agree that some of my post can be seen as "reactionary" or radical, because it is, to a certain extent. I’ll venture out there and say that I think 99% of Bruins either agree or don’t find problem with Points 1-5 (benching Price, which I suppose may be moot now, benching Westgate for Barr or Love or someone, more Malcolm Jones, less Taylor Embree, and more Josh Smith) or Point 9 (firing Reggie Moore). So let’s go ahead and set those issues aside and focus on the coaching moves I’m looking at: dumping Bullough and Howard, and letting Chow ride off into the sunset after this season and the points you raised:
1. Obviously, Clark Lea isn’t the ideal guy to be our DC. Then again, Bullough is terrible. I don’t think there are a lot of folks out there who think he’s the guy to turn this defense around. Is it a leap of faith? Oh yeah, a huge one. What other options do we have at this point? I’d be open to CRN bringing in someone else from the outside of the program, but how realistic is it to expect him to make a quality hire mid-season? Lea has little-to-no experience, I grant you that, but do you think our defense could do any worse with him at the helm? Maybe N is right about Hundley, but I have been less than impressed with the secondary this season, and at this point, I want some radical change that will infuse our defense with some creativity and fire rather than the same stale, boring, easy to plan against defense we’ve seen from the Bruins the past 5+ seasons. Yes, it’s risky, but I do believe that we can’t possibly do worse with Lea than Bullough, and hell, we might just get lucky and find out the kid can do the job well. His age tends to lead us to think he’s inexperienced, which is true, but that doesn’t mean he can’t do his job. I know a lot of twenty-somethings in my industry who do their job better than their older counterparts (a fact backed up by the stats we have to keep).
2. I’m aware that players handle things differently. That’s all well and good, but that’s not how I handle things. Like I said in the original post, this is what I would do if I was the man-in-charge. As you said:
To suggest someone shouldn’t start because you don’t like the way he and another player talked on the sidlines is really making a lot of assumptions about what was going on.
That’s what coaches do all the time. You can never know what is going on in someone’s head and sometimes you make an example, especially since their own teammates see it as sign of disrespect/immaturity/acceptance of a losing mentality. If Rahim Moore, one of the team captains found it unacceptable, I think it’s a fair assumption for me to find it unacceptable. Hell, even if Rahim said nothing, if I was the head coach, I would have found it unacceptable, and if it was my team (and thus my perogative), I’d bench them both.
3. I’m not looking to fire Howard immediately, but I wouldn’t be opposed to showing him the door with Bullough. It’s not just because Dorrell hired him. It’s because, like Bullough, he’s a Dewayne Walker guy and, unless he came out and said he has an entirely different defensive philosophy (which I doubt is true, or why would Walker bring him on his staff if they weren’t on the same page), then we need to cut out the Walker folks and banish the soft-ass weak-coverage prevent defense crap. Walker, like Bullough, got lucky every so often, but more often than not, we’d get burned and exposed.
On Howard, we’re going to have to agree to disagree because I simply don’t believe he had "done well with great players" or has "a pretty strong track record" when it comes to our DL. As I’ve said, from my observations, our defensive linemen have not developed under Howard. Their technique in shedding blocks has not qualitatively improved. As for our defensive ends, I have not seen any development in their ability to utilize basic moves (such as the swim move) than what they came into the program with. Our defensive linemen, like our WRs, seem to be a pretty much known quanity once they get to UCLA. When they leave, they were more or less what they were when they arrived. Yes, they’re bigger and stronger, but that’s not because of Howard, that’s because of their work in the weight room and the fact they are still growing young men. In terms of "coaching up" the talent, Howard, IMHO, has been deficient. Our defensive line has looked good only because Howard was lucky enough to have elite talent (Brian Price, Brigham Harwell, Bruce Davis) coming into the program that got pressure on the QB and made it look like he was doing his job. Can you point out which defensive linemen came into the program and got better (in terms of technique or ability not attributable to weight or strength gain) under Howard? As for Korey Bosworth, I’m sure he’s a great guy, good kid and all that, but I don’t think his technique was that good, his stats were mediocre, and I’d say 95% of his success was due to the defense having to key in on stopping Brian Price, Datone Jones, and Akeem Ayers. Howard is an okay coach, but okay isn’t going to cut it in this program anymore. I think it says a lot that despite bringing in numerous defensive linemen over the past 5+ seasons (David Carter, Reginald Stokes, Jeff Miller, Dylan Rush, Andy Keane, Darius Savage, Justin Edison, Brian Price, Datone Jones, Damien Holmes, Iuta Tepa, Keenan Graham, Owa O., Sealii Epenesa, Cassius Marsh, Rykeem Yates, Derrick Bryant, and Wesley Flowers) we’re having to start a converted TE at DT. Of all those guys we brought in, exactly 1 has left early for the NFL. A converted TE at starting DT should say a lot, especially when you look at how guys like Stokes, Keane, and Edison, who were ranked higher than Bosworth out of HS, who were certainly considered better defensive lineman than Nate Chandler, a freakin’ TE, have not developed into reliable players for UCLA under Howard.
I understand my takes are pretty radical. Especially about letting Norm Chow go, which I’m glad we agree about (I’d say the same about Reggie Moore, but I’m confident that 99.99% of UCLA folks agree he needs to go).
All-in-all, I do appreciate your point of view: I just don’t think Howard or Bullough are worth saving and I’m willing to gamble on Lea. I do subscribe to the “what the hell do we have to lose” mentality at this point of watching another year of lame-duck Bruin defense.
Question for you older guys
Why do Cal fans hate UCLA so much? Reading their SBNation blog the hatred rivals USC/UCLA fans going at it. Theres definitely much more hate from Cal fans then there is from UCLA fans. One sided hated rivalry? I also noticed this attending the game. The fan base really wanted to crush us haha.
UCLA '08
Probably because Cal is the most boring place in the world...
They’ll rub whatever they can in our faces
by all hail westwood on Oct 11, 2010 2:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Different Take
I was at the game and while Cal definately wanted to take us out, and rightfully enjoyed doing so, I found the students and the crowd to be pretty friendly. Lots of mingling between UCLA and Cal fans. Saw several frats houses around the stadium with lots of kids with Bruin jersey’s “socializing” with their Cal counterparts. Nothing like a UCLA/SC game.
I woulds also add that the Berkeley area surrounding the campus was anything but boring. The energy there reminded me of what the Village was like back in the 70s and early 80s.
I love the Rose Bowl, but how great would it be to have our own stadium on campus…
by WestlakeVillage Bruin on Oct 11, 2010 8:17 AM PDT up reply actions
+1
I don’t understand why there is such vitriol on our counterpart site about UCLA; but little point in us making baseless comments about Cal in response. Great university, great setting, on-campus stadium makes for great atmosphere.
Cal and the rest of the UC system is one of the reasons California is the greatest state in the Union.
by britishbruin on Oct 11, 2010 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Because they think we steal their water.
As for the laughter, it really bothered me too. But I’m not as convinced as the rest of you that RB wasn’t trying to lighten Prince up and get him going. I wasn’t on the field so I didn’t hear. When I’ve watched again, it really did look like RB trying to relax Prince (who was playing more tight than I remember seeing him play).
I agree about Chow and Moore. We need to be getting more bang for the buck, so to say with our OC and as far as Moore, I can’t believe that so many of our receivers drop balls and that they keep putting them back in . At some point you lose your job.
Go Bruins!
There was a time....60's thru 80's
where Cal had not been able to beat us in either basketball or football. We had a ridiculous win streak built up against them. I think that most older Cal fans went through their years never winning a game against UCLA and that creates the hate.
by 84 on Oct 11, 2010 7:35 AM PDT up reply actions
yes.
that and the natural rivalry from both being UC’s. If Davis steps up to FBS at some point, I’m sure we’ll both evolve a nice rivalry with them also.
Go Bears Go
by Rocksanddirt on Oct 11, 2010 7:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Cal vs. UCLA
We lived in the Bay Area in the early 1970’s for 5 years. As a born and reared So Cal person with two degrees from UCLA, i was amazed at what I call the “one way rivalry” between all things SF and LA. I thought they were hypersensitive about Los Angeles (as in why would I ever want to go to Los Angeles?) comments. So the Dodgers, UCLA, USC, Rams (at the time) were all objects of scorn and derision, so much so among enough of our acquaintances and SF based friends that my wife and I discussed it more than a few times.
After moving back to the Los Angeles area, I vividly remember two couples in front of me waiting to enter a downtown restaurant at lunch years later. The two couples were discussing a NYC based musical they came down from SF to see that opened in Los Angeles (“Phantom”), and not in San Francisco. The issue was how could they go home now, and keep the secret that they had come to Los Angeles and then not tell their friends they saw the musical. It was a serious discussion and I was laughing at the “SF Centric” state of their minds.
On the other hand, I believe most Los Angelinos are fine with San Francisco, and enjoy the occasional trip there, and there is not the emotional outpouring of hautiness or whatever you call it that occurs too much on the other side of the table…..
Bill
Mensgym
This is my observation too....
people in the Bay Area hate SoCal… people in SoCal think the Bay Area is a ncie place to go for the weekend.
by stuckInBayAreaHell on Oct 11, 2010 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Obviously not true
Since you’re a self-professed fan of all L.A. teams and yet your screen name blasts the Bay Area.
So clearly not everyone in SoCal thinks the Bay Area is a nice place.
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
it would be a great place...
for a weekend
by stuckInBayAreaHell on Oct 11, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
If it's so bad
Then leave. You won’t be missed in Northern California.
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions
And thanks again for proving my point
Obviously the NorCal-SoCal rivalry is not “one-sided” as L.A. people like to claim, since you’re bitching about the Bay Area.
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions
I think it is man
For the record. I absolutely love the Bay Area. If possible we want to move there some day. However, the vitriol we read online towards UCLA coming from Norcal is more than a little weird and seems to be fairly one-sided. I have never cared about hating Cal and will not start now.
Have to agree to disagree
Because I see a lot of L.A. hate toward NorCal also. I don’t think it’s black-and-white like a lot of folks make it out to be, however.
Moreover, just because some Cal fans have some kind of weird hate-obsession with UCLA, that is not representative of all Bay Area sports fans. I feel like, on BN especially, folks have become myopic in the whole “NorCal hates on SoCal thing” because we deal with a lot of Cal trolls.
Just my two cents and like I said, it’s the one thing we’ll have to agree to disagee about. :)
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions
Probably something to that
For the record during college all of my room-mates were from the Bay Area (4 out 5 years). It worked out that way in our first year and we stayed with it because well … we were all ginormous 49ers fanatics.
I didn’t really experience the Cal hatred towards UCLA until my first game against them. It was pretty stunning to hear the ’fucla" bombs raining down from their stands. It was bizarre because I almost went to Cal. Oh well. We are not going to think about them until we play them again next season.
Oh … Alex Smith is even worse than Kevin Prince. Ugh.
Remember when everyone talked about the Niners winning the NFC West?
Hahahaha.
The Niners will continue to suck until the Yorks finally sell the team. Although, maybe, just maybe, they won’t squander the #1 pick this upcoming draft on another QB bust.
Usually, if you tell someone that both your starting QB and your backup QB were #1 pick guys, you’d think, “hey they must be pretty good.”
It’s so sad.
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
Well
The good news is that Jim Harbaugh will coaching either the Niners or Chargers next season. So there!
Good on multiple fronts
Niners will suck less (but will stick suck because they’re owned by the Yorks and Alex Smith is the QB) and Stanford will suck more.
Double bonus points!
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Bellerophon
I do think it is very one-sided – both the rivalry and the hatred. Are there So-cal lovers that hate Nor-Cal? You bet, but that in itself doesn’t mean the rivalry isn’t one-sided.
I went to UCSB undergrad, where about 50% of the students were from nor-cal and 50% from so-cal. Of the males I knew, I’d say about 80% of the guys from nor-cal HATED LA and another 10% didn’t like LA. I’d also say very few of the so-cal guys hated, or even disliked, nor-cal and their sports teams. Funny thing is that many of the so-cal guys didn’t even know there was a big rivalry with nor-cal. And many of these guys who ended up hating the nor-cal sports did so because the nor-cal sports guys were such assholes about so-cal sports and so-cal in general. Who isn’t tired of hearing how LA sucks and we steal their water?
It’s actually kind of funny.
Did I take an official poll or have I ever seen one? No, but I’ve known enough people over the years (not just at UCSB, and not just college educated people) from both so-cal and nor-cal to have a statistically significant sample size.
In my mind, the hatred is very one-sided.
by bornagainbruin on Oct 11, 2010 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions
Having lived in both places
… when I moved to the Bay Area in the mid-90s I was struck over and over with the bitter hatred of SoCal … and after 40 years of being born and raised in LA I mildly disliked the Giants, liked the 49ers, thought Cal was cool… and absolutely thought SF was great place to visit. So much so I moved here.
In short, it is way one-sided.
by harry bruin on Oct 11, 2010 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions
As a So-Cal'er in Nor-Cal
I think that the issue is non-Angelenos tend to dislike LA (kind of like how non
New Yorkers dislike NYC) but people tend not to reflexively dislike Chicago or
San Francisco.
by KnudsenRockne on Oct 11, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I was thrown out of the game!
I don’t understand why Cal fans have so much hatred and disrespect for UCLA. I was sitting in the Section T of the game and attempting to be as respectful as possible to the older fans I was around. Despite the fact that I refrained from using obnoxious or foul language, insulted Cal, or was physically aggressive I was thrown out of the game! Cal fans were throwing trash at me, screaming at me to sit down during 3rd and long situations when I was trying to support the Bruin defense, and in general very hostile.
I was asked by a Cal fan for my ticket because he refused to believe I had purchased one in that section. After I refused, he reported me to security and they escorted me out because I was disrupting the game. I responded to the boos and the trash throwing with the statement that I knew UCLA fans would never treat guests this disrespectfully a the Rose Bowl. A truly disappointing experience.
That's easy. Because UCLA is located in Los Angeles...
Ever heard those lovely “Beat LA” or “LA Sucks” at any sporting event you watch on TV. Well, the Bay Area has that chip on its shoulder in spades. They don’t just dislike LA, the hate, loathe, detest Los Angeles with an irrational passion. Who knows exactly why. When I first moved here, I had a neutral feeling about the area and its teams. After years of having to hear how I suck because I’m from LA, I’m now a passionate fan of Bay Area teams failing. It’s really pathetic that they are so crazy in their hatred, but you really have to be here for awhile to truly understand it.
Disagree entirely
I’m a Bruin and I’m from the Bay Area. I’m a huge Bay Area homer too. I think it’s the best part of California, best part of the United States, and one of the top 5 best places in the world.
And I think L.A. is great too. Not just because I’m a Bruin, but because I think L.A. is a fun place to visit (although I doubt I could live there because the whole traffic thing does piss me off…it pisses me off here in the Bay Area too, but not as much since I can take BART).
I’m a huge A’s fan. So I hate the Angels. Not because they’re from Anaheim (BTW, that whole Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim name is soooooo lame), but because they’re our division rival. And they have that stupid damn monkey.
That said, being an A’s fan, I also hate on the Giants, despite them being a Bay Area team. Which in turn means I kind of like the Dodgers (except for that bastard Gibson and his lucky gimp homer in 1988).
I don’t think it’s so black-and-white and having grown up in the Bay Area, I personally know a lot of NorCal people who moved to L.A., who visit L.A., or who otherwise think L.A. is a cool place. I even know a lot of NorCal-SoCal couples, so obviously those people don’t mind.
Moreover, I don’t think this rivalry really existed until relatively recently (as in didn’t exist until 1960), and I think a lot of it stems from the Giants and Dodgers. In my mind, the NorCal-SoCal rivalry is one that has been built on the foundation of an imported New York rivalry: the ol’ Polo Grounds New York Giants and the Brooklyn Dodgers. Bear in mind, those two teams were part of the three-way heated rivalry in New York for a very long period of time, and both teams came out to California around the same time. Naturally, the rivalry stuck.
In terms of why San Francisco fans have a chip on their shoulders, I think a bit of it has to do with the Giants and Dodgers. In New York, the Giants won five World Series titles, the last coming in 1954. At that point, the Dodgers hadn’t one a single one. In New York, there were the Yankees and the Giants. The Dodgers, playing in Brooklyn, were kind of an afterthought. That changed in 1955 when the Dodgers, led by everyone’s favorite Bruin, Jackie Robinson, beat the Yankees in a seven game World Series.
Since the Dodgers won their first World Series, the Giants haven’t reached the promised land again (and with Philadelphia looming, they’re not going to make it this year either). On the other hand, after the Dodgers moved to L.A., they ran off another three titles in their first decade in the City of Angels. San Francisco is still waiting for one (a fact that I, as an Oakland fan take much glee in). So, for older Bay Area (Giants) fans, as well as the collective memory of the Bay Area, the Giants have always been second fiddle and, truth be told, jealously breeds contempt. On that point, I’d be willing to bet that people who identify as A’s fans probably have a more relaxed attitude toward L.A. than people who are Giants fans.
Look at other sports: Bay Area fans aren’t exactly raging when it comes to the L.A. Rams. Why would they care? We had Joe Montana-to-Jerry Rice. The Niners were the greatest team around, so I don’t think the NorCal-SoCal thing played out at all in the NFL (the Raiders are a totally different story since a lot of Bay Area Raiders fans were justifiably pissed when Al Davis gave them the finger and relocated the team; and I’m sure L.A. Raiders fans were pissed when Al did it to them).
Likewise, I don’t think Warriors fans hate on the Lakers. In fact, I’m a Warriors fans and my second-favorite team is the Lakers (maybe because I’m also a California homer). I do hate the Clippers, but only because they’re challenging the Warriors for the title of most laughable NBA franchise.
Then there’s the Cal fans. I don’t group Stanford fans, because I think for the most part, they don’t really care or hate on the L.A. schools. I think they do hate on U$C, but only for the same reasons we also hate on them: it’s a school of cheating, fake assholes. Can’t really fault the folks at the Farm for hating on Second Choice. Back to the point: Cal fans do hate on UCLA. A lot. But I think that’s to be expected for a UC rivalry like ours. It really is a unique rivalry because no other public university has something like it. It’s not like Longhorn fans give a shit about UTEP fans. But Cal and UCLA are pretty much equals in academics. Both are world-renowned schools. Cal does some stuff better than UCLA. UCLA does some stuff better than Cal. No parent in California is going to be pissed that their kid is going to UCLA over Cal, or Cal over UCLA. I’d be stoked if my future kids get into either, since both are a world-class education for (well, what used to be) public university tuition (although that being said, if my future kid got into Harvard, well sorry UC, but it’s Harvard).
I think of the UCLA-Cal thing as a sibling rivalry, not a NorCal-SoCal thing. If Cal was in San Diego or Sacramento or Fresno, I don’t think anything would be different. Okay, we wouldn’t make fun of Berzerkley or Dumpster Muffin, but in terms of the rivalry, it’d be the same, I think. What bothers me is that UCLA fans associate asshole Cal fans (and there is a segment of Cal fans who have some kind of weird hate-obsession with UCLA) with all Bay Area fans. That’s not fair, especially to die-hard Bruins like myself and Patroclus, who are both Bay Area folks.
The NorCal-SoCal thing has been built out of a lot of stupid, short-sighted stereotypes (L.A. folks are all lazy surfer types who waste “our” water; Bay Area folks are all crunchy granola hippies or arrogant NorthFace-wearing yuppie dicks). Yes, San Francisco has a chip on its shoulder because of the Giants-Dodgers thing. But, in my opinion, that doesn’t translate into some “irrational” hatred of all things L.A. by all NorCal people like a lot of L.A. folks here like to complain about. A lot of the rivalry has been built on that foundation, but it’s a stupid rivalry without any real thought. As a Bay Area Bruin, I’m tired of coming here and seeing uninformed folks bitch and complain about how the Bay Area hates on L.A. In case you didn’t realize, bitching about them bitching about you, is no different than bitching about them in the first place.
The NorCal-SoCal thing has been blown out of proportion. I think there are some things we all agree on, such as how Fresno is kind of weird, our Legislature is full of morons, Yosemite is pretty nice, we’re the best state in the Union (that’s right Texas), and that we need to find better public transportation solutions because this traffic sucks. A lot.
And P.S. to San Francisco folks: stop complaining about the damn water thing. You guys have no room to gripe since you steal yours from the Hetch Hetchy in Yosemite. And it’s not like S.F. is Delta country, so seriously, stop.
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Very similar to Giants-Dodgers
I grew up in soCal and lived in the Bay Area, as well. Talked to some guy in a bar in Mtn. View during a Giants-Dodger game on TV. He said “I hate LA”. I asked if he had ever been there. He said “no, I hate it”. Not exactly a rational thought process, but very emotional.
by BruinFanGA on Oct 11, 2010 10:56 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
we have a office in Sac & Frisco
and whenever I’m up there the folks love to hate on me cause I’m a angelino. they hate the lakers-UCLA-usc-dodgers-angels you name anything so cal and they hate it!
besides the 49ers what else does Nor cal have in the way of major championships? nothing comes to mind. The fans at the game were pretty nice to us though. maybe they feel sorry for Bruin fans?
"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's" - John Wooden.
Here's a list off the top of my head
Oakland A’s: 1972, 1973, 1974, 1989
Oakland Raiders: 1976, 1980 (1983 doesn’t count for NorCal since that was in L.A.)
San Francisco 49ers: 1981, 1984, 1988, 1989, 1994
Golden State Warriors: 1975
The Kings have been decent (but always fell short to the Lakers), the Sharks are a perennial playoff team (that can also never get it done all the way), and the Giants are mediocre most of the time, but decent some of the time.
Don’t forget that Stanford also has 99 NCAA titles (second only to UCLA) and has won the Director’s Cup every year since 1994. Every, single, freakin’ year (P.S. Guererro, let’s get on that, since we’re constantly in second or third for it).
Given how many sports we have
Second or third is a pretty good accomplishment. If we want to seriously compete for that particular award, we need to field more teams.
Answer from an "older guy"
I grew up in LA, though I have been away for years I have always puzzled about the SF vs SoCal vitriol. At UCLA we thought it was great to go up to Frisco (had to say it) . After college we still enjoyed a weekend by the bay. Yet Friscans seemed to bash everything about Southern Californian. I have never understood the one way hatred but it’s the same outside the realm of college football as it is in.
by bigislandbruin on Oct 11, 2010 8:25 PM PDT up reply actions
My son is a Cal grad
and he was also on Rally Comm (their spirit club – the guys with the blue and gold bumblebee striped shirts) during his last couple of years there. The whining I heard at the time was as follows:
1) You stole our fight song;
2) You stole our colors;
3) You stole our mascot.
I miss Terry Donohue!
At least he took us to Bowl Games (and won them).
this is the fruit of donahue
Its the athletic department thinking competing in the conference is good enough, not reaching for the heights.
Every hire since Donahue left has either been a coach, a player, or both for Donahue.
His rotting coaching tree needs to be uprooted from the Morgan Center and the inbreeding needs to end.
by silverlakebruin on Oct 11, 2010 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions
Price and Owa to have MRIs today
Seems doubtful to me Price would even play after watching his knee injury in the pile-up for the fumbled ball at Cal. Be careful what you wish for in having him benched…………we are pretty lean at that position. I sure hope Owa can play……he has been such a bright spot on D in the last 2 games.
Damn Ball Warriors needed,
as in “hold on to the,” “catch the,” and “needs to get the.”
As for coaching and accountability, it seems that the same MGS (My-Guy Syndrome) that infected our BB team last season has now taken root in our FB team.
Totally agree!
You hit the nail on the head on all of your points. I could not agree more with you on firing Chuck Bullough. It seems like every week were talking about how his soft nickel defense getting shredded. Its like you mentioned CRN is already a great offensive mind so why not let him take the offense over and get us a real DC. I think if CRN cant see that change must be made within his staff, then I personally think he should be let go.
We're still waiting . . .
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
As with many others . . .
I’m blown away by the ups and downs we’ve experienced with our team over the years. When we had CTS in charge, it was to a large extent expected because he was learning his trade as he went along. With CRN . . . Well that just isn’t going to fly.
I agree with much of what many of you (especially Bellerphon) have said. We have to take some pretty drastic measures. I don’t think it is ‘unreasonable’ to expect a consistent product on the field. BUT I do think that letting Norm Chow go might be to much. Given his track record, I believe he gets much more benefit of the doubt than anybody, including CRN. I believe CRN’s recent home runs in the recruiting game have more to do with CNC’s presence on the staff than his eternally optimistic outlook.
As long as we are advancing some daring theories on how to fix this mess, I propose; Let CRN go. Right after you fire Chuck Bullough of course. Use CRN’s salary to hire a DC, and promote CNC to Head Coach. With his history in the game, Norm has to know good guys to hire that can get the job done: DC’s, Recievers coaches, etc.
Better yet, promote Palcic. He is the one bright spot on this staff.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Norm Chow to head coach?
ROFLMAO, he can barely execute a competent offense as is and you want to make him head coach.
RESCUING DANCE MUSIC FROM THE BLAHS
Chow
Is on his last two years in college football (most likely)…he is not the key for another rebuilding. We need to give Neuheisel and Chow two more years, Bullough until the end of the year, and Moore until the end of the year. Palcic, Lea, Hundley, and Howard are pretty much Neuheisel’s guys at this point…so their futures at UCLA are all tied together as far as I’m concerned. I’m trying real hard to be patient with this team, but it’s running thin. I’m just hoping for tangible improvement in our STYLE of play and EFFORT on the field. We’ll see how the rest of the season goes.
Smelling a T-shirt selling Bonanza Opportunity
Hey MexiB: Contact cafepress.com and print up about a thousand of these on blue t-shirts, but have the red go to Gold, instead. I’m down for 4 of ’em right now!
And, respectfully, I agree with the posters above who spoke up for Terry Donahue. Lots of folks label those years mediocre – focusing on the games he didn’t win or in some cases found a way to lose. However, take out Donahue and what is the UCLA football history of Winning? Red Sanders? 95% of the posters here (myself included) were not on the planet when Red left it. Prothro didn’t stay long enough, neither did Rodgers or Vermeil. For what its worth, considering the last 7 years, I’d be very happy with competing for the Pac-10 title, ‘cause it sure hasn’t happened for real since Toledo’s second last year (‘01) – yeah I’m discounting Karl D’s improbable 2005 run. Every time I think about that hear I keep seeing the number “66” for some reason. : (
The Mad Bruin
by lostnacfgop on Oct 11, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Couldn't agree more with this entire post
But I have the sickening feeling that none of it will happen (maybe the exception of Reggie Moore going).
Mostly agree
I don’t agree in pushing Howard out because he’s done an admirable job with what he has had to work with IMO. He’s had many challenges with this unit during his time here. We’re starting a guy that would be a backup at a top progam (Carter) and a guy who has been a gypsy of sorts (Chandler). Our backups are a True FR and a guy isn’t Pac 10 material. Bullough and Moore are coaches who obviously need to go but Howard is a keeper IMO.
Someone please explain to me why our passing game runs plays from Tecmo Bowl instead of Madden? Considering we have 2 of the better offensive minds in football, I just don’t understand the lack of variety & creativity in our playcalling. I understand that our OL has issues sustaining its blocks in the passing game but to me, I don’t think that’s the whole story. In the video of CRN speaking with the media after the game, CRN mentioned how you can’t dig a hole when you’re playing a “field position game”. Is this him/CNC being conservative or do they really have zero confidence in our passing game? I can’t get my head around this considering KP seemed to be improving in the 2nd half of last season (don’t understand his regressions either) and the WR position having so much talent (minus the drops).
Would like your opinion on this
You’ve been around BN for a while and you usually have a pretty good take on the program, so since you mentioned Howard, I’d like your take on it.
Above this post, I replied to silverlakebruin with:
I’m not looking to fire Howard immediately, but I wouldn’t be opposed to showing him the door with Bullough. It’s not just because Dorrell hired him. It’s because, like Bullough, he’s a Dewayne Walker guy and, unless he came out and said he has an entirely different defensive philosophy (which I doubt is true, or why would Walker bring him on his staff if they weren’t on the same page), then we need to cut out the Walker folks and banish the soft-ass weak-coverage prevent defense crap. Walker, like Bullough, got lucky every so often, but more often than not, we’d get burned and exposed.
On Howard, we’re going to have to agree to disagree because I simply don’t believe he had “done well with great players” or has “a pretty strong track record” when it comes to our DL. As I’ve said, from my observations, our defensive linemen have not developed under Howard. Their technique in shedding blocks has not qualitatively improved. As for our defensive ends, I have not seen any development in their ability to utilize basic moves (such as the swim move) than what they came into the program with. Our defensive linemen, like our WRs, seem to be a pretty much known quanity once they get to UCLA. When they leave, they were more or less what they were when they arrived. Yes, they’re bigger and stronger, but that’s not because of Howard, that’s because of their work in the weight room and the fact they are still growing young men. In terms of “coaching up” the talent, Howard, IMHO, has been deficient. Our defensive line has looked good only because Howard was lucky enough to have elite talent (Brian Price, Brigham Harwell, Bruce Davis) coming into the program that got pressure on the QB and made it look like he was doing his job. Can you point out which defensive linemen came into the program and got better (in terms of technique or ability not attributable to weight or strength gain) under Howard? As for Korey Bosworth, I’m sure he’s a great guy, good kid and all that, but I don’t think his technique was that good, his stats were mediocre, and I’d say 95% of his success was due to the defense having to key in on stopping Brian Price, Datone Jones, and Akeem Ayers. Howard is an okay coach, but okay isn’t going to cut it in this program anymore. I think it says a lot that despite bringing in numerous defensive linemen over the past 5+ seasons (David Carter, Reginald Stokes, Jeff Miller, Dylan Rush, Andy Keane, Darius Savage, Justin Edison, Brian Price, Datone Jones, Damien Holmes, Iuta Tepa, Keenan Graham, Owa O., Sealii Epenesa, Cassius Marsh, Rykeem Yates, Derrick Bryant, and Wesley Flowers) we’re having to start a converted TE at DT. Of all those guys we brought in, exactly 1 has left early for the NFL. A converted TE at starting DT should say a lot, especially when you look at how guys like Stokes, Keane, and Edison, who were ranked higher than Bosworth out of HS, who were certainly considered better defensive lineman than Nate Chandler, a freakin’ TE, have not developed into reliable players for UCLA under Howard.
What do you think?
OL, QB then DL
These are the areas that we’ve had the most challenges for various reasons in that order. I’m not comparing Howard’s situation to Palcic (It’s not even close) but he has had to make do with limited resources. I personally view the DL like the OL in that it’s difficult to determine who will ultimately be players. Thus, I’m not surprised that a high number of the guys you listed have not panned out. You have to factor in the level of talent we were bringing in (not very good; Chinny was a gift to the Shaw IMO) and whether they truly were fit to play on the DL (Keane, Rush, Savage, etc). Lastly, healthy programs don’t play FR guys on both lines unless absolutely necessary or the kid is just out of this world. Even with the recruiting successes under CRN, we still haven’t reached that level yet. Just this fact alone, has caused havoc and is a tremendous disadvantage.
Going into more detail, Howard came into the program in 2006 where he inherited a pretty stable starting DL in Hickman (SR), Harwell (JR), Bear (JR) and a yet to have emerged Davis (JR). I neither give nor take credit away from Howard for Hickman’s success since he was well established. However, you have to give Howard credit for the development of Bruce Davis. I don’t agree that Davis was an elite talent. The guy was your classic tweener whom the staff had no idea what to do with. But, they took the one thing Davis was good at and turned him into all conference DE and a current pro. He reminded me of the undersized VTech DE, Corey Moore who was all of 6 feet but was a terror off the edge utilizing his speed.
The guys behind them were Blake, Dragovic, Lombard, Ward, Jerzy, Rush, Carter, Savage, Keane, Stokes, Moline, etc. who were predominately FR/Soph’s. The only guy that was highly touted was Savage (4 star) but he just got to campus. I’m not married to star ratings but they do count. I had high hopes for Savage (Had visions of Big Daddy Wilkinson) and Rush (thought his wrestling background was going to help him with the pass rush) but for various reasons (position moves & transfers) they never panned out. I had high hopes for Jerzy too but I can’t argue with what he provided. As for the other guys, they were a mixture of CTS settling for players instead of going after the best, undersized projects, legacy rides, etc. I’m ranting now but my point is that after the starters, we had a few guys with potential but the majority of the guys were question marks/projects. I think he did what he could considering guys like Ward, Stokes and Carter became solid contributors although not stars.
In 2007, we got BP and Edison. We all knew that BP had NFL written all over him but you have to give Howard credit for developing him for the NFL in essentially 2 1/2 years since BP couldn’t initially play due to eligibility issues. As for Edison, he was a gamble that hasn’t panned out. Moving to 2008, we brought in Datone and Holmes. Before Datone got hurt, we were looking at an all Pac 10 performer. Like BP, Datone didn’t have the luxury of a RS. I am disappointed in Holmes thus far but you can’t win them all. In 2009, we brought in Tepa and Graham. I think you have to agree that to date, you are satisfied with their development and have high hopes for them, especially Graham.
As I stated before, we still aren’t healthy at this position yet. Our most talented guys have zero or limited experience. It’s still going to take 2 more years because the guys that aren’t UCLA level players have yet to finish their careers and the more talented guys are mostly underclassmen. I don’t think Howard is the best out there but I do believe that he has earned his keep to date.
Not trying to overdo it but just to show you how difficult it is to predict the DL position, look at the guys suc has brought in. I’m going back to 2004 to show what their DL coach had to work with.
2004: Germany, Schweiger, Miles
2005: Ashley, Moore, Spicer
2006: Parsons, Simmons,
2007: Tupou, Harris, Griffen, Reardon
2008: Perry, Casey, Jackson, Armstead, Horton
Except for Jackson and Horton, every single one of these guys were 4/5 star guys. Even with the insane amount of talent that suc brought in on their DL, you can see that most of them except for Griffin and the 2008 guys (too early) failed to live up to their press clippings.
I know you’re frustrated just like I am. I sat in Memorial Stadium getting ragged on and I was beyond pissed. I was going to get on BN and go nuclear. I have other thoughts but it’s still driven by emotion so I’m holding off. Just don’t think Howard should be your target.
Anthony Barr
if he’s healthy, i move him to LB immediately. I’ve felt he’s been wasted all year. His talent is worth so much more than some run blocking. I thought the F-Back was going to be a very dynamic position that would set UCLA apart from other Pistol offenses but it’s been no more than a FB/TE in the run game.
See point #2
On a side note (which I know N already knows), I’ve been advocating Barr to OLB since he committed.
It just makes too much logical sense not too put him there (unless they expect Bowens or Olaniyan to step up next year).
by Bellerophon on Oct 11, 2010 8:47 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Next Year
That wouldn’t make sense…specially since Chow has said the staff is thinking about this year. It’s pretty obvious that Barr could give us a boost on the D this year. Also, where is Fauria? we’ve got a 6’8 TE who from all accounts can catch the ball yet we keep going to the same TE who drops one or two balls a game at minimum
Fauria can't block
I have kept an eye on him every time he comes in. He get’s overwhelmed. Unfortunately Harkey can’t catch. Up to the coaches to teach these guys and build their confidence.
I disagree with a lot of the basic premises here
but as it will be a longish post I’ll fanpost separately.
which is now here
(but was somewhat preempted by N’s frontpage post on the OL…)
by britishbruin on Oct 11, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Lessons from Al Scates
When I was a student in 1988, I remember reading an article about Al Scates and why the UCLA Volleyball program was so successful. Scates stated (something to the effect of) he only recruited the type of guy who wouldn’t talk to their girlfriend for days if they lost a volleyball match. He was partially joking, but for the players who knew him, he wasn’t Bottom line – Scates did not tolerate players who are comfortable with losing. When I saw the QBs laughing on the sideline – that explained everything for me. You can go on about your 10-point plan to improve the program. But until we have a football coach like Al Scates (Harbaugh is a good example) we will continue to wait for the train.
I think Neuheisel can be that way
See point #6. Send the message to the team: losing is not acceptable and accepting a loss is not acceptable. Bench Prince and Brehaut. That will send a damn clear message.
If they don’t get it next year, that’s fine. They can hold a clipboard while Hundley runs the Bruin offense.
I hope you're right
But I’m not so hopeful. The time to send that message and establish that culture was in his FIRST season. If he didn’t have the courage to bench star players then when expectations were LOW, how is he going to have the courage to do it in his third season when expectations are higher.
Love CRN but..............
….. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark! I’m not a football guru just a life long UCLA fan that goes back to the serpentine huddle. Many posters have pointed out specific details and player deficiencies and how to correct them. Something bigger is happening.
We have recruit more talent in the last 3 years than all of CTS’s years combined. The question is what have we done with that talent? Is our OL so bad that we can’t complete a forward pass more than 15 yards down the field? Are we so talent starved that we haven’t had a passing attack for almost 3 years. This year is the first time in 3 years that we have managed to run the ball with any consistancy, Cal game being an exception.
What I sense is that we have a disconnect between CRN and CNC. We were all elated when Rick brought in Norm and even more so when we kept him from going to U$C. But in reality what has CNC done for us in the way of establishing an offense? He finally brought some innovation in the form of the pistol which has shown promise this year. But for all it’s worth we are still a crappy football team with a QB, receiving corp and running backs that collectivly are a joke.
Defensively we spot our opponents a TD or two before the game begins and then play catchup which we usually are not capable of. One thing we don’t have to worry about is players leaving early for the NFL because they are not NFL caliber.
I think it is time for CRN to clean house and be allowed to hire all new coaches of his choosing. I don’t want Morgan Center telling him he needs to keep this coach or that coach because a recruit might leave if the asst. is fired. I don’t want people telling him to hire a coach just because U$C is thinking about hiring him. I want CRN to hire his guys and hold them accountable. If they can’t get the job done… fire their ass just like in the business world! You can’t produce then it’s time to dust off your resume!
If it takes money then I’m willing to throw some money into the hat and I’m sure there are others that will contribute in a manner that abides by NCAA rules. If we are to start a T-Shirt selling campaign, then I want the money to go to a fund to hire decent coaches.
Donahue-esque Would Be A Compliment
Right now, I would given anything for the Bruins to have as good a program as they had under Terry Donahue. Going to the Rose Bowl used to be a realistic goal under Donahue; right now it seems like a pipe dream.
Rich Ramus
i agree completely
After the game on Saturday against Cal (THAT DEBACLE), the only thought I had was “someone better get fired for this s**t”. And I stand by that. I really think our DC needs to go. That was such a pathetic attempt at play calling. We looked like little kids out there on the defensive end.
I think CRN has brought this program along, and I see improvement for sure…but at the same time, losses like the CAL + Stanford losses are just not okay. It’s one thing if it’s a close game, but both of those games were complete lopsided blowouts. That’s just not okay by any stretch of the imagination.
Where'd the bullets go?
In the Houston and Texas games two or three potential ball carriers were flying around. On TV it was not easy to see who actually got the ball or if the QB kept it. In the Cal game it looked like Ohio State in the olden days. Prince just handed the ball to one RB, no confusion, no sleight of hand. Perhaps I don’t see the subtleties but can someon explain for me how this was the same offense?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
