Random Thoughts On the Last Few Days
by Class of 66 on Nov 27, 2010 10:58 AM PST
Email
PrintBumped (B) - Not everyone is sold on Chow (unlike "Bend and Break" Bullough), but Class of 66 chimes in with some good thoughts (and makes a good case for Chow) following a very tough weekend for Bruin fans everywhere. Fire away in the comment thread with your thoughts, and as always, GO BRUINS.
1. I miss Nestor. It's just not the same without him -- more an issue of tone than content. I miss his unique "voice".
2. That said, the front page guys have done an incredible job of keeping BN strong and vibrant. The "new" voices from our old voices continue to meet the high standard of fact based analysis. The posts on football and basketball have been been complete and incisive.
3. And, the comments in the game day threads have respected the standards set and enforced by Nestor. It seems that, in his honor, we are behaving better.
Now, for a bit of substance.
4. My Mantra for the Year -- has been that we are a young and inexperienced team. A few weeks ago, after we beat Oregon State, I said that we were young, but no longer "inexperienced" in the sense that we had played 10 weeks and our young 'uns were no longer dazzled by the bright lights. I expected more from them as the season wore on, and we are actually seeing sparks of development. Brehaut is clearly maturing and getting better. And, the young receivers, for the most part, are doing the same. Better routes, and a bit more reliable.
5. But, my new mantra is that, by necessity, we are playing too many players who are below 2 on our depth chart. Yesterday's Star News had a list of injured players who were not available. We had 13. ASU had 4. Of our 13, at least 9 would have been starters were they available.
Add to that that we "lost", because of disciplinary action we all applauded, 3 new players who, because of attrition, might have played.
We are playing high stakes poker with few face cards or Aces. Not easy hands to play.
6. I am a strong Norm Chow supporter -- have been all season. I do not want to go backwards and have that debate again, today. However, I cannot see how anyone can criticize his play calling, yesterday. Yet, some do -- knee jerk lumping him in with Bullough as coaches who should be fired, soon.
As Brehaut has developed, the game plan has expanded. We threw 56 passes, often on first down. We ran trick plays -- flea flicker, end around. We converted 8-19 3rd downs, one of our best efforts to date.
We won the meaningless battle of time of possession by 5 minutes.
Bottom line: we scored 34 points and gained 442 yards -- which should be more than enough to win any game in which we play defense.
This loss was not on Chow, in any way.
7. And, as I noted in the thread -- many of the limitations placed on our offensive scheme are limitations imposed by the offensive line. Yet, we correctly honor Palcic for squeezing every ounce or performance out of that line. How can we honor Palcic, whose line is a problem, and then condemn Chow who has to try to scheme around its failures?
8. The Much Criticized Run Into the Middle on 4th and Goal: Although easily defended (if you cannot make a yard in that situation you don't deserve to score) the truth is: The play was not supposed to be a run up the middle. It was supposed to be a leap over the pile in the middle, and that is why we used Franklin not Coleman.
In this mornings Star News, it's reported that CRN told Franklin, before the play, to leap over the pile. Franklin, instead, ran into it.
9. I watched the BSU v. Nevada game last night to get a better sense of what a well loaded Pistol can do. With the right talent, it is an extremely effective offense. BSU has a stout D -- and, once Nevada got rolling, the pistol was very hard to stop. What is the difference between how they run it and how we do? Surprisingly, it's not the number of plays they run out of it. It's the execution of those plays. First, their O line works on both run and pass plays. We will get there. Second, they have the perfect QB for the system -- one whose "deception" really works, and who can both throw and run. I think we are weakest on the decision making, deception ends. But, Brehaut is getting better -- on all fronts. I think our running backs either match or are better than theirs. Theirs have the benefit of better deception and a stronger O line. We will get there. And, their receivers run good routes and catch the ball -- consistently. Last night, I got a good education as to what we can be -- and I saw an incredible game.
10. There is not much to say about our D that has not been said all season. There really is no reason to repeat it here. Bullough was a bad hire -- from the Walker tree -- and the acorn does not fall far from the tree. My sense was that Bullough was hired in an attempt to keep/appease the D recruits Walker had attracted before leaving. Many of us were unhappy with the hire, BUT took the position that "If CRN wants him, we want him". He is totally CRN's responsibility and CRN must deal with him, soon.
11. Our two most talented units have underperformed all year. Before the season most of us felt that the two most talented units on this team were the receivers and D backs. Neither have performed up to expectations. Yesterday, the receivers looked a bit better -- but were still sufficiently inconsistent that I wonder if Moore should not be replaced, soon. Our D backs have not been good -- but out of fairness to them, it is hard to cover for a long time, and our lack of penetration and pressure on the QB has given every QB and receiver more than enough time to succeed.
There is absolutely no reason to keep Bullough. None whatsoever.
Yesterday was as ugly as it can get. I want to beat the trogans and they are very beatable -- if Chow keeps his foot on the throttle, Brehaut continues to grow into the role AND someone else coordinates the defense for our rivalry game.
We will score on sc. But, we cannot beat them if we play D the way we've played all season.
I, for one, will be there. I want to be there to stand and cheer as we reclaim the city.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
87 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I hate to admit
I only caught bits and pieces of our game. I was far more captivated by the Iron Bowl. Therefore, I can add little with regards to our performance.
I will say that I watched the Boise State upset, and agree with your thoughts on Nevada’s Pistol. Watching them execute is truly inspiring. I don’t understand why some are calling for us to ditch the Pistol. Not only does it make no sense schematically, it would be a PR disaster. I think it’s time to double down on the pistol and make sure we get it right.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
I agree with you that Chow seemed to call a good game yesterday
there was more misdirection, Brehaut was looking off his first target and the first down throws used more imagination than usual. However what you put in bold about Franklin being used instead of Coleman, still makes little sense to me. I truly believe that Coleman gives us a better chance at getting a yard or two whether leaping or driving forward. Maybe my memory fails me, but I don’t recall Franklin showing some leaping prowess in other games. I’d take my chances with the bigger DC everytime in that situation.
I trust The coaches to
Know which player leaps best
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 27, 2010 12:17 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Hard to believe that this team was 3-2 at one point.
But when you have to change out major position players due to injury and behavior issues, consistency will always be a problem. Overall, I thought the offense looked good and showed signs of improvement on where we want to be headed. If you had told me a month ago that we would have an effective passing game and get a number of passing touchdowns, I wouldn’t have believed you. Rosario and Embree, whose play so far has been rightly criticized here, were getting aggressive for balls and keeping drives alive.
But that defense….wow. Hard to watch. I’m glad that Rahim Moore will be back next year. I wouldn’t want to end my college career with a defensive performance like that. You all can tell me how bad our defensive schemes were yesterday, what stood out to me was the inability to tackle and make the play. Hopefully Ayers will not want to end his incredible career with games like this at the end.
Big game coming up.
Thanks
I appreciate your logical, fact-based, and most importantly unemotional and positive analysis of yeaterdays destruction in the desert. Nestor has set the bar quite high and so far everyone has followed suit. 66 to me you are spot on and congratulations for being so insightful. Keep it up.
The BN Voice
As an update on N, his transition out of BN was being planned behind the scenes for the last few months as other priorities for him began to take precedence. All is going very well with him, though I am confident that he is just as miserable after yesterday as anyone else here.
As much as N was our leader here, and his spirit and legacy always will be, the Voice of BN has always been that of a passionate and intelligent fan base who is justifiably proud of our University and is always supporting UCLA Athletics.
Though we have our own opinions on which directions our programs might follow, the bottom line is that we all want to see UCLA succeed. And with that, the Bruins Nation Voice should remain loud and strong and carry on what N has led since the beginning here.
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
by gbruin on Nov 27, 2010 2:06 PM PST reply actions 5 recs
RE Franlklin and Goal Line
That is an amazing bit of news. To hear that he disobeyed the HC is really bad. Really bad.
Leaping over the line would have done it, but I don’t think it would have won the game. I am not a fB expert, so I don’t know what should be done except bring in new coaches assisting. 3 years later, and this, is a sad state of affairs.
Probably he didn't "disobey" exactly
as much as he used his own judgement and made a snap decision that he could run it. But that’s why coaches give instructions.
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
+1 Instinct Took Over
Can’t fault him for making an instinctual decision — he must have thought he saw a hole.
Things like this happen.
I only mentioned it because during the thread I wondered why we had not used Coleman and others joined in.
sjh
I wondered the same
I was there on the sidelines and I heard CRN yell to Franklin as he was coming off the field about what the play was SUPPOSED to be. Your report is 100% correct – he was supposed to go over the top and for whatever reason he didn’t. I wouldn’t call it “disobeying” either – he must have seen something that closed up in a hurry!
"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel
I also thought ball crossed the plane.
Replay off said no.
We need to grow up and build a new winning swagger ...
What has happened to Ucla football? I’m a Bruin and frankly it’s hard to support what’s going on in this football sport. I’m not asking for CRN’s head nor Chow’s ( which have been suggested by others). I believe we need to focus on getting these two coaches to forget their “ego’s” they came with and focus on training the folks they have recruited and focus on the needs we must secure now (example: .two QB’s with 6’5’’, speed, strong arm, positive attitude, swagger) and train them to play NOW…..most of the leading top25 teams do that in addition, including the Pac10/12.
I agree re QB.
We have THE best QB in the nation right here. He CAN recruit a good one. Maybe Hundley is it.
One play doesnt lose a game
Everyone’s talking about the failed series on the goalline, but there’s plenty of blame to go around. Everyone talks about that boise kicker who missed a game-winner from about 30 yards out, but that boise team choked up a 24-7 lead and rushed for something like 10 yards in the 2nd half (I think?)….players screw up all the time but I’m more concerned with the fact that we blew a 17-0 lead where we looked great, due to defensive breakdowns and poor tackling. you are not going to hit every chip shot FG and its unfortunate that he missed one at the point in the game when he did, but that’s life – very few kickers go 100%, and you aren’t going to get a 100% success rate on every single play.
IMO the 4th down call was a fine one – that’s a very high percentage play to gain 1 yard, that play has the odds in your favor. If we had run PA or a bootleg for a 3 yard loss or an incomplete pass everyone would be hating on the call as well – the correct call is always the one that works. you win some, you lose some, but I like that call with a team that has been working in a new offense and that has not consistently been able to pass the ball this season.
Depth as an excuse – I don’t put too much into that. Yeah, talent-wise, we arent where we thought we’d be. but we shouldn’t be playing like we are. They are playing football for UCLA at the D-I level and many of them have been playing for years before this – I can understand if they make mental mistakes, such as being out of position or blocking the wrong guy because they haven’t gotten the reps in practice. But if you are in the hole with the RB and you miss the tackle time and time again, I don’t care if you are the 2nd string guy – you are always one play away from being the starter so you’d better be ready. And that is also up to the coaches to make sure that they have backups ready to go – injuries hit all teams, and they are a part of the game, but good teams are able to make the most of a bad situation.
Nevada-boise game – I agree, great game to watch. IMO we look more like nevada than we did at the beginning of the season – a bit more fleshed out, showing a few more wrinkles. I think more will come with time. most coaches take years to really learn a new offense inside and out, I wasn’t expecting us to be putting up huge numbers right off the bat. However one thing I would like to see us do is stick with the run. Nevada wasn’t doing much until the 2nd half, when they just wore boise down in the 4th quarter running the ball. I think we have given up running the ball way too early in many games this season, even when we were ahead – I didn’t like a few series in the first half when we went 3-and-out with incomplete passes – trying to be a bit too cute – if you want to be a running team, that should never happen. If you want to run an option offense then you need to be able to commit to the run 1st and stick with it.
+1 Great to hear your "voice" again!
by 281bruins on Nov 27, 2010 5:11 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Strong Post JT, but One Quibble
We are not playing second stringers. We’ve had to play our 4th string, walk on QB.
And, in many positions, we’ve played players who were projected at 3rd or 4th string in the spring. We’ve had to move people out of their "natural positions (positions they’ve played for a long time) to places where they’ve had no experience.
Yes, all teams lose players, but our attrition has been worse than most. As I mentioned, ASU had 4 injured players who would not be in the game. We had 13.
CRN started with an empty cupboard and has lost some of the cans he put on the shelf. The shelves are still a bit bare.
sjh
Cal just lost to UW.
No bowl for Cal. UW needs to beat WSU next week; ASU needs to beat UofA and get a waiver; Oregon State needs to beat Oregon or Stanford to go bowling.
Yikes.
So youth and inexperience exonerates CRN and Chow
but not Bullough? Okay whatever.
No one should be let off the hook for this mess. I could buy into the youth and inexperience excuse for our won-loss record if we were at least competitive each week, but 5 of our 7 losses have been blowouts. Our problems run much deeper than just youth and inexperience.
If canning Bullough is part of the equation of fixing this mess, then so be it. But no one on this staff should be feeling that their job is secure right now.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
Youth isn't the only thing that is costing Bullough
It’s also his terrible schemes, the fact our defensive players always look lost, and his failed defensive philosophy.
Personally, I'd get rid of Chow too...
…and use the money for an experienced DC who can get the job done and let Rick, an offensive guy, control the offensive side of the ball.
That being said, 66 does have a point in that while both Chow and Bullough haven’t gotten it done this season, Chow does have a long track record with success whereas Bullough hasn’t done anything worthwhile, and so far, has been nothing but ineffective.
Just out of curiosity
Does anyone know how much would the buyout in Chow’s new contract cost? I have to imagine he protected himself by including one.
Many people agree with you that Chow’s money should be spent on a good DC, but I don’t think it would be as simple as has been suggested. Plus, UCLA football does not exactly have a history of exercising buyouts.
Are these the wealthy and influential boosters that choose to keep CTS?
Or the ones currently underfunding the Pauley Renovation? I have my doubts.
Per 11/25 fishwrap
CNC’s contract extension “believed” to be $500,000/year for 2 years.
by 281bruins on Nov 27, 2010 6:11 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I very respectfully disagree on firing Chow in order
to free up money to hire a better DC.
Although expedient, I do not think it the “right” thing to do. We just extended his contract for two years — in part to keep him from going elsewhere and in part because we appeared to be pleased with the way he was doing his job.
I think we should honor our commitment to him. Our word, in the form of a contract, should mean something.
I agree with Sideout — there is absolutely no basis to believe that “wealthy alums” would buy Chow out.
I think it far more likely that wealthy alums, if approached correctly, would raise the money necessary to help hire a great DC — without taking a negative approach to Chow.
B., I know that the “recapture” argument is but a thread in a much more carefully woven cloth of reasons to get rid of Chow — and I don’t mean to simplify your case against him. However, the “recapture” argument has never gotten traction with me and I’ve finally decided to respond to it.
And, one more thing we’ve not discussed in evaluating Chow’s performance — he is one of our most effective recruiters of players at all positions and on both sides of the ball. The players and their families seem to like and respect him and I think that’s important.
If we are to get rid of him, let’s make the decision on his performance in all aspects of his job — not because we think we’ve made a bad purchase and want the money back to spend elsewhere.
As I’ve said all year, on the merits, I think he should stay. But, I understand that others disagree.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 27, 2010 10:47 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not going to rehash the whole argument
You know where I stand on Chow, my reasons for thinking it’d be smart to move on to another OC, someone young, and let Rick take the offensive reigns. No need for me to repeat that again.
In terms of “committing” to Chow because it’s the “right thing to do” and we have to “honor the contract.” Yes, that would be true in a lot of places, but employment contracts, both in college football and the outside world, usually have a buy-out clause. It’s not like UCLA and Chow entered into some simple contract to the effect of “you coach for us and we pay you X number of dollars.” I’m sure both parties have protected themselves in case one side wants to walk away early (either Chow deciding to hang it up or UCLA parting ways with Chow).
I cannot imagine there isn’t a buy-out clause in his contract. If UCLA decides to exercise that buy-out, we’re not doing the “wrong thing” and “screwing over the guy.” It doesn’t make UCLA the kind of party that “deals in bad faith.” UCLA entered into a contract and it’s exercising one of its legal options under that contract, which Chow agreed to, knowing such a buy-out was possible. No one is getting shafted of the bargained-for exchange.
It’s not like we’re “breaking our word” if CRN decides, after watching the tape, talking to Chow, etc. that he wants to go in another direction at OC. CRN’s job is to win football games and build a winning program. If the path to doing so means letting Chow go, that’s his job. That’s why I’m sure Chow protected himself with a buy-out clause.
I understand you want Chow to stay and that’s well and good, even though I disagree. But let’s base our reasons (either to keep him or get rid of him) on objective evidence and not subjective ideas of what is “right” and “wrong.”
I do agree that Chow is an effective recruiter in a certain segment: specifically, he has opened Hawaii up to us and we’ve landed some real solid recruits through him. That being said, for all the reasons I’ve discussed before, I still think it’s in the team’s best interest to move on, which I know you disagree with.
by Bellerophon on Nov 27, 2010 10:55 PM PST up reply actions
I have not seen his contract but
Usually, the buyout clause is in the contract to deter the employee from leaving. It says that if he leaves, he has to pay for the privilege of doing so.
Usually, there is no clause that allows the employer to “buy out” the employee. The employer simply terminates the employee AND, if the termination is not for cause or a specified part of the contract — the employer is on the hook for the unpaid compensation.
Coaches who get fired without cause, get paid. CTS got paid what was due on the remainder of his contract. He was not bought out.
So, if we fire Chow, or anyone else with a valid contract, without cause, we are on the hook to pay him.
And, that’s where the alums step in.
Because if we are already paying a coach, there will be no money for a new coach. The alums agree to pay the old coach.
BTW — IIRC — we foolishly extended the lizards contract and had to pay him, too. The alums stepped in to make sure the university had enough money to pay CBH.
Chow’s contract may be a matter of public record. I’d love to see it. I’d be surprised if there is a “buyout” clause that let’s us terminate him at will. The very fact that he has a two year contract usually means that he is not an “at will” employee.
B., I fully understand your position and tried, in the original part of this post, to honor it and make clear that it was more complex than simply firing him to recapture his salary.
But, I stand by my position in saying that I simply disagree with the righteousness of dumping him so that we can spend the money elsewhere.
And, I’m pretty sure I’m right, it would not be a transaction in which we gain money to spend. It will be one in which we lose money to spend and have to use some alum money, and good will to replace him.
Finally, I’m not sure there is sufficient support to dump him to rally the deep pocket guys to enable the move.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 27, 2010 11:09 PM PST up reply actions
I disagree about getting rid of Chow
for a few reasons. If we let him go sc would sign him the next day as OC. Why care? Because they look at him as a god and that might be just what the doctor ordered for them. Confidence is better than stars in my opinion.
That is to say that he would want to go there with all the proverbial shit hitting the fan for troy. I think he would go however. A couple of years above reproach there and then retires.
I think we keep him because he is as good an OC as anyone. He switched to the pistol without complaining too much. He’s open to new ideas. He displayed integrity by sticking with us before we turned on him this season. We all applauded this when it happened but now do not return the favor to him?
No, I think Chow gets another year or two. I can understand the frustration but I think the blame lies more with the entire team: Players, coaches, and all.
EGO TROIORUM MALLEUS SUM
by Bruins102NCAA on Nov 28, 2010 4:04 AM PST up reply actions
Firing Norm Chow is the last thing I would want to do now
I think letting Coach Chow go would be rash and very shortsighted. He came here as perhaps the best offensive coordinator and quarterback coach in the history of college football, and I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt.
And I think you have to be a little bit blind not to see the way the offense is starting to come around especially after a very productive offensive performance against a good Arizona St. defense. We just passed for 311 yards against a good defensive team. When was the last time we saw that at UCLA? Firing Norm Chow is the last thing I would consider doing at this time.
agree on keeping Chow
I gotta wonder the thinking at the time the extension was offered?
Why offer two years if there was any inkling of termination?
What has so dramatically changed since then?
Should we credit Chow with bringing Brehaut along?
Hasn’t Brehaut improved immensely since fall camp?
I just don’t see how everything can be dumped on Chow’s doorstep. There are just too many other factors out of his control. I just can’t reconcile how a coach with Chow’s resume can be the cause of all woes when we have the personnel problems we have. It’s kinda an Occam’s razor deal. What’s more obvious given the circumstances?
Also, if both Chow and Bullough are terminated, there will be substantial cumulative consequences. The new OC will have to learn Neuheisel’s offense and the defensive players will have to learn a brand new system. That seems a bit much to bite off, not to mention how the clean sweep will look to everyone outside the program, most importantly high schoolers.
I think we need stability on offense and begin anew on defense. I mean, in a way, I feel that if there is reason for CRN to fire Chow, then there is reason Neuheisel should fire himself.
Keeping Chow.....
“If we let him go sc would sign him the next day as OC. Why care? Because they look at him as a god and that might be just what the doctor ordered for them. Confidence is better than stars in my opinion.”
I think this thinking is what got us into the mess we are in! To keep Chow just to keep him from going across town is stupid. Everybody got so excited when we poached him for the Trogans. When we kept him from going across town and joining Lame, again everybody went crazy.
I think Chow had his day and deserves being in some Hall-of=Fame but we need to get past trying to one-up suc. We need the best OC that we can find and we need to let him do his thing. If that CNC fine if not..here’s the door!
I agree with you in principle
I do not think we hired or retained Chow to mess with sc. I think we took both actions because we believed in him and thought him the best man for the job.
Like many here — I really don’t care about sc and would not make any decision based upon its impact on them — it would not even enter the calculation.
The only decision I make that has sc in the matrix is who I root for on weekends when we are not playing them. I always root against sc.
But, I really don’t get any pleasure when they lose to another team. Or when they lose a player. Or get punished. Etc.
The only real pleasure I get is when we beat them.
And, until we do, in all sports, there will be no joy in my heart when sc is a part of a conversation.
sjh
What do you think?
Not at all meant as a smart-ass reply, but a true question. I’m trying to see it from a HS QB’s point of view. Chow’s put up some amazing numbers, and tutored some star QB’s – Heismans, etc. But…the last couple of years, Chow’s offenses have been less than impressive. You’re going to play for the Chow of 2011, not the Chow of 1981 or 1991. How do you see it? I’m not sure what I’d think. Anyone else want to chime in?
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Why is UW able to win out on the road?
And we cannot?
And their defense didn't make Cal's backup QB look like an All-American
by SuperBruinMan on Nov 27, 2010 8:46 PM PST up reply actions
Thank you 66
I’ve been away today, I needed to get some work done and was afraid I’d get pulled in to all the debate. But your analyses, in my view, is spot on. I do think Chow has adjusted to our new qb and they did do things yesterday they haven’t done before. The d is very talented, but seems to always be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I don’t think they have mental issues, I think they are doing what they are told to do. They seem like an incredibly intelligent group. On the other hand, the d line has really been hurt, which probably hurts the secondary as well. My main problem with Chow would come if it was he who kept insisting on playing KP with no practice with the receivers. I know there are still drops out there, but the passing (receiving game) is like night and day compared to what it was with Prince.
I just want to thank you for your sane analyses. I think the fact that we are playing so many 3’s and 4’s and guys we might have wanted to redshirt is big. The talent that has been lost for the season (Datone, Larimore, Thigpen, the whole o-line practically, Jefferson, and then the pre-season injuries to people like Josh Smith and Owa that got them off to a late start… oh yah, and Prince), well it’s been really rough. Thanks for reminding us.
Go Bruins!
OT...
Tommy Rees, brother of UCLA holder Danny Rees, led Notre Dame to a 20-16 win over *$c despite 4 turnovers
"The true athlete should have character, not be a character."- John Wooden
That's the little good news we needed.
It was fun pulling for Notre Dame in the fourth quarter.
A huge interception at the one yard for the Fighting Irish!
So hilarious
Both teams tried to lose. Irish DB falls down, SC wide receiver drops pass all alone on the ten yard line. Irish had a very impressive touchdown drive right up the middle of the trogan D.
A backup, freshman QB
Oh my gosh! I thought it wasn’t humanly possible to win with youth and inexperience! I guess it must be decent coaching.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
You don't seem to get it
You want to look at one player on an experienced team that starts upper class men playing in positions they’ve been playing all of their careers.
In those situations, it’s easy to absorb and cover for the inexperience of the odd man out.
We start very few experienced players — and are down to 3rd and 4th choices on our depth chart. We have players out of position.
The difference is clear — whether you want to see it or not.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 27, 2010 10:55 PM PST up reply actions
Look at Michael Floyd
Best WR on the field that night. Rees was the source of 4 turnovers if I am not mistaken. They won through solid D and the stop route to Floyd, USC’s defense is bad enough that Kelly could throw that scheme together and win the game
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 28, 2010 8:08 AM PST up reply actions
Keep rationalizing 66
I am sure that magical season where all the stars align is right around the corner.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
I'm with you
You make a good point about the difference it makes having experience around a new qb. I don’t think it’s about getting rid of Chow at all. I do, however wholeheartedly agree about Bullough. Rocky Long would be my choice at this point.
"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel
It was mainly the other players on the team
All of USC’s points came off of turnovers by Rees. He made some good plays, but so did Kevin Craft in his first year..
by SuperBruinMan on Nov 28, 2010 1:26 AM PST up reply actions
Thoughts on
the now former Miami HC Randy Shannon becoming the new UCLA defensive coordinator next season?
more interesting
is that the U is washing it’s hands of pretty much the entire staff…. following 9-4 and 7-5 seasons the last two years… good think rick et al are not in south florida these days.
Which begs the question
Is UCLA at fault for not holding its football program to a higher standard?
Shannon might be a decent DC get
He would be in the price range UCLA would be looking at, I bet. He’s not close to my first choice, but I wouldn’t be terribly upset if he was selected. He’s certainly an upgrade over Bullough, but then again – an animatronic monkey that shrieks would be an upgrade over Bullough at this point.
Is his D record good?
Why would he be a good choice?
Shannon was a good DC
During Shannon’s six years as UM’s defensive coordinator, his defenses ranked as follows in total defense nationally:
2001 – 6th
2002 – 7th
2003 – 2nd
2004 – 28th
2005 – 4th
2006 – 7th
He’s not a good HC, and as I said, I wouldn’t be thrilled with the hire, but he’s got a hell of a lot of evidence to show he is/was a very, very solid DC.
I'll be there...
next weekend, standing and cheering for you and all the other Alum who can’t be there.
Appreciate your voice helping to fill the void left by N.
I have sat on the sideline these past several months for a number of reasons. My voice will awaken and hopefully root on our Bruins to many future victories.
Another cost of attrition
I just dawned on me that one of the greatest costs of losing depth is that it destroys the “position competition” that most of us believe drives players in practice and helps bring about excellence.
That’s a hidden cost of what’s happened this year.
sjh
The team
With the FUSC game this week and the Bruins out of bowl contention and FUSC not able to go to a bowl how fired up are the guys going to be for this game?, Will they come out lifeless and flat and end the season being destroyed by there cross town rivals or will they have some fight in them?.
Forget Chow, Dump the Rickster
As my mamma once said, “who’s responsible for this mess?” Well it’s CRN. He’s the head coach and he is responsible for the nose dive our program is going into. If he is not directing the program toward the promised land, and I don’t think he is, we need to find someone who will. Honestly, I don’t see our football program going anywhere under the Rickster. He has run out of excuses and empty promises.
timeout on 4th and goal at the 1
just my 2 cents, but when you want to ram the ball down the opponent, don’t call a timeout to let the D regroup. RN does call alot of “I’m not certain” TOs. And the last game that JF jumped the line for a TD was?
In chicago it’s tough to side with the irish, but i dont have a quibble with them winning that ugly suc game last night for westwood recruiting, which might not suffer so bad if the blue and gold are emancipated from CB and allowed to play some D next wknd.
PS: thanks much for picking up the ball on this site, 66!
actually graduated in 85, the olympics and h.locklear were distracting...
Thanks
I contribute once in a while
I am in awe of the front pagers who post great stuff every day.
I write because I love UCLA and I love this community
And, they are the reason we have a place to post.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 28, 2010 10:19 AM PST up reply actions
We DID have the opp to end the LA Monopoly...
With $C on prob and no bowl. We have one more shot Sat night.
Stanford to BCS likely
They have the toughest admission requirements of the PAC 10, yet they managed to go 11-1
The big difference is 2 things that we are lacking: 1. Great QB. 2. Great coach..
Craziest part?
In 2006, Stanford went 1-11 under Walt Harris. Harris got canned and Harbaugh took over.
In 2007, Stanford went 4-8 under Harbaugh.
In 2008, Stanford went 5-7 under Harbaugh.
In 2009, Stanford went 8-5 under Harbaugh, played Oklahoma in the Sun Bowl and barely lost, 31-27.
And obviously, this year, they were one loss (which they led by a lot for a while) away from playing in the BCS title game.
Pretty damn impressive considering what we took over and where he’s taken them, despite the strict academic requirements of Stanford.
That 1st 4-8 2007 year
also included an incredible win at the trogans, knocking them out of the national title game.
We are still looking for our 1st win against a Pac10 opponent with a winning record.
That program has been on the upswing literally from day 1. Harbaugh is the real deal.
Rick has got one game + one season to prove that he is the real deal.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
Sticking with CNC for now
Good thoughts by all of the posters here. I am heading into the camp that believes that if CRN wanted to offer CNC an extension, and DG signed off on it, then the leadership (for now) our of beloved football program believes that this is the best next step. I think that 66 has done a nice job of positing good rationale for what happened this year that caused Norm to become the anti-Norm in a way. And we all believe that a DC change is the right next step. Changing coordinators on both sides of the ball now sounds really disruptive given that we had plenty of points, combined with decent defensive leadership, to win at ASU. The repeated failures of the defensive coaches to get the right guys in the right place at the right time has been on view the entire season. Let’s get that change (a new DC) done and done right first. Let’s give Brethaut and KP and Hundley some consistency for another season. And we will, of course, remain vigilant to the need for this entire staff to make a severe right turn to 7 – 8 wins in CRN’s year 4 at a minimum.
Hudley and Chow
I don’t think this has been mentioned here in all of the debate about Chow, but I wonder how big an impact Chow being at UCLA had on Hudley’s decision and how big an impact it would have on his signing if Chow was let go? We’ve discussed recruiting. But hanging on to Hundley should be a big part of any decision. I am in the camp that the offense can get better, and has, under Chow. But even if I weren’t, the Hundley issues would move me to the keep Chow side.
Go Bruins!
And on the other side of the ball,
my guess is losing CB does us no harm with current and future recruits.
Go Bruins!
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.
