Dancing In March: It's What Elite Programs Do
by Tydides on Dec 16, 2010 3:00 AM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintEarlier this year, in another season, we discussed expectations for the program as a whole. After a humbling loss to Arizona in Pauley that brought last season's Bruins to 6-8, we came to one conclusion as we stared into the void: For a program with the stature of UCLA, a losing season is an unmitigated disaster. Unfortunately for all of us, the rest of the season played out and that disaster is exactly what we got. For elite coaches at elite programs, even in down years, losing seasons are unheard of and are unacceptable.
Of note is the following:
However, what I am arguing is that if this season ends up being a losing one, there will be no excuse for it and should end up putting Howland under pressure to not only produce a 20+ win season and a tourney run next season, but he also needs to instill confidence that a losing season in 2009-10 was nothing short of an aberration.
So you see, the expectations of a tourney appearance this year aren't new, and no one should be surprised that this is what we are calling for in order to restore some faith in CBH's ability to get this ship back on course.
Now that we've endured the unacceptable losing season and have missed the tournament once, our sights have turned to what it means for this season and the expectations. Obviously another losing season is out of the question. That cannot happen. Not here. But what has become clear is that just as elite programs do not accept losing seasons, they also routinely make the NCAA tournament. Missing the dance in consecutive seasons spells disaster for coaches at elite schools, and makes it all the more important that CBH find a way to guide this team to a tournament berth.
Program comparison after the jump.
Obviously here at BN, we know that the tradition of our program is unrivaled, and our attitude and expectations must reflect that. We expect more because it is a privilege to play for and coach for the four letters. Here's a look at other storied programs and their postseason history regarding tournament appearances:
Duke
The last time Duke missed consecutive tournaments was 1980-83; Coach K's first three years as head coach. Since then, the Blue Devils have made the tournament every year but one (95). We don't know how they would handle a situation like the one we could have on our hands if this season goes south, because they haven't been in that position.
Indiana
In nearly three decades, Bob Knight never missed the tournament in consecutive seasons. His successor, Mike Davis, made it for his first three seasons and then missed the tournament twice. One season after that, he was gone. Since then, they've missed the tournament for the past two years, however those are Tom Crean's first two.
UConn
After his initial three seasons, Jim Calhoun never missed the tournament in consecutive seasons. They were in the NIT last season, but currently sitting at 8-0 with a win over Kentucky on a neutral court, they're looking to be in better shape than the Bruins as far as making the field this year.
Kentucky
Outside of their Trogan-esque period in the late 80s where they were under sanctions and a postseason ban, you have to go all the way back to when the NIT rivaled the NCAA tournament in importance to find an instance of Kentucky missing consecutive tournaments.
Michigan State
Tom Izzo missed the tournament his first two years at MSU in '96 and '97. Since then? Not once.
North Carolina
The Tar Heels missed the tournament in consecutive seasons in '72-74 under Dean Smith. That was the last time that happened until Matt Doherty did it in '01-03. Doherty was fired after that season. Roy Williams missed the tournament last year, and at 7-3 it's not a lock that they'll make it this year, but then again, Williams has a couple of championships and more importantly, is still recruiting very well. Also helps that they missed the tournament one year removed from a championship.
UCLA
Last consecutive missed tournaments was '84-86 under Walt Hazzard in his first two years. Before that? Coach. In 1961, before banner #1. It's also important to remember, if for no other reason than to rub it in the faces of Trogans, that in the 60's and up to 1975, only conference champions went to the NCAA tournament, leading to amusing anecdotes like:
In the 1971 season, USC was ranked #2 in the country with its only 2 losses coming against conference rival and #1 ranked UCLA, so USC could not go to the tournament.
Obviously that's not the same situation that we're dealing with today.
The point is that elite programs, especially in the modern era (since 1985 when the tournament went to 64 teams) are tournament regulars. When you combine the possibility of missing the tournament twice, with unfixed problems in recruiting, you begin to see the urgency of the situation. No one is trying to diminish what CBH has accomplished in his time here or all the Ben Ball Warriors who continue to make us proud at the next level. However, the storm clouds in the immediate future are gathering, and they are dark. At BN, we need assurances that there is a plan; a pathway to an endgame that gets us back to the euphoria we experienced only a few short years ago. Maintaining our status as an elite program by this simple metric would be a great start to get us to believe again.
It's not time to give up on this season. Not even close. This team has the talent and the coach to feast on a weak Pac 10. But the urgency is very real.
57 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
A minor note
The one year Duke missed the NCAAs, Coach K was only with the team for the first 12 games before taking a leave for back surgery and exhaustion.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Yes, we did
Was i happy we beat Cherokee Parks too. What a turncoat !
Another way of looking at it
Since the last Wooden championship in 1975—35 years (longer, probably, than most BN readers have been alive)—UCLA has won one championship.
During that time, Duke has won 4, UNC 4, Indiana 3, Kentucky 3. Florida, Uconn, Kansas, Louisville (under the guy who should have been UCLA’s coach), and Michigan State have 2 apiece.
That makes us one of 11 teams with 1 championship. We all thought the legend was back with those three Final Fours, and maybe CBH can recreate that and get us a title down the line. But to do so, he’s got to retain his players the way Duke, UNC, and Florida have, to create a mindset that they’re Bruins and not just future NBA stars.
In the meantime, we are indeed a legendary program—one whose best days only geezers like me, Fox, 66, and a few others can actually remember.
I still think we have a good shot of making this year's tourney.
What I would like to know is how everyone feels if we went to the NIT? While it is clearly not as important a goal as the NCAA tournament, it would be added playing/growing time for our youngsters.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
NIT?
Better than nothing for the players, as far as practice and semi-competitive games go…not good enough for the program. My two cents.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
My point exactly.
We should be above the NIT, but it still provides us the added game time and practices. Also, IIRC, UNC missed the tournament one year, played and won the NIT, then made the tournament the following year with a deep tourney run.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Which means last year should have been the NIT year
That’s what a “down” year means to me for this program.
+1
Last year was completely unacceptable and should be looked at as strike 1 against Coach Howland. However, he is still one of the very best coaches in the game and IMO is not truly on the “hot seat”. It’s right for fans to be upset, even verging on anger about last season, we’d better have Mike K or Tom Izzo lined up before we start talking about replacing CBH.
Ok
So say we do miss the tournament, it begs the question: Who do we hire? Frankly I’d advocate for Izzo, but I don’t know if he’d leave, or Pitino, or go straight to Jamie Dixon. Honestly though, it would be a hard shot to CBH if we hired his protege.
Also begs the question, would the administration fire him if he misses this season? Short answer: No. They would not. There will be the bastion of folks who say “3 final fours” which is a monumental accomplishment. I guess I’m officially on the fence. I think a lot depends on how well/poorly we play this year. If we’re a bubble team with some quality wins (BYU, AZ or UW) and a strong showing in the tourney and we get left out, I can’t really fault CBH very much. Some, but I don’t know if it’s enough to oust him. If we go 18-14, we’ll talk.
What pisses me off
is he was able to use his success at Pitt as a springboard to a brand new stadium.
Meanwhile, our team suddenly goes into one of its worst stretches in history right in the middle of our already maligned stadium renovation.
The snake bites continue.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Really Angry?
Are you really angry with how much CBH has done for this program? Are you really pissed off we went to 3 straight final fours and brought the UCLA program back to prominence, the whole reason we have high expectations for this program now?
People continue to shrug off the one and dones as things CBH should have seen when really that system is the difference between all of those programs and ours. UConn under Calhoun, Indiana under Knight, Duke under Coach K, NC under Roy Williams, and Michigan St. under Izzo had all been established before the one and done rule was created. That consistency is what this UCLA program under CBH has lacked. The one and done rule came during the infancy of our current program so there isn’t a history of kids staying under the CBH tenure as there is for the other programs. People are shrugging off that Roy Williams and Calhoun DID NOT make the tournament last year. When really a light should go off in peoples head and start to wonder why elite programs don’t have the consistency that they have had in the past. Now I’m not saying necessarily that the one and done rule is the sole reason for the state of Howland’s program but we should notice that there are some other things happening to this program causing this past down year.
by PurpleRabbit on Dec 16, 2010 10:54 AM PST up reply actions
Uh, I'm pretty sure the fact that both Calhoun and Williams missed last year is adressed
Let me check…yes, it was addressed. I also see what they’ve done so far this year and you have to admit, they’re in a better position to make it this year than we are. And while you’ve incorrectly asserted that last year’s tournament misses by those coaches were “shrugged off”, you seem to be doing the same for the fact that both coaches you mentioned won titles. Multiple titles in fact.
The inconsistency argument you’re trying to push is actually disproven by this entire post. You’re acting like we’re the only program that has had to deal with the one and done rule. Other elite coaches and programs have weathered that storm and continue to put their teams in a position to succeed. The point about the program not being “established” when the rule was put in place is ridiculous. CBH had been at the helm for four full years before that rule was implemented, and we had already gone to two Final Fours. How is that not established?
So as far as these “other things” that are happening to this program, I hope you have a longer list than that, because the ones you’ve presented are unconvincing.
Under Howland, players that left for the NBA after 1 or 2 years:
2004: Ariza after 1 year. Surprise, perhaps, but irrelevant to this conversation.
2005: none
2006: Farmar left after 2 years. Would have been wonderful if he stayed, not a shock that he left.
2007: none
2008: Westbrook left after 2 years. Again, staying would have been awesome for us, departure not a shock by mid-season.
Love: left after 1 year. Completely expected well before he left high school or chose UCLA.
2009: Holiday left after 1 year, surprising only one person. Unfortunately, that person was Howland.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
in fairness
CBH recruited Westbrook as an expected 4 year player – his explosion in year 2 was positive for the team that year, but mid-season is a bit late to make alternative plans…
by britishbruin on Dec 16, 2010 11:47 AM PST up reply actions
Not angry at CBH
angry at the circumstances and Murphy’s law, that we didn’t do the fund raising during the Final Four years!
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I know we've been hearing that the project isn't doing well financially
But is there anyone here that knows how bad it is in terms of numbers?
Cut the guy some slack!
Ben is taking it in the shorts for one bad recruiting class. The class that had all the spoiled brats was eated #1 and we were all gloating about how good we were going to be. Well that class turned into a bust with all the egos, spoiled brats etc.
Last year was a total disaster as we all know. UCLA basketball couldn’t get any worse than last year. I don’t think we’ll ever get over the Serbian bricklayer. It’s time to put last year in the rear view mirror.
This year we have a group of talented, young players who are growing as players and becoming team mates. I think the Montana game was an abberation and the Kansas game was a glimpse of how good we can play. I’m expecting to see the team progress as the season goes on.
Ben hasn’t gone basketball senile on us, he just needs the right combination of players and we’ll be back in the hunt. CBH needs to ask Santa Claus for a point guard for Xmas! I think Ben has learned his lesson as far as rcruiting 5 star primma donnas.
I just want to live to see the day when UCLA walks out on the court and the other team realizes that they are toast and might as well phone it it. That’s the UCLA basketball mystic that we use to have and I hope we regain it. Hard eow to hoe but I think Ben can do it just give him some slack!
We played then-#1 KU tough last season
within four in the second half at one point, before losing by a very respectable 12 points. A good almost-win against KU didn’t do much for us then.
I hope we succeed soon as well, but all of us holding a group hope session won’t do a d*mn thing for recruiting misses, finding a PG, FT shooting, or anything else. Ty’s whole point is that we need – not just hope, need - to see action.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
We didn't have an "almost-win" vs. Kansas last year
They raced out to a 17-6 lead after 9 minutes and coasted. Sure, UCLA got back to within 5 shortly after halftime, but it was never a single digit margin in the last 9 minutes, and Kansas was up by 17 with a minute to play. It was only a good result to the extent that most were expecting to lose by 25.
by SuperBruinMan on Dec 16, 2010 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
Nice comments Twothphry.
This is to me why Rick is in much bigger trouble than CBH. Howland has proven he can coach, and while he is digging himself out of a hole he created, I think it is one he can climb out of.
We are young and raw, but we are also improved from last year. I don’t believe in magic pills, so for those to say we are just one good PG away from being an elite team, I say there is no such thing. A really good PG would only highlight our deficiencies somewhere else.
I figure both coaches have two years to prove they should stay. I believe Howland will have us back up and running smoothly by year two. I think Rick is gone at the end of two years.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
+1
I completely agree and I wholeheartedly agree with purplerabbit’s take on the impact of the one and done rule above.
While it’s understandable that last season’s failure generated frustration unlike anything we’ve felt since the Lizard was roaming our sidelines pretending to coach, I think it’s way too premature to be having this much discussion about CBH being on a burning hot seat.
The one and done rule has hit us hard, harder than any of the other top programs and was a big contributor to last year’s debacle. It makes the comparisons above a bit suspect in my eyes. It also makes the 3 straight Final Fours to which CBH led us even more impressive but that’s another conversation. It’ll be interesting to see how much consistency the other elite programs have in the next decade if this rule stays the same. My guess is we’ll see random down years (losing seasons, missing the tourney, etc) at Duke, UNC, UConn, Mich State and the like. I’d also guess that Coach K, Williams, Calhoun, Izzo, etc will not endure the same scrutiny we’re in the process of putting CBH through.
CBH revived UCLA basketball after several years of underperformance and I remain grateful and confident in his abilities. I think we all need to relax a little and practice some patience.
by DoubleTroubleBruin on Dec 16, 2010 11:13 AM PST up reply actions
-1
The one and done rule was implemented in our last Final Four year. It had a marginal effect on recruiting for that one year. That you invoke that rule to say that the Final Fours are more impressive despite the fact that the rule wasn’t in place yet, and simultaneously use it to try and discredit the rest of the analysis despite the fact that everyone is playing under the same rules is fundamentally flawed logic.
You and others also seem to be missing the point about down years. We all know down years will happen. That’s the nature of college basketball and has been for decades. The point is that down periods do not span multiple years at elite programs. The problem is compounded by the fact that we not only missed last year but that we do not appear to be moving to fix what needs to be fixed on the recruiting trail, which does not bode well for our prospects if we do happen to extend our tournaments missed streak to 2 this year. Who’s to say that the streak won’t go to 3, 4, 5, or more if we don’t get the help we need where we need it? That’s what this is about.
point taken on the 3 final fours, Ty, my mistake
i was trying to say that we’ve dealt with a great deal of talent leaving in less than 4 years and got ahead of myself…
my bigger point is that the early departures will continue to have an impact at the elite programs that are able to attract that kind of talent. Losing Westbrook, Love and Holiday so quickly was crippling, even if it was expected (particularly in Love’s case). As more and more young guys bolt early for the NBA, the chance to “miss” on their replacement gets bigger not just at UCLA but everywhere. Again, I’d guess we’ll see more rough patches for even the most elite programs.
We had a terrible year last year, I admit. And yes, we’ve been up and down so far this year. But I am by no means writing this team off to make a run at the Pac 10 title. One bad year and a slow start with such a young team is not enough for me to sound the alarms that we need to be prepared to hire CBH’s replacement.
by DoubleTroubleBruin on Dec 16, 2010 11:45 AM PST up reply actions
I am not writing this team off either
Why? Because it is coached by CBH. Howland is a great tactician and teacher. Our posts over the past few days are in the same vein as N’s post that I’ve referenced from earlier in the year discussing a potential losing season. We do not expect, nor do we hope for it obviously, but we do need to preemptively come out and state the expectations and the reasoning for it early. We are not in the business of retroactively applying a standard that cannot be reached because that is inherently unfair.
that's totally fair
i guess i just get tired of the negativity and the presumption of another failure this year. i feel like sometimes somebody needs to “stick up” for CBH around here.
by DoubleTroubleBruin on Dec 16, 2010 11:56 AM PST up reply actions
not sure I understand if you are right or wrong when you say
“The one and done rule was implemented in our last Final Four year”
in our last final four year, we played against one-and-done Rose
in our penultimate final four year, the Florida team that beat us went on to beat one-and-done Greg Oden
one further note on the timing – the introduction of the rule meant that there was a single year when the NBA draft talent was down, due to high school players not being eligible, and the one-and-dones not having played a year yet. This was the year that Farmar decided to go pro, rather than stick around for his junior season and go into a draft with Oden, Durant and others. So the introduction of the one-and-done rule may have had an indirect effect on the team there (insofar as he might not have been guaranteed 1st round after his soph season in a normal year, and returned for his junior season to cement it)
by britishbruin on Dec 16, 2010 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
I was speaking to the implication that the Final Fours (plural)
Were more impressive. I can see how it would make our third one more impressive, even if we benefited from the rule as well.
The timing of Farmar leaving is more than I’m willing to get into, because it’s too much speculation for me to guess about his mindset after FF #1, but even then if Farmar didn’t leave after that year, he probably would have left the year after, and that means we wouldn’t have gotten Westbrook. I think that at the end of the day that’s a net negative, but of course I can’t be sure. That’s why I don’t like to get into it.
If I understand you correctly
Ty, you’re trying to make the point that even in a down year, a tournament berth should be an expectation. I think this is more than reasonable. The shine does not come off programs that come in as 12-seeds. The shine comes off major programs that miss the tournament (and more damning, the NIT). Consecutive misses simply exacerbates the problem. I’m of the opinion that we missed on McCallum and Zeigler simply because they wanted to play for their dads, but missing on the trio of Cook/Turner/Carson can be solely attributable to the combination of missing the tourney, losing season, grumblings around the program (departure of Gordon, Bobo, Moser) etc. It has a correlation, and I believe, causation.
by OswegoBruin on Dec 16, 2010 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
An expectation, yes
I am not naive enough to believe that we’re always going to make it even if we expect it, but there’s no reason for the program to be in a state where we believe that the tournament isn’t even a reasonable goal in any given season.
but with Farmar as an extra outside shooter
CBH wouldn’t have been under such pressure to go after the Serbian marksman… so then Westbrook still has a scholie waiting for him. Though of course, I can’t be sure either. :-)
by britishbruin on Dec 16, 2010 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
Are you kidding me?
Do you have ANY idea the scrutiny that UNC fans put on their basketball team? Talk about a basketball school. And yes, they probably aren’t under the same scrutiny right now…um, because their teams are doing so well, perhaps?
The double standards some of you have is pretty incredible, when judging the hoops and football situations. You’re less demanding of a hoops program that is one of the top 5 in the country and much harsher to a football program that has rarely been in the upper echelon.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
no
UNC winning the NIT last year is not “doing so well.” They are as embarrassed about that as we are about going 14-18, I’d guess. And no, I don’t think people are calling for Roy’s head as much as we seem to be the past few weeks around here.
I respect your opinion Tasser. I just don’t think firing our coach (who has led us to great success until last year) is the answer to a bad season.
by DoubleTroubleBruin on Dec 16, 2010 11:49 AM PST up reply actions
Even worse
They’re suffering from a mediocre year this year as well. Sure they had a good game against #11 Kentucky (so did we against #4 Kansas, although we didn’t come out with a win), UNC has arguably worse losses than we do. They lost to both Minnesota and Vanderbilt in consecutive games. Now these aren’t slouches, but they’re certainly not miles better than Montana.
by OswegoBruin on Dec 16, 2010 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
I am NOT calling for CBH to be fired
and I don’t see anyone else doing so either.
I am for setting a reasonable level of expectations that are in line with this program’s stature and frankly, in line with our coach’s ability to which so many point and rightly so. At some point you have to do that, and we believe that point is now. It is not in our power to decide when a coach gets fired, all we can do is point to what we expect as fans. And we are saying that, in our opinion, based upon our view of this coach and this program, making the NCAA tournament is a reasonable expectation. If the team doesn’t make it, it won’t necessarily mean that CBH should be fired, but that he failed to meet expectations two years in a row. It is for someone else to decide about his job, but it is up to us to define our own standard.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
+1
I agree with you very much on all points.
I remember a game back in the early 70’s against the Citadel, I think, where their players all had that “we’re toast” look on their faces. It seemed like some of them were literally shaking in their sneakers as they looked around the rafters and were subjected to the roars of the Bruin faithful! I, too, would love to see a repeat of those days.
What I am looking for from CBH..
…is a team that improves this year. A team that gets the best out of the talent that we have available this year. I am less focused on a specific record or tournament invite or result. If I see substantial improvement to our individuals, and more importantly our team, that we can continue to build on through recruiting into the future, I will be happy.
This year is tough
I think that this year is especially tough. Normally with a strong Pac-10, asking for a tourney birth in a down year isn’t too demanding. However, with one, maybe two teams making the tourney this year from the Pac-10 it makes it that much harder to make the tourney in our down year. I like to look at it comparing it to our football team this year. Before this year we were all saying that we wanted the team to improve and go to a bowl but our record might not show it because of how tough our schedule was. This year in basketball we might get better but we still might not make the tournament due to our weak schedule. I’d be happy with improvement in our team.
irrelevant
if the Pac-10 was strong, we’d struggle to go over .500 and so would also miss the tournament. The weakness of the conference doesn’t make things tougher or less tough inherently.
by britishbruin on Dec 16, 2010 11:56 AM PST up reply actions
True
I agree but there isn’t 1 team ranked in the Pac-10. I’m not saying the conference as a whole would be better. But if you have 2 or 3 teams ranked and we could sneak a win in 2 or 3 of those 6 games then you would have more “quality wins.” Couple that with 18 or 19 wins would be more impressive than 20 or 21 wins in a season like this
by lil eg not cs on Dec 16, 2010 12:04 PM PST up reply actions
The problem is
This team is likely going to be on the bubble. If Howland’s job is going to ride simply on making the tournament, then the somewhat arbitrary judgment of the selection committee is going to play a large role when it would be more useful to consider how the team is improving and the prospects for next year and beyond.
by SuperBruinMan on Dec 16, 2010 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Let's worry about it one game at a time.
Tournament selection time won’t be until end of February.
We don't decide what Howland's job rides on
All we do is offer up expectations and standards that we believe are reasonable. We don’t know for sure what the expectations and standards are for the decision makers, we speak as fans and alumni.
We think CBH is one of the top coaches at one of the top programs in the country. If you do not believe that making the tournament is a reasonable expectation based on that, then what is?
As for the prospects, it is actually a point of worry if you consider that we still won’t have an elite PG next year, so unless Zeke and Jerime suddenly flourish, the situation will not change much…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Improvement, performance in conference
Both are much more reliable indicators than the opinion of the selection committee. There are several good teams in the Pac-10 even if RPI doesn’t reflect that. And in the end the selection committee could punish the team for lacking a big win in non-conference play even if it does much better in-conference.
The PG situation is tricky, but unless the thought is that Howland has simply forgotten how to recruit PG’s, I’m not sure any prospective candidate (least of all Jamie Dixon) could be trusted to fix it any quicker.
by SuperBruinMan on Dec 16, 2010 4:48 PM PST up reply actions
We need to always play the best game possible
Then win or lose, we will just be fine.
The Montana game is unacceptable. No excuse. Everyone on the team, coaching staff etc went to lunch on this one.
Success and the new college recruit....
I think one of the problems of being an elite program is that recruits get the idea that by being recruited by UCLA, they are NBA material. How many recent recruits got smoke blown up their a$$es and thought they were better than they were? Plenty.
Our recent defection is a case in point. Carlino hadn’t even got his bags unpack when he was out the door. Somebody gave this kid the false impression that he was NBA material and he needed to showcase his talents. Not playing in the first six games obviously hampered his plans and he went bye bye.
How man kids left early, transferred or quit the program. Quite a few. We had a few one and dones but most left because they weren’t getting what they thought was quality PT or we weren’t playing their style of basketball.
I hope that Ben talks to recruits frankly about where they will fit in on the team, the style of play we play and the fact that they are here to play team basketball and learn all there is to know about playing basketball. This isn’t a showcase for the NBA.
I’m also sick and tired of kids who aren’t here to get one of the best educations in the country. These kids are only a knee injury away from reading about them five to ten years later in the where are they now column. They’ll be some sad story and we should care about them.
I think Ben is learning the new recruiting game and we’ll be ok as long as we cut him some slack. In the meantime everybody ask Santa for a big time PG!
Yes, Santa will indeed deliver, through the chimney to the Howland's residence
in Hancock Park a JOHN STOCKTON CLONE !!!!!!
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.
