Turning the Page: Looking to Next Year's Depth Chart and Schedule
by CPOBruin on Dec 8, 2010 10:07 AM PST
Email
PrintBumped. Good starting point to set expectations for next football season. -BN
The easiest way for me to turn the page on a very forgettable 2010 season is to look ahead to 2011. I am putting it down on the record, for me 8-9 wins (including one over USC) is what is needed for me to have faith in CRN going forward.
Still, I've been looking forward to the upcoming 2011 season for a couple years now. Our roster for 2011 is shaping up to be solid and stacked at every area but QB (ugh) and maybe OL. We should have a very good Defensive/Offensive Line, a solid secondary, a very good LB corp, and one of the best set of RB's in the Pac-12.
Offensive Depth Chart:
QB: Prince/Brehaut/Hundley
RB: Franklin/Jones/James/Coleman
F-B: Barr/Thigpen
WR: Marvray/Rosario/Johnson
WR: Carrol/Embree/Smith
TE: Fauria/Harkey/Pressley
LT: Baca
LG: Ward
C: Maiava
RG: Hasiak
RT: Harris
My comments on this lineup and a look at the Defense are after the jump.
Looking at the Offense, the obvious question mark will be at QB. I put Prince as the #1 QB on the assumption that we'll continue running the Pistol at least 50% of the time. Prince, at least to me, looked much more comfortable running the Pistol, and reading the defense. If Prince is not back 100% for Spring Practice, then I would move Brehaut to the tentative #1 and have an open competition come Fall between the Three QB's.
Our depth and skill at the RB/WR is the best it's been in a long long time. Franklin will be coming off a 1,000 yard season, although he desperately needs to get in touch with Tiki Barber to cure his fumbling woes. Malcolm Jones will split the heavy duties and I'm excited to see him break out. Jordan James will be the scat back shifty runner (and I hope will be used in screens and empty backfield spread formations because he should be a matchup nightmare). Derrick Coleman will provide depth in case anyone gets hurt.
At WR, Rosario and Embree need to take a back seat. Marvray and Carroll are faster, hungrier and attack the ball with more intensity. I also hope Josh Smith works on his route running because he obviously has the physical tools to be great, although I don't have high hopes that he'll put in the necessary work.
The OL is still in flux and I don't know enough about the backup OL's to put in a 2-deep rotation. Still, I trust Coach Palcic here more than any other coach on our roster. I hope Maiava bounces back well. Ward and Hasiek are 4 star recruits that should step in well. Harris will be the elder statesman here.
Defense:
DE: Jones/Graham (gonna be a big competition)
DT: Marsh/Carter/Epenesa
DT: Willis/Chandler
DE: Odighizuwa/Graham
SLB: Zumwalt/Bowens
MLB: Larimore/Sloan/Golper
WLB: Olaniyan/Westgate/Love
CB: Price/Jefferson
CB: Hester/Abbott
SS: Riley/Dye
FS: Hilliard/Dye
I look at that Defensive Line and I just think WOW. These guys will be young but incredibly talented and dynamic. Owa, Willis and Marsh are all studs, and I hope Willis asserts himself this Spring and dominates his way into the lineup. Jones and Graham are also both solid, I hope Graham gives Jones a run for his money. We also have tons of Depth for the inevitable injuries, with Carter, Chandler and Graham all having good experience. We should be winning the LOS fights here. Period.
At LB, I'll be curious to see how things play out. I know Zumwalt and Larimore both play Mike, but they need to be on the field together so I bump Zumwalt to Strong Side (Akeem will obviously be playing on Sundays). Olaniyan has dominated practice, and I hope he also makes the step up. If Zumwalt, Larimore and Olaniyan can all play well, that will be one dominant LB corps (although prone to making a lot of mistakes because they will be very young).
Secondary is looking to be our most experienced area again, but I really hope these guys can stop the yapping and concentrate on football. I anticipate Moore will be gone, but if not then I'll be thrilled. I feel bad that Dye will likely get benched, but Riley is too good to sit. If Dye can make a move to FS, that'd be ideal but I think Hilliard is solid there too.
Special teams:
K: Smith
P: Locke
KR: Smith/Thigpen
PR: Smith/Thigpen
As for special teams, let's hope Kip Smith picks up where Forbath left off, and let's hope Embree doesn't return another ball for the rest of his career because Josh Smith and Thigpen are too explosive to sit.
Lastly, A VERY VERY early look at the schedule, and where I predict expect our 9 wins to come from:
1. At Houston - WIN.
2. Vs. San Jose State - WIN
3. Vs. Texas - WIN (why the hell not?)
4. At Oregon State - WIN
5. At Stanford - LOSE
6. Vs. Washington State - WIN
7. At Arizona - LOSE
8. Vs. California - WIN
9. Vs. Arizona State - WIN
10. At Utah - LOSE
11. Vs Colorado - WIN
12. At $C - WIN
13. BOWL GAME!!!
That's our 9-3 season. We lucked out not playing Oregon. Of the predicted expected Wins, we have the greatest chance to lose against Texas, OSU and ASU. Thus 8 wins is definitely possible and still having a successful season with some solid wins over tough opponents, as long as we beat SC and have no more embarrassing blowouts.
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.
122 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yep
8 wins, at a minimum. These are very reasonable expectations for this program and this coaching staff in year 4 of their tenure. If we don’t “turn the corner” next year, I have little faith that this staff can ever get us where we want to be.
It will also be interesting to see what Moore and Ayers decide with the very real threat of an NFL lockout. This could further bolster the depth of the defense.
Nice post.
I really like your thinking, but here is why I am not so optimistic.
My biggest gripe is that CRN and staff have never shown that they will play the better guy, or the guy that is producing.
Example #1:………Rosario and Embree both had subpar years and never ran good routes and dropped passes from the opening snap against Kansas State. In the middle of the year when Marvray and Carrol (an even Smith) started to produce, the majority of snaps still went to Rosario and Embree, even though they continued to drop balls, not be aggressive to the ball, and run crappy routes.
Example #2: Josh Smith was one of the best return men in college football when at Colorado. He comes to UCLA and suddenly he can’t catch a punt? Come on. To make matters worse, they put Embree, our possession receiver who has no chance of breaking off a punt return back to retun punts? Ridiculous. Put someone back their with some burners. If Smith isn’t it, coach up Marvray (he later did a few), Carrol, or Thigpen to do it……….not Embree.
Example #3: When I was at the Arizona game it was painfully obvious that Steve Sloan (who was in for Larimore) was painfully slow to the ball and not a good tackler. He got hurt and in came Zumwalt, who was everything Sloan wasn’t. Zumwalt was a stud in the middle. Why wasn’t he playing earlier? Because the coaches did a poor job and seemed to just give the position to Sloan because he was next in line.
Example #4: The coaches did a very poor job in regards to the quarterback position. Why wasn’t Brehaut developed more when it was obvious to everyone that Prince wasn’t ready on many occassions because of injury? That was baffling. Prince didn’t even practice at times during the week and still played. If you are Joe Montana you get that type of treatment. If you are Kevin Prince, you ride the bench until healthy. Also, I posted before the beginning of the season that Prince would get hurt. It isn’t his fault, but he is injury prone. He sat out his senior year at Crespi HS with a knee injury and has missed many games at UCLA with injuries.
Example #4: The way Malcolm Jones was used. Either play the guy or redshirt him. Didn’t make sense.
Which brings me to my next point. Do we really have a true competition at positions? I don’t think so, and I know two players personally on the team who say that the belief within the program is that certain guys will play regardless of their effort of ability in practice. The way that CRN has ran his program, I see no way the following:
1) No way that Coleman is #4 on the depth chart behind James and Jones. While maybe he should be, it won’t happen. CRN has proved that he likes Coleman, and James and Jones can turn into Adrian Peterson and it won’t matter……Coleman will play over them.
2) No way that Carrol and Marvray are ahead of Embree and Rosario on the depth chart. Both those two gave substandard efforts this year and still played ahead of more reliable, harder working players. Rosario and Embree will be starting against Houston next year at Houston to open the season. While maybe they shouldn’t be, they will. CRN has proven that. Heck, Carrol and Marvray can turn into Andre Johnson and it won’t matter, Embree and Rosario will play over them.
3) While Olaniyan may be ripping it up in practice with the scout squad, and may rip it up all spring, their is no way that he plays over Bullough’s boy, Sean Westgate. I love Westgate. I love his effort and his heart. A Bruin all the way. But he is severely limited and is just too small to take on Offensive Lineman, let alone tougher-than-shit fullbacks coming at him through the hole. His effort this year, while honorable, was not that of a quality linebacker. Olaniyan has All-Pac 10 written all over him, and has an incredible future…………but it won’t be this year. Heck, he can turn into Ray Lewis and it won’t matter………..Westgate will play over him because that is the way that it works in our program.
4) While it seems reasonable that Larimore and Zumwalt must be in the lineup together, has history shown us that will happen? Nope. It’ll probably end up being Larimore as the #1, followed by Zumwalt, followed by Sloan. While you are correct that he must be on the field with Larimore to create an incredible inside duo………..unless Zumwalt turns into Lawrence Taylor, it ain’t gonna happen………..Westgate will be playing over him, or someone else may be. Hey, on the bright site, we’ll have a great backup at MIKE if Larimore gets hurt again.
5) Prince will be starting. The reports out of camp will be that Chow wants Prince to start……..I don’t know, maybe so he can get some free dental work or something. The reports will be that Prince has worked hard in the weightroom and is throwing the ball better than he has since his Pop Warner days. Everyone will forget about his shortcomings (injury prone, not accurate, etc.) and they will anoint him the next Matt Leinart. Brehaut, who should be starting, and Hundley, who should be the backup, will get minimal time until Prince gets hurt again. Heck, Brehaut could become the next Drew Brees and it still won’t matter…………Prince will be starting because that is the way it works at UCLA.
Sorry to be so negative, but as they say, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it……….or something like that. If everything you have written in your depth chart proves to be true, then I have no doubt we will have a great year. I have just seen this movie too many times and I know the ending already……….I don’t want to watch it again. I just can’t do it. I hope to hell I am wrong and that CRN finds his balls and puts the right people in the right positions. If he was smart, he would pull all his players, and all his coaches into a meeting room and tell them that nobody’s job is safe, including his, and the best players will play………….and that the best coaches will continue to coach…………PERIOD!! When that happens, and only when that happens, will we win next year. However, I ask you, has anything in this program the past three years indicate to you that that will happen? I didn’t think so.
by muircoach on Dec 7, 2010 6:40 PM PST reply actions 8 recs
I agree with Muircoach
What about last year suggests that next year will be any different? Are our guys going to get faster, block better, tackle better or anything else better? Is the Ballough suddenly going to turn into Buddy Ryan or Rocky Long or one of those guys? Our guys will be fundamentally the same. Our coaches will be the same. Our philosophy will be the same.
Question (real, not rhetorical). Can someone fill in the blanks:
Number of fake punts: _
Number of fake field goals: _
Number of passes by a running back: ____
Number of screen passes: ____
Number of “bubble screens” or “Jailbreak screens” or whatever our version is: ____
Number of timew we went for it on fourth and short (not counting when the game is out of reach with 30 seconds to go): _
There were lots of rationalizations for the post abdominial surgery menu that our offense ran (inexperienced linemen seemingly the most prevalent.) It seems to me that by the last game of the season, our true freshmen (I love that term, given that it implies the existence of “false freshmen”, but I digress) are basically sophomores. I don’t buy the inexperience alibi any more.
I’m not sure we win any games next year. Wazzou is no cinch. There is no valid reason to suggest that we win any road games, for that matter. Houston won’t get its first three or four QBs knocked out of the game next year. Home games? San Jose State won’t be awe-struck because they’re playing us at the Rose Bowl, and they will probably have more fans at the game than we will. Cal, ASU and Colorado? Why should those be any different next year. Colorado is used to playing tough competition on the road. just$c* It’s unlikely that they will all have parole violations at the same time. I can see us going 0 for 2011. The longer those running the show think the status quo is just fine, then the greater the likelihood that I will be proven correct.
And another +1
I remember yelling loudly at the TV this year, “Have you ever even heard of a Halfback Pass?”
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
+1
alone for “post abdominal surgery menu”
This bothers me SO MUCH
I feel like the coaches only see what happens on the “practice field.” CRN has said multiple times, “well they practiced well, I don’t know what happened!” It is INFURIATING.
I have to agree, Muircoach. Rosario and Embree will play, despite being the number 2 and 3 best recievers we have on the team. I believe Carroll is better than both and Josh Smith has the potential to be.
As for RB, this is why we lost Knox. He played well on the field, but could never beat out Franklin or Coleman on the field, so he just didn’t play?? IMO we wasted a year of Jones. He played alright and got some good experience, but nowhere near enough touches to have been worth it. Coleman, while he made some great strides earlier in the year, regressed as the year went on. He just DOES NOT have breakaway speed, and with a suspect O-line that cna only hold their blocks for a moment, that is crucial. Franklin played well, but his fumbles killed us all year long. We need to give Jones and James a hard look, but it won’t happen.
As for punt returns, I remember early in the year, Josh Smith apparently made a comment to Gansz that he didn’t want to return both kickoffs and punts beacuse it was too “tiring” or something to that effect. Gansz was understandably pissed, and kept him on the bench for punts, where he wanted him. Eventually we tried out Smith for punt returns mid-season, and he dropped (and barely recovered) his one and only punt return. Thus, Smith needs to show some dedication to the thing that he does well. PS, I think our punt return blocking might be some of the worst in the country. It looks like we just let them through.
All in all, I absolutely hate it when the best players are not the ones on the field. It is a terrible coaching philosophy, on par with “playing not to lose.” Playing EXPERIENCED Westgate over TALENTED Zumwalt was a mistake from day one. Playing EXPERIENCED Rosario over TALENTED Carroll is a mistake. Experience only helps when it is coupled with equal or better talent than your younger players. Give me talented players any day over experience. I really, really, hope this changes over the offseason. I would not be surprised if it doesn’t.
coleman
I don’t understand your issue. If you take fumbling into account he might have been our most effective back carry for carry. I wouldn’t have said that about the 2009 Coleman, but this year, he was very effective. He has good vision and falls forward better than any other back, including Jones. He isn’t the same guy that got repeatedly on the goal line against Oregon in 2009. Speed isn’t great but when you get high ypc like he does I don’t have a ton complain about.
I agree
He has improved. However, the fact remains that we had an offensive line that struggles mightily to pass block and run block. When teams start stacking the box, any run plays need to be quick-hitting in order to be effective. Coleman is not a quick guy by any stretch of the imagination. And though he’s strong, he doesn’t play like it. He has good vision, but he doesn’t physically dominate his opponents like we would need a power back to do. Jones, might. We gave him a chance up till one fumble, and bam, I don’t think he had more than 5 carries in any game after. YPC are well and good, but when he gets tackled in the backfield because he can’t hit the hole fast enough and it kills a drive, that’s the sort of problem we can’t keep having.
I agree with what you are saying, but I think there is a reason.
CRN plays the guy who he thinks will make the least amount of mistakes. Period. He doesn’t play the guy who will make the most plays.
We have talked about CRN’s conservative, “keep it close” approach a lot. His depth chart is simply a reflection of that philosophy. As I’ve said before, I don’t think CRN is this conservative by nature, but when he got here he had to play that way and has not gotten out of that conservative mindset.
CRN is more worried about muffing punts than getting long, exciting punt returns. Hence Embree. He is more worried about having QB’s who have the playbook down than having QB’s with dynamic arms. He wants LB’s and safeties that know their assignments, and is willing to trade athleticism for experience. Until he gets out of the “mistake free” mindset and gets in to the “make plays” mindset, he’s going to make the same personnel decisions.
by AllHailMightyBruins on Dec 8, 2010 10:56 AM PST up reply actions
Sounds like . . .
CRN plays the guy who he thinks will make the least amount of mistakes. Period. He doesn’t play the guy who will make the most plays.
This is another great way to describe “playing not to lose” as opposed to “Playing to win.”
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Well ...
putting less mistake prone players in is “Playing not to lose big”
But we saw in the Stanford game how well that works
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly.
I believe that if you play, no matter how mistake prone you are you will adjust and make less mistakes. Everything boils down to playing time. Which is why Prince Starting ahead of Brehaut when he had missed the majority of Fall Camp mystifies me.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Well, I am sure that even Rick & Norm figured it out
after they saw the results.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 6:04 PM PST up reply actions
We seem to be only a step or so away from taking a knee three times and hoping for a big play by our special teams or defense
In the good old days I remember, no one had a clue as to what Coach Prothro would do (punt on third down, go for it on fourth), and there were always one or two new plays when Homer Smith ran the offense.
We know that the approach we’re taking now will get us at best a 4-8 record and a string of embarrassing losses. How much worse can we get putting speed on the field everywhere, and trying to confuse the defense once in a while?
if you keep folding hands
sure you might stay in the game but you’ll never win the tournament. I agree Allhail CRN just wants to stay in the game as long as he can. Sometimes you have to wanna win instead of not losing.
His conservative game plan sucks!
"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's" - John Wooden.
The hand you're dealt limits what you can do.
Look again at 03rdn9’s analysis of Chow’s play calling of the ASU game.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 7:36 PM PST up reply actions
I completely agree with you muircoach
in that my thoughts above made no mention of the COACHING – and you are right on, that this is really the biggest question mark moving forward – both in terms of ensuring a healthy competition in solidifying the depth chart and in coaching the players up to their full potential.
I think the point of my article was to lay this out: there really will be NO EXCUSES next year for another disappointing season. We have the Talent to play with anyone, the Depth to sustain key injuries and not have that cripple our season, and the Experience to limit our stupid penalties and undisciplined play.
Many valid concerns
to be sure, but I must disagree with the idea that Westgate singlehandedly keeps Zumwalt and Olaniyan off the field. The kid has tremendous heart, but there’s only 1 of him!
Also, I think we all must admit that there are two sides to every story. Embree and Rosario certainly disappointed most of the year, but I’m pretty sure that for every spectacular TD bomb that Brehaut threw to Carroll, Brehaut also threw at least one INT intended for Carroll that was due to some miscue between the two of them. Coaches had to pick their poison there, I guess. The real issue is why wasn’t there a better option. I’m much more concerned about the lack of player development at that position than I am the personnel choices made.
my thoughts exactly
I’m much more concerned about the lack of player development at that position than I am the personnel choices made.
this has to be the best reply agree with EVERYTHING
Coaches are married to experience we could get every 5 star recruit this year and they wouldn’t start untill 2013
Agree only partly w Muir
I think you are right regarding the receivers . Regarding the defense, I don’t have any worry that they won’t start Zumwalt at Sam (assuming Ayers is gone). As to the Arizona game, i think the concern was that Zumwalt didn’t know the defense and Sloan knows the defense very well. . If you noticed when Zum was in, Westgate was calling most of the plays and even in the games after that. Not a knock on Zum, just the reality that they slotted him at SAM early so he didn’t have to learn the plays from a MIke perspective. After Zum went out in the SC game and Sloan went in , you should have been able to see that Sloan was calling all the plays and not Westgate. I think it will be interestin beteween O and Westgate at Will . i also think Kendricks will be at one of the backup OLB spots
Are you predicting or expecting?
I expect 8 games at the minimum, I don’t know where those wins would come from but that’s what CRNneeds to do next year.
I predict 6 wins at best, however.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
there's a clear difference
between what our roster is clearly capable of and what product the coaches will put on the field. I have very little hope for our team next year until our coaches prove otherwise.
Muircoach's post.
I for one completely agree with your post 100%!! I do not take your post as negative but rather as a completely brutal, honest & constructive one. Just like you pointed out, it just baffles me how one player excels at his position yet a player that was there before him with not quite that talent gets the start. This is not a job where seniority prevails! The better person should start at every position, period. As far as the qb position goes, next year Brehaut should be the starter with Hundley as backup. Also, the defense needs to be a bit more aggressive & the offense has to learn to take a few more chances instead of playing it safe all the time. Keeping the other team constantly off balance will do wonders for us as a team.
from your mouth
class72, did you transfer in 73 to Notre Dame? That’s South Bend speak goddamit.
actually graduated in 85, the olympics and h.locklear were distracting...
U forgot about Shaq Evans, WR who transferred from Notre Dame...
He was another one that got away and came back…More competition, hopefully more production.
Dye
Our best safety this year IMO. Dont see him taking a backup role.
by Bruins#1 on Dec 8, 2010 11:22 AM PST via mobile reply actions
By the way - Please pick this Depth Chart apart to death
I know for a fact that I am not the most knowledgeable football fan on this blog, so if I made an incorrect call, please educate me on the topic. I like making these now because it gives me something to look for in Spring Practice and lets me anticipate where the big competitions will be.
Anyone know Iuta Tepa's status?
When is he anticipated to be back?
by Westwood Wizard on Dec 8, 2010 11:44 AM PST up reply actions
Thoughtful post. If only we can be certain CRN will actually use the best players
next year and know when key personel are on the field or have a good explanation as to why not.
I am putting it down on the record, for me 8-9 wins (including one over USC) is what is needed for me to have faith in CRN going forward.
I’m with you on this, its complety possible, and expected, with our returning players. No excuse for "inexperience’ in 2011.
RB should be our starter, given he finished the season on the field. Any of the othe QBs should only be able to take his job if they have a dyn-o-mite spring AND fall practice and remain 100% healthy.
I'm sick an tired
Of putting a team on the field that is not best suited to their talents. We mismanaged Anthony Barr, Milton Knox, Zumwalt (until later), and Dietrich Riley (played him too late).
Its for this reason we should start Hundley. Yes I know i’m going out on a limb, but frankly, he, as a high school senior, runs better than Brehaut or Prince, and as a smart kid can learn the offense quickly, and has a strong arm. Whether he can hack it at college speed remains to be seen, but he needs the ability to win the starting spot. Not one of those “open competition, oh wait we’re starting kevin prince” loads that we had last offseason.
And the downside, Oswego?
We might go 3-9 instead of 4-8. I’m willing to take that chance. I’m willing to take lots more chances that our coaching staff is, obviously.
The upside is that we might actually develop a winning attitude.
EXACTLY
Really, how much worse can it get? 3-9 maybe, but there is a chance we could actually, as you said, develop a winning attitude, get some momentum, and actually make some noise in the pac 10. If it doesn’t work out, we have plenty of experience in Brehaut and Prince. It’s basically starting the 1st round draft pick over the seasoned, less talented vet in the NFL. Take a chance!
Should probably thrown in
2-10, 1-11, and 0-12 as options as far as “how much worse” it could get. There’s also the part where you waste a year of eligibility and possibly damage the guy’s confidence because you threw him out there totally unprepared.
And there’s also the likelihood that if he fails, people stop calling to put him in every week.
by SuperBruinMan on Dec 9, 2010 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
And there's also a chance
he could get hurt. There’s also a chance he could get hit by lightning. If he struggles mightily, guess what? We put Brehaut or Prince in. Frankly, our run game will keep us in games, and our defense should still be effective, so I do not see the problem with giving him a meaningful shot to win the position. He is by far the best suited to run the pistol physically.
This whole discussion frustrates me because
It is so obvious that we had real talent on this team this year all over the field. But far too many studs never saw the field or just were not developed for a variety of excuses.
Add in the extremely conservative schemes on both offense and defense and the overall strategy of playing not to lose again and again, and you have a prescription for a 4-8 season now and for the indefinite future.
Now I have to wait nine months for more Bruin football. That’s bad enough, but with Men’s basketball sucking and Angels baseball being Angels baseball, it’s going to be a long and painful wait. And for what?
Let’s pray for a miracle and a turnaround football season.
GO BRUINS!
I am with you
I’m giving CRN one more year. I’ll always always be a Bruin fan, but if UCLA football doesn’t produce next year, then I’ll be advocating strongly for a coaching change and (for my own health and sanity) will scale back how much I follow the team until that happens.
There was real talent on this team
Just not necessarily in the right positions. Our OL played its heart out but there really is no standout on that line. Our QB, it remains to be seen if there is talent there or not…everyone has potential. Our DL definitely has talent but not enough size and not enough depth.
The way I see it, talent and consistency in the trenches will win us games. The guys who played for us this year at those positions should really be second stringers. For the OL and DL, I really don’t think it was a matter of coaching.
It is a different matter when it comes to the QB, the CBs and the WRs. Those are the guys who really should have played better but were held back by poor coaching.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Valid points
But you must agree that overall we did a very poor job developing and integrating the new talent. Just look at one obvious player, Gatorade National Player of the Year, Malcolm Jones, mainly sits for a year for us while the #2 running back behind him last year is an All-American at South Carolina this year.
An extreme example to be sure, but it makes the point.
Of course, none of this is malicious. It’s just a philosophy which I’m guessing is a carry-over from the NFL where rookies can cost you ball games.
Who knows?
That's not a valid comparison
until you compare what offensive line they’re running behind. And the USC offensive line has more experience and a bunch of them have played together for a while now. No one plays in a vacuum on a football team.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Spot on, Tasser10
There definitely was bad coaching at some positions, but the main thing that killed us is our OL & DL aren’t up to Pac-10 standards. Maybe they could have started in the WAC and maybe, with time, they’ll become Pac-12 starters but this year they were outmatched in the Pac-10. I hate to criticize these guys because they had heart which much of our team lacked.
For the record, our line coaches have been doing a lot with a little. If only our secondary & WR coaches could have been half as efficient we might have won at Kansas and one other game.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 4:51 PM PST up reply actions
That's just it, isn't
Here’s the scary thought: the guys who did play on our OL and DL were the best on the team…what does that tell you about the depth at those positions (read: the coaches did not exactly inherit a lot of players at that position).
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Sorry, wrong spot
Meant as reply to uclahy
I'm with you on frustration of being a Bruins and Angels fan...
However, at least we’ve got the Lakers. Notwithstanding the cold streak they’re in right now.
agree with some things
But some of your depht chart is off. I don’t think moore or ayers leaves but for the sake of argument I think riley is moores replacement and dye has to start next year he had a good year. I also would like to see marvay and carroll and fauria start but the coaches seem to be tied to rosario embree and harkey so those are the starters for next year as well no matter how bad they perform on gamedays in IMO. I can’t see the coaches giving james carries over coleman even though I think they should but chow loves experience and goes with that over talent.
We should get 8+ wins next year but that depends on QB play for the teams sake I hope the prince era has ended its not his fault but you can’t build a team if your QB misses important practice time and is out every two games.
"Chow loves experince...over talent"...
Not so sure one can draw that conclusion.
Try this… Coleman and Harkey are much better blockers than Jones and Fauria. Also, is Chow responsible for in game personnel lineups? I don’t know, but would love to find out this kind of inner workings of the coaching staff.
Marvray and Carroll seem to have bright futures (talent), but did they really have a command of the offense like Rosario and Embree? Maybe it’s just knowledge, not experience per se that is the crux.
Just thinking, as in wondering, there.
This all sounds so familiar
I heard this last year with all the top recruits we got. RN is still at the top, and I see that as THE issue. Nice to hear Meyer is avail. For me, RN is not the man for the job. Simple. 3 years time is enough to see that.
Urban Meyer?
LOLOLOL!
Let’s get realistic and work within the confines of what can be done at UCLA, if you want to think about new coaches.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Very interesting comments about coaches' abilities to recognize talent...
reading through many of these comments, I see there is little faith that the coaches recognize talent. Or, if they do, they are purposely not playing that talent in favor of lesser talented players only because they have been in the program longer.
Does this sound a bit strange…that the coaches of a major institution’s football program are purposely trying to undermine the success of the program? Isn’t that what all this commentary is really saying?
Wow!
Now, I understand the desire to uncover the reasons for the less than exemplary season, but to go so far as to say the coaches are, with malice aforethought, keeping the program from success is just too unbelievable. That is tantamount to them thinking they want to fired as soon as possible.
OK, some comments are not going to that extreme. These comments simply think that the coaches do not have the ability to recognize superior talent. Oh, really?
So, you would have me believe that a couple of guys who have plenty of college and pro coaching experience cannot judge talent? That some people who may not have ever seen a UCLA practice yet alone have football coaching backgrounds can see the talent gaps and point out the mistaken choices the NFL guys are making?
Hey, I’m with you in critiquing after the fact, but I just can’t buy into the notion that these coaches made such obvious errors. It is just too easy, not to mention fun as hell, to play what if games with our players, yet where is the hard evidence that, for example, Brehaut is so superior?
Yes, he came along well as the season progressed after Prince went down, but is he really that much better at present than Prince was? He certainly didn’t show me much in the early games. And, do you remember that terrible decision to throw the long ball that was intercepted? At no time in the route did our receiver have any downfield advantage over the defender and as the ball was overthrown (hence the INT) it actually looked like the SC guy was the intended receiver. This is the kind of play that would produce the “what was he seeing?” reaction from coaches.
Let the boys grow up a bit more. Spring ball is merely months away. Let them get healthy. Hopefully. we get more linemen recruits as that is still my number one weak link.
That was the point I was making when I said that there is a reason.
CRN obviously wants to win. He plays the players that he thinks gives the team the best chance to win. IMO, CRN believes that making less mistakes is winning football. CRN repeats after every loss that the team made too many mistakes, got to stop making mistakes, etc. Along with all of his evaluations, I hope CRN looks at the approach of the program and decides to open the throttle up.
by AllHailMightyBruins on Dec 8, 2010 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
Careful there...speed kills
mistakes also will lose games. I mean, we could possibly point to just 4 mistakes that lost us that game.
Three and we possibly are tied going late into the fourth quarter. (Fumble=seven points for them, offsides or whatever penalties that killed a drive or two=six to seven points for us.)
So, where is the happy median? I’ll guess you’ll opine we net gain from riskier play.
What kinda rattles me is that we shouldn’t have to play riskier just to win games. We should be good enough to just roll with what plays we run.
Someday, eh?
Agree
that sometimes mistakes kill. But ball security, missed tackles, and penalties are not “mistakes” in the common vernacular, at least not to me. Those are fundamental football issues that should not happen, ever, on a well coached team. Will they? They always seem to. But they should be the least of a team’s worries. But they seem to be our biggest worries. Can we tackle? Can we not hand the other team the football? Can we not commit penalties? Can we not keep the quarterback from getting sacked/injured?
It takes time to coach a team well
I made the point in another comment that given the ratio of players to coaches and the time constraints the coaches – no matter how good – cannot spend quality time with all of the players in their charge. In a good team, the older and more experienced players take the rookies underwing and they learn from them. You can see in our secondary that there has been some of this effect – but that chain of experience was shattered for QB’s and linemen. The coaches just don’t have the time to prepare 2 or 3 young QB’s to be first stringers… especially since the OC is the QB coach.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 5:35 PM PST up reply actions
They say Norm _is_ a good QB coach
Certainly his resume speaks well for his ability to train QB’s
If you cannot trust a coach’s past performance to judge their ability to coach, what criterion should we use to pick that “good QB coach”?
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 6:06 PM PST up reply actions
Kevb75 you make sense
Throwing caution to the wind is liable to have us losing big time instead of by a touchdown or two. And I always think “Well, after the game is all but lost it is time to gamble and open up things a bit.” and then I think “Hey! That is just what Rick did.” But this only applies to offense play calling – we can definitely point to poor coaching on the defense – it has been done ad naseum so I won’t repeat it all here.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 5:31 PM PST up reply actions
I think you're misunderstanding the frustration
The talent is not being misjudged. That’s why these kids are recruited in the first place. They have the talent, the talent is there. The coaches are not “intentionally” trying to mismanage the team. I think it stems from a program-wide mentality that we are young, we make mistakes, therefore we must do everything we can to limit mistakes.
CRN realizes the margin of error is slim, and thus he puts players in that will “make the fewest mistakes” a-la westgate, embree, rosario, prince, coleman, etc etc…. examples are all over the field. Physically and football wise, these kids that are playing have less talent in many cases than the players behind them. But they’re getting the nod because they are steady, and make, supposedly, fewer mistakes. This mindset works sometimes, but if you do this in every instance, you remove playmaking abiltiy, talent, and speed from your team. Look what happened when Carroll started after Rosario went down with an injury. We had a vertical passing game, a deep threat. Look what happened when Jones got 8 carries a game in the beginning of the season, he was getting 8-10 yards per carry. Look what happened when Steve Sloan went down and Zumwalt came in, the entire mentality of the defense changed. These are MISTAKES. The coaches choose a player based on seniority, trusting that their leadership and their experience will outway any talent disparity, instead of letting the best player play and putting them in positions to minimize mistakes.
Pete Carroll was the king of this. When he would get a young star player, if they competed harder and performed better, he would play them. Ben Howland did this with Kevin Love.. immediately started over Lorenzo Mata, and to think people were discussing him coming off the bench. Imagine what our season would have been like with KEVIN LOVE coming off the bench?? Percy Harvin at Florida started from day one in a stocked roster. Marcus Lattimore, a true freshman, is a star at South Carolina because he is an extremely talented running back and was given a chance to shine.
This “play not to lose, experience over talent, slow and steady wins the race” garbage is exactly why this football team will never be good. Andrew Luck, Matt Barkley, these guys started because they were more talented, yet less experienced, then the players above them. They are now winning games (except Barkley’s team sucks). We are starting our most experienced, least talented (lets be HONEST here) quarterback, and shocker, we lose. This idea can affect recruiting. All those “he doesn’t want to compete” arguments become REAL. Kids see other players ahead of them on the depth chart, they WILL NOT COME HERE. Because they know no matter how well they play, they will not get the nod because they haven’t “played in enough games”. I really, really hope this situation turns around. I am not confident, however.
I also 'live' the frustration...
I believe there is a vast chasm between ‘talent’ and being able to execute the given offense on the field. Yes, these kids you mention have talent. However, can they possibly at the beginning of the season have the capability to run the offense? Almost two offenses if we want to split hairs.
That’s where the decision is made difficult. You say the coaches are choosing seniority over talent. My first question is how did you acquire this particular bit of info? My guess is that you are making a guess based on what you see. We have a few players come in for a few plays and showcase their talent. However, does that mean they have a mastery of the playbook? If not, our ability to vary the calls goes way down and then we look even more ‘vanilla’.
I think the key to making the determination of who gets to play is what the coaches (ours and every other staff including Luck’s and Barkley’s) say…“who gives us the best chance of winning”. I don’t know who Luck had to beat out to start games, but I’ll wager there was quite the chasm there. Barkley, maybe not so much, but the kid can throw a ball. They also had a tremendously better team around them, to support their learning curve. Do you realize how much easier it is to look good when the other members of the team are just plain good players?
Jones some good carries early, but did not impress much after that. My guess there is the line let him down. He really never did look better than Franklin and probably can’t hold a candle to Coleman when it comes to blocking.
Carroll = vertical game. OK, that’s one dimension. But can he run the correct routes the correct way for all the other plays? If he doesn’t, the INT stat goes through the roof, drives stall and we lose games.
Talent by itself is no end all. I’ll take the smart bunch of experienced players over the oodles-of-talent guys any time. How’s the Miami Heat as an example?
I can’t wait for next year. My line of reasoning starts to fade when all this talent becomes experienced. We shall see.
In response...
I know for a fact the coaches chose seniority over talent. They stated it directly. On the Sean Westgate situation, they said “we know he’s undersized, but he tries hard and he’s got a good motor.” Instead of playing Glenn Love, who just watching him it is obvious he is more athletically skilled than Westgate, shows that the coaches are playing experience over talent. Are there other extenuating circumstances? Sure. But there always will be. The “know the playbook” argument works, but often times it is used to refer to a player in a coach’s doghouse. For example, Randall Carroll never “knew” the playbook, and Rosario, apparently, did. If you watched the games Carroll played, he looked night and day to Rosario, who puts out minimal effort, has zero strength, and has massively regressed in terms of performance from last year.
As for Jones, how do we know, given the number of carries Franklin recieved, he wouldn’t have outplayed Coleman and Franklin? We’ll never know, because the coaches chose to play him behind both ballcarriers. He looked explosive, looked like he could move the pile, and yes, he fumbled. But guess what, he played almost none after that. Exactly the way we handled Franklin, who now has a complex. Sure he’s played more this year, but he still fumbles. Point is, you never know how good someone can play until you give them the reps. Was Jones given the reps? Who knows. As for Coleman, great he can block. As for Harkey, great he can block too. Great. They play a position that requires INFINITELY more than blocking. While TE is half blocking/half catching, running back is, especially in our pistol offense, RUNNING. Coleman did better in the first half of this year, but athletically he is nothing compared to Jones.
As for the team being better, at USC, sure. That’s why even Matt Leinart looks great in that offense, they have tons of players around him. Elite talent. As for Stanford when luck started? Sure they had Gerhart and a solid offensive line. But if you really want to argue talent, they had significantly less talent. Could you imagine Morrell Pressley playing for stanford, or Malcolm Jones (who would be starting immediately) being Toby part 2? The talent point strikes both ways. We have plenty of skill players, but they NEVER SEE THE FIELD. They have talent, but we don’t play it. We play the experience. Stanford plays the talent, USC plays the talent, we play the experience. Look where it’s gotten us. Oh, by the way, Oregon plays the talent too.
Methinks we will just have to agree to disagree...
and that’s OK.
You say TE is infinitely more than just blocking and then say it’s half blocking – half catching. That doesn’t make much sense, but I’m guessing you mean that each half is very important. On that I will agree. The dilemma there is that if we use one for blocking and one for catching, it becomes a defensive dream.
In the pistol, there are pass plays. The RB needs to block. Same dilemma. And I disagree that Coleman is athletically ‘nothing’ compared to Jones. I feel that Jones is actually closer to Coleman than Franklin, but that bodes well for the future.
You bring up the example of Westgate being undersized with a good motor and conclude this means he’s experienced and is then chosen for his seniority. I disagree. I allow for that to mean he gets to his coverage, sheds blocks and makes plays better than Love. Doesn’t make it true, just my take.
Rosario and Embree. They’re a mystery as to why they seem to have regressed, but could there be other reasons? Maybe, I don’t know.
Stanford plays talent that is experienced. Take a look at the All-Pac 10 team. They have juniors and seniors on the line. And how do you judge “they had significantly less talent”? Compared to our line? Or do you mean over all the positions? No way they have less talent on the line and as far as overall, I’m not so sure when you factor in the youth of our talent and how that translates to making plays (knowing the playbook).
But, sure, those players would look much, much better playing for Stanford, Oregon, USC or Arizona…maybe any of the other teams. The reason? The line and QB’s would make them look better.
Imagine having Stanford’s, Oergon’s USC’s, Arizona’s ASU’ (need I go on) line. Our offense would have produced several more wins.
But back to the crux…playing experience over talent. I gather you mean to say we would have been better and that the coaches either didn’t believe this or that they knew this and chose to play a less productive lineup. Either way, I just cannot buy into it. I just cannot believe that these coaches with so much, forgive me here, experience, would make that kind of mistake.
Like I said previously. These coaches will not have the youth reason next year. My line of reasoning goes ‘poof’ in 4 months.
Honestly
We do disagree pretty fundamentally, but I totally see where you’re coming from. I really do. I believed it last year. But the fact is it’s happening again. I’ve watched it happened for many years now. Simply put, UCLA has talent and experience gaps. In very few places are we acceptable at both.
Example: Rahim Moore. Talented, experienced, excellent. Akeem Ayers, same thing. Datone Jones… sigh. My point being, at very few positions do we have both talent and experience. Ideally, we have both, but not so much. With Westgate, I really have to disagree. Have you seen the kid try to “shed blocks” a pretty crucial skill for a linebacker (especially a small one)? The kid is manhandled time in and time out. Sure he’s quick, smart, can make plays when in good position. But just as often, he’s blown out of position and completely removed from the play. Contrast that with Jordan Zumwalt. Steve Sloan was playing a mediocre game, and went down wiht an injury. Keep in mind he started all of the 2008 season. In comes a non-experienced, very talented Zumwalt, who completely changes the complexion of our defense. Instant toughness, instant quickness, pressure on the qb. He had a monster game. This is my case in point. He would NEVER have seen the field had Sloan not been injured. Why? You really, really have to wonder why? Does he practice poorly? Even so, who cares if he practices poorly if he plays like that in the game?
As for running back, sure there are pass plays and sometimes the running back is required to block. I’m confused as to how Malcolm Jones would not be well suited to be a pass blocker? Inexperience sure, but how is he going to gain experience without playing in games and picking up blitzers? As for TE, my point about “infinitely” more than blocking means that, if you have a TE that only blocks, you do not have a tight end. You have a second right or left tackle. AKA, you have a Harkey. The tight end MUST be a threat because that is what makes his position useful. The defense must account for him, and if they can catch passes, that’s one more person focusing on the tight end, and one less blitzing, one less keying on our running backs, etc. To me, that is INFINITELY more responsibility than blocking.
When I referred to Stanford playing talent, I was referring to Luck’s first year. There was a good offensive line, sure, annnnd there was Chris Owusu… annnnd… Gerhart. That’s it. Literally. You can swap out any other WR’s, running backs, fullbacks, etc. for ours and it would be a wash or we would win. Even Sua Filo could have played on that offensive line. Point being, sure we don’t have a great line. But we have good skill players, more so than they do. Gerhart was a beast, I won’t deny it, but if anything, Luck succeeded because he is a TALENTED quarterback, not an experienced one. Oregon, their QB? Darron Thomas is a RS soph, playing over Justin Roper who has a full year of experience. GOOD CALL. He has been spectacular, with very limited experience prior to this year. My point is, if you have talent on your team, play them. Your point saying their line and QB will make their young talent look good is exactly my point. Sure you can have an experienced oline, where experience is usually the best indicator of how good your line is, but at other, skill positions, QB/WR/RB/TE, talent will trump experience almost every time. Robert Woods beat out every single WR on USC’s roster. Not easy, but the kid is ridiculously talented. Why can’t we utilize our talent? Why do we have to wait for the experienced player to be injured before we can see our talented kids perform?
TE = 2nd Tackle
And with our OL maybe that’s what the coaches thought would help keep our QB’s healthy. As it was, Bre had a concussion which took him out of a game and look how our 3rd & 4th string QB’s did.
Putting a lot of emphasis on blocking doesn’t seem to crazy if you plan for more than one game at a time.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 5:48 PM PST up reply actions
Problem Is
That while they may be another blocker, thats one less option for the QB to go to, thus allowing Defenses to stack the box, and bring more pass rushers, neutralizing any advantage that another blocker might have. A questionable idea, imo.
Problem with a concussion is
QB’s cannot throw the ball from a stretcher.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 6:06 PM PST up reply actions
OK, you're laying it on the coaches doorstep
I understand. (By the way, thanks for the even tempered back and forth. Great discourse on a passionate subject…UCLA football!)
Datone Jones…“sigh”, indeed. Do we get only one more year from him?
Zumwalt…how would coaches know how a player performs in the heat of battle before he goes to battle? All they have to go by is practice performance. Yes, he was amazing in that first game of his, but after that I don’t remember much that stood out. Is that because he did not play much? Did I just not take note? If he did not play much, why? What could we have seen from the TV that they cannot see from film? I mean, if he was that much better of an option, why oh why would the coaches not play him? I’m sorry, but on this I have to go with the coaches knowing something we don’t. But, Zumwalt will play big minutes someday and the D will be better as he develops (grows, learns, gets smarter).
Jones is/was fresh out of high school. And he is not as big as Coleman. Put those together and Coleman easily wins the blocking nod, but only for a while. I’ll bet Jones didn’t need to learn much blocking in HS (didn’t they just give him the ball all the time) and therefore has a while to go before effectively mixing it up with the big boys in college. He’ll get better for next year and may even beat out Coleman on both counts. Here’s a point…did anyone punish/drag tacklers like Coleman did? And, if you play a guy to get him game experience, how does that help win that game when someone else is better at the position?
Stanford…what more would one want than a great O-line ( Stanford had three of five 2010 first team All-Pac 10 linemen), Andrew Luck (first team) Owusu and Gerhart. Jeez, I could have played any other position and they would have done almost as well. Their talent probably far outweighed other players at the same position. Ours don’t. And, Brehaut is no Luck (going pro soon). Jones is no Gerhart (a knat’s eyelash from being the Heisman winner). Though each would have looked more like the Stanford guys had they had the luxury of Stanford’s line!
Of course, talent can overcome experience. That’s why we had younger guys slated as starters on the line, until injuries, school work and a mission got in the way.
I guess I’m saying the guys you feel should have played more didn’t have enough talent to overcome the combined talent/experience of the players chosen by the coaches.
I’m siding with the coaches decision, you’re not. That’s OK. I’ll even go so far as to say you may be right, but I don’t fell it right now. You say give it time…I will as the years pass…maybe you’re right there, too!
Im a Broken Record
Both of our lines were below par. The OL had a few good games (Texas and Houston) but were mostly inconsistent. The OL has been a focus in recruiting, and perhaps will improve next year and the year after. An offense cannot succeed without a line that can control the line of scrimmage.
The defensive line could never get any penetration into the backfield. Opposing passers had unlimited time to pass. Running backs were rarely tackled by defensive lineman, and were very frequently untouched until they hit the secondary.
You can’t win when your lines are being dominated.
Brehaut had lots of experience in practice and in games by the time the SC game came around. He played poorly nonetheless.
Zumwalt has great talent, but he looked lost out on the field. Playing middle linebacker without knowning what you are doing is deadly.
A football team needs a critical mass of talent in order to succeed. My feeling is that we were the less talented team in most of the games we played. Perhaps we are getting better in terms of overall talent, but I don’t have confidence that the players we have are good enough to compete.
I was astounded that Carroll didn’t get more playing time. His speed stretches the defense, and he has to be accounted for on every play.
In which game
did Zumwalt look lost on the field? I’m just curious. Because he was knocked out of the U$C game early on, and Sloan was in, who looked lost.
talent needs help to succeed
raw talent is great, but not the only factor in the equation. It needs to know how to work as a teammate, know the play/coverage etc.
We have plenty of high talent players, but those guys either don’t know the plays/coverages or don’t have the experience of playing at college game speed. Sure, as has been pointed out, some players come out of high school and perform rather well. My guess is that those players are skill position players that have great supporting casts. Supporting casts mean experienced linemen who didn’t just come out of high school.
We have too many young or inexperienced players on the O and D lines, which has resulted in busted plays on offense and elongated plays on defense. The other factor of the O line is that most playing this year were second stringers in spring and fall camps. Second stringers with little previous game time.
I just today saw a year to year stat on tackles for loss. We had 46 fewer TFL’s this year than last. That is significant and I just can’t see how that is something that can be placed on the coaches as these are the same coaches for both years.
Now, from 2009 to 2010 we lost the #1, #2, #3 and #5 guy on the ’09 list. From the 2010 list we only lose #1 and #6.
Here’s the fun part, #2 will be a RS Jr., #3 will be a So., #4 will be a Sr., #5 will a RS So. That’s not including Owa or the return of Datone Jones. We should be vastly better up front defensively.
In a way, the same goes for the O-line. We get back people that have been around the block a few times.
Anyway, with better players and what looks to be a somewhat easier schedule, we should improve by quite a margin. Might even put up an acceptable record.
westgate v love
Love didn’t help himself by looking lost whenever he was on the field. Also westgate was the leading tackler…. just sayin.
That statistic is not useful
because every single team realized a lead blocker would win every single matchup with him. They ran at him all game long. I would lead the team in tackles if every team ran right at me. I’m not saying he’s useless, I’m simply advocating we put someone with less experience yet more physical talent in instead.
Hey bruinhawk, indeed Urban Meyer
IS AVAILABLE !!!!!!!!
If Guerrero were smart, carried authentic Bruin traits in his DNA even, then he should, right this minute, serves Rick & Norm walking papers, and muster all his clouts and energy in putting together a financial package Meyer cannot refuse. Bring this PROVEN WINNER to Westwood.
Dig him up. Prop him up on the sidelines. Play recordings
of his famous inspiring speeches at practice and game. Yeah, that might work.
That didn't work with El Cid.
And we have propped up a body on the sidelines before. That didn’t work either.
greg in denver, UCLA guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Good point
But even the Lakers really don’t matter until the playlets, and are nothing compared to UCLA basketball in my book.
You will know how much I want to thank the Almighty
if Rick leaves on his own and we get Urban Meyer.
We cannot pay him
sadly. I think Urban would still be coaching, if he could. I think it’s health related.
You mean
Urban “Brett Favre” Meyer? Just a joke, not discounting the health issue.
Well, excuse my ignorance
How is he like Brett Favre ? How is he like a joke ?
Maybe because he suddenly announced his retirement at the end of the
2009 season then did a 180 and decided to unretire? Don’t get why that’s a joke, unless its because each has been less than spectacular upon their return to the game.
I don't think Meyer wanted to return this year
Seems like he was kinda forced into it so as to keep the recruiting class in tack and all. His coordinators sucked this year.
BTW, what does any Bruin have against the Gator football team? If anything, it’s their basketball team…..who did something to us. Twice.
Would Urban want the job?
Rebuilding a program as down as ours for as long as our isn’t the same as taking over a decent program to take it in a different direction.
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 5:51 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, I know that too.
I am just saying in jest. But If I had deep pockets like Soros & others, I would do it come hell or high water. Get Rick & Norm the walking papers.
Health related matter ? No problem....
I will make sure Mayo Clinic is free, at his service !!! LOL
Best should play
Bruins seem to, as noted, choose experience over talent. If they do so then quit recruiting and then only providing playing time late in season blowing a red shirt year. If a freshman has the talent play him. I wouldn’t care if the player was a tenth grade female if they had the talent(my apology to tenth grade girls). Some players you see the talent in high school but even though they were recruited on ability they want them to sit. Riley and Zumwalt are perfect examples and should have been playing from Day 1.
I like how on paper we should be a 8, 9 , 10 win team
But in reality it plays out as only 4, 5, and 6 wins. It really indicates that the problem is not the players, but indeed the coaching.
In fairness
on paper, it was expected that UCLA would be a 6 win team this year, including by Nestor and many other of the fine folks here at Bruins Nation. This is not to say that this 4-8 season was not an absolute disappointment, especially given the blowouts, the egg we laid against $C, the undisciplined play of the players, and the conservative play-calling. It is to say that in terms of W’s and L’s, I think only the most optimistic of fans really expected 8-10 wins this 2010 season.
Next year, despite the ineptitude of this coaching staff, the expectations for what will be acceptable will be much much higher given the time that CRN will have a full 4 years to recruit his own players.
Some of us figured 6 wins was on the optimistic side
There were many who thought we’d be somewhere between 4 and 6 wins. Before the season many figured it would take a miracle to beat: Texas, Stanford, Cal, Oregon, and Arizona. And there were differences of opinion on: KSU, Houston, ASU, OSU, Wash, & USC. WSU was our only ‘will win’
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 5:58 PM PST up reply actions
there are enough rick apologists
in the power positions that even another 4 or 5 win season keeps him around at least a couple more years…. get used to mediocrity (at best).
They're not so much apologists
as people who won’t shell out the money for an overhaul. They have their hands on the purse. It’s not that they like mediocrity it’s that they’re super conservative and tight fisted with expenses.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
"The problem is not the players, but indeed the coaching"
Go tell Guerrero what you just said.
Right.
If we hire a halfway decent coach right now, we should be contenders for the Pac-12 championship next season. How hard can it be to teach correct technique and a few dozen plays to players? Geesh, anyone on BN could do that
When I think about it – coaching Football is so easy, UCLA should not have to pay someone to do it. It should be a side job for a math teacher or something!
With the talent we have we should win at least 9 games . . .
With the coaches we have we will win 5 at most.
What if the other teams get even more talent?
One of the factors we have not been considering in these discussions of UCLA’s performance is how has the competition been doing?
Our schedule in 2010 was much harder than our schedule in 2009.
We won 6 regular season games last season – why did anyone expect us to do the same this season?
by KnudsenRockne on Dec 8, 2010 6:51 PM PST up reply actions
There is talent
but not enough, not old enough, not enough at the right positions, and not enough decent players to back them up. You can’t expect the “talent” to play the whole game, especially if they are freshmen.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
NrendonBruin: Or maybe 4 even, then to expect...
him to say " the team had good practices, everyone made good progress and they only needed to execute better. The time will come……….." To put the icing on the cake, there would then be comments about how another one or two years would be needed in recruiting players to shore up the weak areas, etc.
That’s why I said if Guerrero wouldn’t yield the axe now, then Rick himself should do the right thing by walking away.
An interesting thought regarding coaching prospects
Would Jimmy Johnson want the job ?
The position isn't open
so there’s nothing to discuss…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
