Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: UFC 146 Results: Junior dos Santos TKO's Frank Mir

Re. 2010 Expectations: Sustaining UCLA’s Forward Momentum

Let's start our Saturday with another national preview on UCLA. This time it is from  Paul Myerberg of the New York Times. You can find Myerberg's thoughts on college football over at "the Quad" (The NYT's College Sports Blog). He has been posting exhaustive previews of all FBS teams at Pre-Snap Read.

Myerberg's assessments on UCLA last year - when he predicted us to go 6-6, 4-5 in regular season - was pretty much on the money. So it's really interesting to read what he has to say about the Bruins this season.  Myerberg has the Bruins ranked number 40 in his pre-season preview as he takes note of the clear progress Bruins made in 2009 (emphasis added throughout):

In a nutshell It's still a work in progress, this rebuilding job. Progress was made last fall, however, beyond merely the all-important three-game improvement in the win column. Improvement was made on both sides of the ball. U.C.L.A. scored 286 points, not a good number - only 22 points per game - but more than a four-point improvement over its 2008 output. The Bruins allowed 21.2 points per game, down from 29 points per game the year prior. Better yet, U.C.L.A. seemed to locate a quarterback; play from this position was horrendous in 2008, particularly in terms of its penchant for turnovers. This improvement, steady as it was, did little for U.C.L.A. through five games in Pac-10 play: the Bruins opened 0-5, failing to score more than 20 points four times and holding no opponent to fewer than 24 points. The season was made with a solid start and a solid finish, with U.C.L.A. winning its first three games and three of its last four. Improvement was surely made, even it wasn't pretty.

He thinks the Bruins will "continue to see improvement" in 2010 as they are "rounding into form" under Coach Rick Neuheisel":

In a nutshell I may be in the minority, but I think we'll continue to see improvement from the Bruins in 2010. Will that reveal itself in the win column? With this schedule - the non-conference slate is jaw-dropping - perhaps not. That doesn't mean the Bruins won't be improved, nor does it mean the Bruins aren't a Pac-10 dark horse. They will be, and they are. Well, on that second point... it's a very dark horse. Still, I like the direction of the program under Neuheisel: last season illustrated that progress has been made, and there's little reason, despite some losses on defense, to expect any step back in 2010. The continuity on offense will only aid U.C.L.A.'s scoring attack, particularly under center. Is Prince ready to take the next step? No, he's no quite an all-conference quarterback, at least not yet. But he'll be improved, and will do a better job of stringing together successive solid performances. The defense does face issues up front, where three starters must be replaced. If that group can round together, joining a talented linebacker corps and secondary, the U.C.L.A. defense should again rank in the top third in the Pac-10. Helping matters further are five Pac-10 games at home, as well as a road game against Arizona State, a game U.C.L.A. should win. Can we put U.C.L.A. in the same breath as Oregon, U.S.C. and Oregon State when discussing potential Pac-10 champions? No,  not in 2010. But the Bruins are beginning to round into form, leading me to believe the future is bright.

You should read the entire preview here because his notes are pretty much in sync with what we have been reading and writing on BN. Myerberg does have one mistaken impression on the Bruins though. It is about our "pistol" offense. Hey, no one is perfect. We will correct that (with a little help from tWWL of all places) and share more thoughts on expectations after the jump.

Star-divide

Myerberg wonder whether the "Pistol offense" is "a wholesale change" in UCLA's "offensive philosophy" in his ongoing "Five and Five" segment on the Bruins. The answer is obviously negative. We have gone over how the Bruins ran that formation number of times last year and that it is just that - a formation - in a total offensive scheme. Ramona Shelburne of ESPNLA actually has some good notes on how the"revolver" formation came about and how it fits into our offense:

"Norm and I had a conversation after last year that we had to do some things differently to expect different results," Neuheisel said. "So we went out there and studied different programs and ideas.

"We always can go back and do what we did and hope we're just a little bit better. But I went through this before at the University of Washington, where we couldn't move the ball, and all it took was just this magic, this little spark of making defenses play something every down to create the opportunity to exploit them in other places."

The pistol will be merely a tool in the Bruins' kit, not an every-down call. But the fact Neuheisel and Chow are beginning to add to their playbook after two seasons of simply trying to get everyone to learn all the plays in the old one shows how far UCLA has come.

Sure seems like Shellburne has the concept down in terms of how CRN and Norm Chow are thinking about using this formation. It has been amusing to see how most of the local and national reporters have failed to see the overall. You can totally blame Myerberg for having the kind of misimpression he has on this formation. Lot of it has been due to clueless reporting (and often hackjobs) we have seen coming from the local news outlets.

Going back to our season outlook, Shelburne got some poignant comments from CRN:

"We're in a deliver business," Neuheisel said. "I've got a sense of calm, not hurrying to get it done. If it doesn't get done, that'll work itself out. If somebody decides there's a better person for UCLA football in terms of leadership, they'll let me know.

"But I am excited about the challenge that this season presents, and I'm so fond of the guys in our program. I know what they want, so we're going to do it together. We're going to figure out a way to be a UCLA team that not only our fans are proud of but everybody else has to take notice of."

There has been some freaking out at some other online communities about Bruins being picked 8th in the conference.  This has been mostly coming from usual worrywarts who get weak kneed at first sign of trouble and also from some hard core Dorrell supporters, who are now amusingly concern trolling and worked up over expectations after their boy wonder completely destroyed our program.

I guess after being mediocre for so long thanks to Toledo's missteps and Dorrell's inept "leadership" and total lack of vision, we can't fault some Bruins from being overly concerned (we saw that among Red Sox fan base for almost a century until 2004). What is sad though is that kind of hyper worrying and concern trolling, takes all the fun away from enjoying the bit by bit building of a program.

It has been obvious to number observers - such as Paul Myerberg from the New York Times, Oli Buchanan from Rival.com, and Richard Cirminiello of CollegeFootballNews.com - that the Bruins are on a steady path towards right direction under CRN. All the data points from our exhaustive depth chart analysis, points to the fact that he has been methodically replenishing the talent barren roster left over by the previous regime. 

Under CRN the Bruins clearly have the momentum. They are going to hold on it if they stay on an upward trajectory by performing better during the conference play this season. As Myerberg noted in his preview during the 5 game losing streak last season, Bruins lost 4 of them by 14 points. If the Bruins keep getting better (like they did towards end of the season gaining much needed confidence), matter of time when some of those games will swing our way. We will stick with CRN's approach rather than getting caught up in hyper worrying and concern trolling over Pac-10 Media day projections.

GO BRUINS.

Comment 17 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Hyperworrying

Agreed, when you look at last year and if these 8th place prognosticators knew what they were talking about, we were in almost every ballgame. It’s not like we had no shot in any of those games. It was usually a big mistake on our part that led to an extra touchdown deficit. It’s funny how friends that I know that do not closely watch ucla football talk about our record, but a closer look shows how much improvement we made last year. There are 2-3 of those games (during that 5 game losing streak) that were winnable. We could have easily been an 8 win team. That and the excellent analysis on BN that gives me comfort that we will do better than 8th in th PAC, but the nonconference is no joke and I hope players do not get too down if it’s not as they hoped.

by hongerelli on Jul 31, 2010 8:28 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

Last Season

The Bruins usually came out and played the first series well, as it was scripted. I saw a problem during the losing streak related to the offensive execution when they had to play down and distance after the first series.
Then finally, against Oregon State, in the forth quarter, something happened. Suddenly the plays coming in from the sideline were being executed. Up to that point, UCLA couldn’t play from behind to save its life.
If the defense can execute changes before the start of the second half, if the offense can execute down and distance and quit the drive killing penalties (I have no concerns about special teams – as long as there are no muffs), then I believe UCLA will be in every game.
As much a pathetic homer as I am, and I have lost too many bets by betting with my heart, 7 – 5 and 5 – 4 in PAC 10 play seems about right.

by sam_in_hb on Jul 31, 2010 8:48 AM PDT reply actions  

good observation Sam

Specially re offense doing well in first series. Would be interesting to see some numerical analysis on it.

5-4 in Pac-10 for this season would be a definite mark of progress.

by Nestor on Jul 31, 2010 9:06 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

5 - 4 might be a reach, but...

On a completely unrelated sidenote, I am moving from Huntington Beach to the DFW area in about a month, and don’t know how to make sure I catch every game. I am willing to pony up for a Fox Sports West package, but recall something like Justin.com or something like that.
My boss here never scheduled me during a UCLA football game (a great guy, Ohio State alum and diehard Buckeye fan), but I don’t think I will have that luxury when I move – at least not for the first season. : )
Any suggestions to record and watch replays online or by any other means would be greatly appreciated. Links would help, too.

by sam_in_hb on Jul 31, 2010 9:34 AM PDT reply actions  

Get the Fox Sports Package

It is really worth it imo (at least until new pac-10 tv deals are hashed out).

by Nestor on Jul 31, 2010 9:39 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

I was at the

Stanford game and we had that game! How they believe we’ll finish 8Th is absurd!

"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's" - John Wooden.

by TheUclan on Jul 31, 2010 10:10 AM PDT reply actions  

Speaking of Stanford...

Am I the only who thinks Stanford is getting way too much press as a threat in the Pac 10 this year. i realize they made strides last year and I also realize that Luck is solid at the QB position but Toby Gerhardt made Luck’s job a whole lot easier last year than it will be this year. Last year, linebackers absolutely had to stay home every play Gerhardt was on the field which allowed Luck to throw only into single coverage. This year he won’t have that luxury.

I agree that one of the games we could have won last year was the Furd. I’m hoping for and optimistic we’ll see a different on field result this year.

Go Bruins.

by DoubleTroubleBruin on Jul 31, 2010 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Considering Gerhart accounted for one third of their offense

I agree Stanford is over-rated. They return a lot of people on both sides of the ball, but not #7. Let’s see how Luck looks with a mortal lined up behind him.
Thinking that if Prince had #7 behind him (why wouldn’t they let him play baseball), last season looks a lot different for the Bruins.

by sam_in_hb on Jul 31, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree, Gerhart played a far more critical role than people give him credit for.

Stanford’s offense is a question mark to me until they show that they have a running back that can fill half of Gerhart’s shoes this season.

I also partially agree that we could have won the Furd game, but many unlikely events had to fall into place (like Kevin Craft orchestrating a last-minute, game-winning offensive set across nearly the whole length of the football field).

by bruinbunz on Jul 31, 2010 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

If we score a TD

on that opening drive instead of a FG its a different game.

"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's" - John Wooden.

by TheUclan on Aug 1, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Expert Predictions

The "experts" making predictions look at four things:

1) How the team did the year before;

2) The number of experienced star players coming back;

3) The number of experienced players lost to the pros;.

4) How the team has done over the long term.

The people making predictions look at a team that was 3-6 the year before in the Pac-10, lost
Alterraun Verner and Brian Price to the pros, and has not been a factor on the national scene in
over a decade and conclude that, surprise, the Bruins are going to again finish in 8th place in the
Pac-10.

Looking at some old football magazines, the 82 team that won the Rose Bowl was picked by
Street & Smith to finish third in the Pac-10 and sixteenth nationally, They finished fifth
nationally in the final poll.

The 93 team that won the Pac-10 was picked by the Sporting News to finish seventh in the
conference, while Street and Smith predicted they would finished fifth.

The 97 team that won the Pac-10 was picked by the Sporting News to finish fourth in the
conference, and was unranked nationally. The Bruins finished fifth in the final poll.

 I think this Bruin team is still a year away, but I don’t think it is an 8th place team.. It is true that
this team has more talent than experience on the roster. However talented players will get
experience. The converse of that statement is not true.

Neuheisel has assembled a good coaching staff, and has consistently brought in good recruiting
classes. The "experts" will figure that out when they usually do, after the fact . .. . .

by Michael6636 on Jul 31, 2010 10:44 AM PDT reply actions  

Cuts both ways

You’re right in how the pundits use some predictable criteria in their preseason rankings. That 93 squad had a lot of talent and in retrospect was primed for a decent run, but didn’t get a lot of notoriety simply because of the 92 team’s mediocre record. What they didn’t make note of was the huge number of critical injuries on that 92 team, and the number of underclassmen that got thrown into starting roles as a result.

I agree that this year’s squad could very well turn out a lot better than the “experts” think. But, you also have cases where highly rated Bruin teams did not measure up to their pre-season billing.

I recall the 86 team (coming off a Rose Bowl win and a top 10 ranking) was ranked #2 by SI and #4 by the wire services. But, they had that blowout loss to OU to open the season, and then lost the Pac-10 opener against ASU (turned out that this decided the conference title). Then they went on a roll until they got upset by Stanford and had to gut out an ugly tie against UW. But, they ended the season by routing SC and BYU, which set up the 87 campaign with Aikman taking over at QB.

The 1989 and 1999 teams were also preseason ranked in the top 10, but fell hard after some early season losses.

by Woochifer on Aug 1, 2010 2:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Just remember what Coach used to say

“I’d rather have a lot of talent and a little experience than a lot of experience and a little talent.”

"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that count's" - John Wooden.

by TheUclan on Aug 1, 2010 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Let's not forget Prince's injuries mid-season

Our ebbs and floes correlated pretty closely with Prince’s health. Since last year was his freshman year, it took a couple of games for him to get going, and he didn’t really gain good momentum imo until the Oregon State game. He got knocked out at the end of the TN game and his absence fit right in with our terrible start in the Pac-10 season. I was also at the Stanford game, and remember that Prince was out for that game as well. While we made a valiant rally at the end with Craft, I think it’s a stretch to say we were close to winning that game.

As long as Prince stays healthy all season, I think we will have a better shot of having a far more productive offense. My concern is on the defensive end… will the DL hold their own after losing Price? I think we have a net loss in our DL, and it will have a marginal but palpable effect on our total team D.

by bruinbunz on Jul 31, 2010 12:30 PM PDT reply actions  

Persistent injury worries

First, thanks to Nestor and others who have been giving us these fact filled assessments on where we stand and contrasting views from across the nation.

But I fret incessantly about injuries. We may be two offensive line injuries away this Fall from seeing Prince running for his life. We are not where we were 2 years ago but we are a year away from having a depth chart where we can sustain a couple of injuries and still roll sc at the end of the year.

Much of the analysis to date on depth charts and in responsible publications (like the NY Times) has been fact based. I acknowledge my analysis is more opinion or fear based. “IMHO” in my case is based on I have much to be humble about in forming an opinion. But that’s where I stand or cower or whatever.

With that angst in mind:

Go Bruins!

by peggysue69 on Jul 31, 2010 2:16 PM PDT reply actions  

Naysayers!!

I said it before he was hired and said it when he came and now say it again "Don’t underestimate Neuheisel. I have followed his coaching since he was a graduate assistant under Donahue and there is ability and passion in his coaching style. We will do better than expected this year. Maybe not reach the top but don’t be surprised. Support the team and never underestimate Neuheisal as a coach. Go Bruins we will show them.

by Blue Critter 2 on Jul 31, 2010 2:40 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bruins Nation, an unofficial daily online scrap book covering the greatest collegiate athletic program in the nation. Established June 16, 2005. GO BRUINS.

Managers

Uclabear1_small Nestor

Arron_afflalo1_small Tydides

Brad_pitt_as_achilles_small Achilles

377011_2642084725867_1068030137_32302525_1166539782_n_small Ryan Rosenblatt

Telemachus_small Telemachus

Licenseplate_small gbruin

2761_small tasser10

Blue_bellerophon_small Bellerophon

Img_0052_2_small Patroclus

Small DCBruins

Of Counsels

094_small Ajax

Menelaus2_small Menelaus

Small Meriones

Small Odysseus

Associates

Eee_small freesia39

Uclabruins_small AHMB