Will Ben Howland be Vindicated?
by DCBruins on Jan 25, 2011 4:30 AM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintBN said that CBH had to be get the Bruins to the tournament this year. According to a number of sites, including ESPN bracketology, UCLA would make the tournament right now if the season were now over:
The Bruins finally moved into the projected bracket of ESPN's Joe Lunardi on Monday in the wake of a four-game winning streak that has them tied with Arizona for second place in the Pacific 10 Conference. Lunardi has UCLA seeded 12th and playing fellow No. 12 seed Wichita State in one of the new "First Four" opening-round games to be held March 15-16 in Dayton, Ohio, as part of the expanded 68-team format.
. . .
The Bruins are also gaining some momentum in the NCAA's official Rankings Percentage Index figures, moving up to No. 48 after being as low as 182 in some RPI figures before their victory last month over Brigham Young. UCLA could get another significant boost in that department with a triumph over Arizona on Thursday in Tucson. The Wildcats have an RPI of 25.
Arizona, by the way, is projected as a No. 7-seeded team in the NCAA tournament by Lunardi, who also predicts that Washington will be a No. 4-seeded team. No other Pac-10 school is currently projected to make the tournament (sorry, USC).
Obviously that is pretty precarious ranking. But this has been a season of improvement and this is a good sign. Good teams and coaches win the games they should (as we just did in the last four) and they get better as the year goes on as we seem to be doing.
Which means this next game will be very important to UCLA and not just because Arizona is ahead of us in the RPI and standings. UCLA will be facing seemingly its greatest weakness this year.
That weakness is the good "big" or bigs which every team that beat UCLA has to some extent. The possible exception and our only "bad" loss (as defined by RPI) Montana had two experienced bigs that played well but did not put up gaudy numbers. Kansas were led by interchangeable twin bigs. Washington in its victory at Pauley was led by a double-double by Matthew Bryan Amaning who also led the game in scoring. But the other three losses all have a troubling statistic by guys who are not thought of as great bigs or in two cases not even the teams best big:
- In the Villanova loss, 6'10" Mouphtaou Yarou had his career high in rebounds with 16
- In the VCU loss, Jamie Skeen had his career high in points with 23
- in the USC loss, Alex Stephenson had his career high in rebounds with 16
Yarou and Stephenson are not the best bigs on their respective teams. I was in MSG for the VCU game and was talking with VCU fans before the game. It was a friendly conversation and no one mentioned Skeen as the key to the game. Actually it was thought by the VCU fans, if the bigs determine game, then UCLA wins. Yet VCU's very good coach Shaka Smart called a play for the Skeen "10, 12 times in a row" and Skeen dominated the game.
Part of the problem is Malcolm Lee does not play inside. Lee is so good I would rather play Jimmer Fredette and BYU again then a team with a really good big like Derrick Williams of Arizona.
Because Derrick Williams may be the best big UCLA has played yet. Williams has had 3 straight double doubles and in 4 out of the last 5.
So how does UCLA stop him. According to CBH, Anthony Stover may be the best post defender. I really feel for Anthony with his limited experience trying to cover someone as good as Williams. Futhermore, Stover has some issues with rebounds on the defensive side because he goes for block often (In 23 minutes against Stanford with them shooting 30% he still only had one defensive rebound). Oh, and Williams had NINE offense rebounds in his last game.
Smith certianly has the big body but with his foul issues, not sure that is a good idea. Williams has 85 free throw attempts in 7 Pac-10 games including nights of 22 and 16 attempts! Smith may have another six minute night if he covered Williams too long, this time from fouling out.
Lane has recently been benched and passed in the rotation in favor of Stover. You have to believe this is because of Lane's defensive problems as Lane seems a more refined offensive player than Stover.
Which leaves Reeves Nelson. While I think Reeves bigger issues are with conditioning (he gets tired too easily) and attitude (he gets mad at himself and the refs too easily), he is no Malcolm Lee on the defensive side.
Zone is not a solution either. CBH will not play a zone. And for those of you who want a zone, think again about that idea against Williams and Arizona:
Washington sat in a zone half the night to slow Williams. The Huskies put a player in front of and behind Williams while the fluid 6-8 NBA prospect floated from elbow to elbow.
As much as control can be claimed when the final numbers are 22 points and 11 rebounds, the Huskies can claim it.
Another maybe better example of the zone problem is when WSU went zone for large portions of their game against Arizona, Williams had 19 rebounds (9 offensive) and the rest of the team had their best game of the year from 3 shooting 11-17 from behind the arc in a game where they shot 37% from the field.
The one thing about Arizona that no one really notices is how many outside shooters coach Sean Miller can put on the court. Guys with sweet-looking strokes if not overwhelming statistics. With the beast – Derrick Williams – down low, you have to pick your poison. WSU started in a zone and Arizona wasn't stroking it, so the Cougars stayed in it. But when the Wildcats started hurting them from outside, they switched to a man. The zone reappeared in the second half for a while but when it came to crunch time, WSU was back in man.
This is starting to sound like a preview I realize but I am bringing this up now to say that CBH has a very tough job ahead of him for the Arizonia game.
CBH will need his best strategy since Kansas to come up with a chance for the win but keep in mind in this is the first of a pair of PAC 10 games at which CBH has been amazing:
- 2010-11 3-0 (so far)
- 2009-10 6-2 (Lost at Oregon in OT in emotional last UCLA v. OR game at MacArthur Court and at AZ after Malcolm Lee got hurt and we were leading)
- 2008-9 7-1( Lost to then #18 ASU and ASU beat us twice the only team to do so in PAC 10 play that year)
- 2007-8 8-0
- 2006-7 8-0
- 2005-6 8-0
This is not just a good year/bad year statistic. Even in the final four seasons we did lose in PAC 10 play but we never lost in the first of a pair. Even last year in a disastrous losing season we came within an injury and OT of going 8-0 in the first of a PAC 10 pair. CBH will have a plan for Thursday and I am looking forward to seeing it. We will need it against Williams.
This record should help prove to doubters he is a good X and O coach. But what about everything else? Well, there are a couple of other interesting developments on that front. It would be great if UCLA had another strong PF type to match up with Williams, like say Drew Gordon. But the talented Drew Gordon left UCLA because he did not see eye-to-eye with CBH. In this case, I think CBH is vindicated that the problem was Gordon's, for Gordon is having more issues at his latest school New Mexico:
The Rams are tougher than they've gotten credit for, while the Lobos, it appears, might have some chemistry issues behind their slide away from solid NCAA tournament at-large status.
More bluntly, look here:
New Mexico is now 5-6 since Drew Gordon became eligible. #UNLV passed on him b/c of chemistry concerns. Wonder if that's an issue at UNM?
It kind of pains me to think we took a player that UNLV passed on because of chemistry concerns. Obviously, CBH and UCLA screwed up recruiting him but I think CBH is vindicated in ah the "mutual parting of the ways" with Gordon.
It seems like CBH is working hard to correct some recruiting mistakes. After the Stanford win, CBH immediately jumped a plane to the airport to go to Vegas to watch Shabazz Muhammad play in Vegas. We may not win the recruiting battle for Shabazz but Shabazz has already said we are staying in contact the most and that was before CBH flew there Saturday night to watch his big game. CBH is not going to be out worked.
CBH is also working hard to prove that last season was an aberration. Getting back to the tournament this year is essential first step, winning a big name recruit like Shabazz would be another great step. While I hate to quote the guys at Bleacher report what they conclude rings true, at least for today:
Conclusion
Ben Howland’s Bruins are making progress, moving back towards where UCLA is used to being. Just like the job that the Howland did when he first took over the program, he is restoring success to Pauley Pavillion. Even as the Bruins have opened Pac-10 conference play with a 5-2 record, you can see the pieces beginning to fall in place.
Basketball programs shouldn’t be thought of as elite because of a few seasons of success. Also, basketball programs shouldn’t be removed from such a status because of a couple of sub-standard years. In my opinion, UCLA is still an elite-level program that is fighting its way back to compete at the highest level.
Go Bruins!
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"First Four"
Why does it seem hard to believe that UCLA will be one of the first teams to participate in the “First Four” play in games? That just seems wrong, and I hope it does not play out that way. I know we all want to get back to the NCAA somehow, but as one of the first to participate in these expanded games seems just wrong.
Louisville, KY for UCLA class of '87
It is a better story
It cuts both ways. Because of who we are, they may let us in as a marginial case to play in the first “first four.” The ESPN guy has us playing Florida in the second round. It is all a gimick right now.
The key thing is we are in the tournament discussion now for the first time since 2009.
The reason why power conferences are in the First Four.
When the rule changes were made after last season, the NCAA decided that they did not want to penalize the small conferences with authomatic bids by having all of the 8 teams in the First Four as 16 seeds. No power conference team has ever been a 16 seed, so the NCAA decided to split the 8 teams between 16 seeds (4 small conference winners) and lower, power conference seeds (i.e., bubble teams like UCLA and Miami). Plus, it was understandably believed that there would be more interest in those Tuesday games if some bigger programs were involved.
I am not saying that I agree with what they did, but that is the reason for doing it and, as DC states below, the key is that we are now at least in the discussion. I’d rather UCLA be one of the First Four than in the NIT.
It is also better than the larger fields (96 teams were considered) they were discussing.
by orlandobruin on Jan 25, 2011 7:06 AM PST up reply actions
this season
I’d rather be in anything at all than 14-18. Yes we’re improving this year, and that’s fantastic. But we aren’t a very good team yet. If we can get into the “first four”, then I’ll be thrilled and view that as a giant step forward back to relevance in college basketball. Last year was so damaging that I’d be happy with a 12 seed playing whoever.
Well I have to give CBH credit
He has some how, some way, made UCLA being on the bubble seem like a good thing.
Lucky for him, he wasn’t coaching this program 10 years ago. Or 20 years ago. Or 30 years ago. Or any time after 1960 or so. Oh, and coaching in the 2011 version of the Pac 10 is pretty fortunate too.
19 games and 1 quality win, and he’s got Bruin fans talking about progress and vindication.
Wow. How did he do it?
Sorry for the sarcasm. I just think the bar should be set higher for this program. Barely squeaking into an expanded tournament would be another substandard year, which would be 3 in a row. Can we get a couple of more quality wins before we start talking about progress?
You must have not watched the 09-10 season.
Progress is being made. This team plays hard for 30-35 minutes a game. They can resemeble Bruin Ball for periods of time. They are starting to become a cohesive group. They are limiting their tournovers. Zeke is becoming the leader on and off the court and most importantly they are winning.
No progress huh?
by Waitingfornumber12 on Jan 25, 2011 7:45 AM PST up reply actions
Your point is valid
We should not be a bubble team but we are making progress which is what good teams do. I led with a ? not a period.
But in the same sense, you don’t go from a losing season to the final four. Just not going to happen. So the bar is set for this year at making the tourney, he is on his way to doing that. If he does that he likely did a good job.
Well you are correct
Moving up from an F to around a C- is definitely progress. Maybe even considered a ‘good job’ by many.
Definitely shouldn’t be expecting an A. Or even a B for that matter.
You are being little unfair here
We respect your thoughts BM. You have been with this community from the beginning. We would never want anyone to step back from the high expectations we have for all facets of UCLA athletics in this community.
Now that I have said that, I think DC is striking the right tone. He and rest of the frontpagers have laid our expectation for this season, which is to make the tournament. Nothing less will be acceptable. This doesn’t mean that our expectation for next year will be just making the tournament. It will be elevated accordingly.
While that is the big picture, it is reasonable for DC to project a little sense of optimism after Bruins pulled out wins in 4 must win games. If the Bruins can get a split in the desert this week, they could be set up for a solid and emotional homestand against SC and St. Johns (two must win games as well).
It is okay to enjoy the ride just a bit while maintaining big picture perspective. I really appreciate how DC has stepped up maintaining great balance and staying even keeled through this season.
I just think it's too easy to characterize us a perennial top team
Yeah, we’ve had two down years. But if we make the tournament, after those two years, is this really a down year? Blue would probably say yes. While that may be his perogative, I think success should be measured (and tempered) by the amount of adversity you’ve faced. I don’t think anyone’s faced as much adversity as a coach as CBH. Between the MASSIVE drought of talent in CA, to the incredibly overrated 2008 class, to the early departures of JF, AA, LRMAM, RW, KL, JH, Wright, and Stanback, that’s losing double digit players in the space of four years. Considering you only get 13 on scholarship, that’s nearly an entire team gone.
I’m happy with Ben, and there’s nobody i’d rather have at the helm of this ship. You can disagree, anyone can, Blue, but he’s here. So what the hey, lets ride with him.
by OswegoBruin on Jan 25, 2011 10:01 AM PST up reply actions
We do not care much for excuses
Making the tournament should be minimum expectations at UCLA for a “rebuilding” year. We will give Howland a mulligan and consider this a “rebuilding” season. Next year we will expect contention for Pac-10 title and a high tourney seed (within top-4).
It is up to Howland to manage (“caretaker” to use his word) his program in a way (both recruiting top talents and retaining promising ones on roster) and maintain UCLA’s status as one of the elite programs in the country. We will not be very sympathetic to excuses if standards are not met.
I have a history of defending CBH
and i’m proud of our guys so far this season. I truly think we’re getting better and i’m enjoying the team again (especially ML). I want us to make the tourney every year but I, personally, won’t want to see CBH go if we don’t this year. Just my 2 cents.
I’ve even made the same argument that Oswego did above that CBH has had to endure more adversity than other coaches due to the number (and quality) of his early departures. But upon further reflection, I realized that we are going through the same pain that other top programs go through in this new era of underclassman declaring for the draft.
Take, Ohio State, for example. Since 2008 alone, they have had just as many early quality departures under Thad Motta (DeQuan Cook, Mike Conley, Greg Oden, Koufos, BJ Mullens and Evasn Turner). At 20-0 and a unanimous #1 in the country, I’d say they’re handling it just fine.
Food for thought…
by DoubleTroubleBruin on Jan 25, 2011 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
We are not going through the same pain as other "top programs"
Ohio State =/= UCLA. Do not compare Ohio State’s basketball “tradition” to Coach Wooden’s program. Not here.
Ohio State is a “top program.” UCLA is an elite one. Our measure sticks are Duke and UNC because those school have modicum of respect for academics. UNC struggled last year. But there is a huge difference between Roy Williams. One won national championships and the other hasn’t.
Three years ago UCLA had a program which was elevated above Duke. We lost that due to bad recruiting and bad roster management. It is up to Howland to fix it. Getting us back to the tournament will be a solid first step. He will still need to follow it up with picking up his recruiting which has been sagging for more than a year, and putting together a championship contending season next year.
His seat will get hotter if he does not make the tournament. We also do not appreciate folks coming here and dismissing this as some kind of “blogger” discontent. There is a reason why UCLA’s fundraising around Pauley has been somewhat suspect. It just doesn’t have to do with bathrooms.
Are you just looking for an argument, A?
Sorry for the delay in responding but this is the first chance I’ve had to sit down and do so.
You’ve misstated my point. First of all, I did not dismiss anyone or anything. I made no mention of “blogger discontent” and I did not imply that Ohio State was somehow equal to or better than UCLA basketball – in athletics, academics or otherwise.
I agree that Howland has struggled and that it is up to him to fix it. I simply offered my opinion, as a fan, that I would not wish to see him replaced as head coach of the UCLA basketball team if this season does not result in an NCAA tourney berth. I am willing to give him more time. That view may be in the minority here, but I am still entitled to it. I have great respect for our program and for you guys who put so much effort into this site to provide such informed views. But we don’t always have to see eye to eye on every issue.
On my second point, I think we are more closely aligned than you realize. Despite my support for CBH, I tried to be honest and admit that an excuse upon which I myself have relied shouldn’t be used as such a crutch. Again, I agree that it is up to Howland to right the ship. I simply wanted to put forth the thought that we aren’t alone in dealing with younger guys leaving early for the NBA… and that we are in a worse spot than other top (or “elite” if you want to make that distinction) programs. Thats all. If anything I was saying that pressure on Howland should be greater without this particular excuse, not less.
I used Ohio State as an example merely becasue they happen to be the number 1 team in the country right now, not for any other reason. I could’ve just as easily used Kansas (none of Cole Aldrich, Darrell Arthur, Mario Chalmers, Xavier Henry, Brandon Rush or Julian Wright saw their senior years since 2008…)
by DoubleTroubleBruin on Jan 25, 2011 8:16 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with this
I guess the point I was trying to make is that when your point of reference is that dumpster fire that was the 2009-10 basketball season, any modicum of success is going to bring optimism and praise. Yet for me, in keeping the big picure in mind as the point of reference, this basketball team has yet to prove much, which I think partly explains why I am a little less bullish than others in assessing Howland. Yes there has been progress. Yes there has been improved play and chemistry. BUT, we have just 1 quality win up to this point. Our 4 game winning streak includes beating 2 bad teams on the road and 2 bad/mediocre teams at home, and we struggled to do so in all 4. We have yet to really put together 40 minutes of good basketball. Our 13-6 record looks much better than 14-18, but what would our record be if we played in any major conference not named the Pac 10? With that in mind, it’s really hard for me to endorse Howland’s performance right now as meeting up to UCLA’s standards. And I am quick to dismiss excuses, because, again, he is the caretaker.
The bar is lowered for Howland this year, just as it was his first 2 years in this program. The only difference is is that the bar was lowered on his watch. As long as the bar keeps trending upward and doesn’t come back down again, I can get optimistic about the long-term health of this program under Howland.
The team is 13-6.
Last year it was 14-18.
Last season had Drew Gordon transferring mid-season, Drago killing chemistry, and a walk on making the biggest shots.
This season has improved play out of Anderson and Nelson, Zeke improving chemistry, and better team play on both ends of the court.
It is all about improvement. Nobody expected this team to match the 3 Final Four teams. This team is trending in the way of the 2005-2005 team, which made the tournament, and which predceded the 3 Final Four teams. That is progress.
Of course the bar is set higher for this team, just not for this season. It is not unreasonable to think that UCLA could make the field and win a game or two, which would make the season a success.
And FWIW, 23 years ago, Walt Hazzard’s team missed the tournament. If I recall, people were pretty happy that we made the tournament in Harrick’s first season, made the sweet 16 a year later by upsetting Kansas on Tracy Murray’s clutch FTs, and continued a trend that ultimately results in a championship in 1995.
by orlandobruin on Jan 25, 2011 8:23 AM PST up reply actions
These are good points
Last year we were disappointed after losses. This year, we seem to be just as disappointed after wins.
I don't think you're accurately gauging the relative disappointment
I’d say despair would be a more accurate descriptor of reactions to last year’s games.
Or another way to describe reactions to last year's losses
Hopeless anguish accompanied by misery-filled personal desolation.
All good points
I have not been able to watch too many games, and the ones I have seen haven’t generated comparisons to our great teams of the past. Anyone have a magic “Let’s play all 40 minutes” pill?
Hey man, 40 minutes is a long time
It’s like… almost an hour.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
if you find a pill that lets you perform 40 minutes...
… then YOU can be the Phil Knight of our program…
by britishbruin on Jan 26, 2011 12:42 AM PST up reply actions
I promise that if I become the Phil Knight of our program
that I will not make us wear silly looking unforms and I will not put a Rorschach test on the court.
But
please do build us a $230 million dollar arena. Oh and on campus football stadium please!
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
by OswegoBruin on Jan 26, 2011 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
Harrick
basically had this program oscillating from a peak of a National Championship to a valley of an 8 seed in the tournament. A few deep tourney runs and a couple of disheartening 1st round exits in between. Nothing lower than that. This is where the program needs to be, at a minimum, and it is not unrealistic to expect that. Hence, Howland will be ‘vindicated’ in my book once he gets us back to being an elite program, not some bubble 12 seed team.
Also, let' see how the progress continues
The high standard should always be there, and progress must also always point towards meeting it, which is banner#12, whenever that happens.
CBH, how come you missed Soy Sauce of Etiwanda?
CBH, how come you missed Soy Sauce of Etiwanda? Soy Sauce came from Etiwanda HS. Same school where Darren Collison came from.
Isn’t he as good as DC? Check him out…
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ryan+mendoza+basketball&aq=f
I think struggle has made Ben a better coach
I like the fact that he has opened up the offense and not calling every offense set from the bench. I think it is necessary if we want to put up banner number 12.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 25, 2011 8:16 AM PST reply actions
Agreed
The best part of the last two years is that CBH may be a better coach. So often we think of coaches as a static variable, but the truth is, they get better and worse. I think we have seen CBH get better.
Agreed
The best part of the last two years is that CBH may be a better coach. So often we think of coaches as a static variable, but the truth is, they get better and worse. I think we have seen CBH get better.
Howland X's and O's
UCLA’s spacing in the half court and execution against zone defense still leaves a lot to be desired, but I do like the fact that CBH has allowed the guys to run more this season. I don’t think recruiting will ever be an issue with UCLA. The university and the program’s history self recruit a certain caliber player, heck, even in the Hazzard and Farmer eras we had future NBA guys.
I would like to see Howland incorporate a zone defense to allow his team to rest a bit on defense (especially with a short bench) and to junk up the game a bit, throw a different look at teams. The Bruins’ signature defense will always be man-to-man as long as Howland is the HC, that is undeniable, but a little flexibility would reap rewards and allow him to grow fundamentally as a teacher of the game. I’m not surprised by this team, I thought they’d figure it out by February and be hitting their stride about now. I think they’ll figure out a way to bother Williams and walk away with a win on Thursday night.
Life is what happens when you're busy making plans.
One problem with zone and Farmer/Hazzard
Zone takes away arguably our best weapon, Malcolm Lee. Malcolm Lee is so good at taking away the other team’s best player 1-3 and if you play zone you lose that. Remember what Crabbe did when Lee went out. He could do the same to a zone.
(That said for the SUC game, whose two best players are a 4 and a 5, it may not be a bad idea.)
Farmer recruited terribly with one exception, Reggie Miller. Hazzard hit on a few guys (Pooh Richardson and Derrick Martin) but the team was pretty weak when Harrick took over and his first year he did not have a backup guard and had to start two PGs. Harrick also got McLean who wanted to come but would not play for Hazzard.
I agree...
I just want the option of playing zone based on the oppositions personnel, foul trouble, game stategy, etc.
You are 100% correct about the talent gap with Farmer and Hazzard, however, both coaches did land McDonald AA level recruits that simply never panned out – Ralph Jackson, Montell Hatcher, Rodney Zimmerman, among several others.
Life is what happens when you're busy making plans.
McLean was set to commit to Georgia Tech too if Hazzard stayed
Earlier, another Fairfax recruit opted out of UCLA’s LOI even. Can’t remember the name now.
@Htse
Sean Higgins is your guy out of Fairfax. Ended up at Michigan and later GS Warriors.
Thanks, wasn't there also a story to why he wanted out of his UCLA's LOI ?
This part my memory failed me. But Higgins won a championship ring that year at Michigan though.
Great entry
I enjoyed reading this. Perhaps it’s because we’re able to be slightly more positive than when we lost to SC. But good write-up.
Go Bruins!
My patience is there if the team continues its progress, win or lose
My patience was sorely tested, stretched beyond the pale when the team consistently performed below its potentials. Ask Michael Roll how he felt about the debacle. That sums up our collective sentiments here.
Honestly I may be in the minority opinion here
But barring a late-season collapse, I definitely think Howland deserves and has earned himself another year. He had a bad year last year, that’s for sure, but it’s definitely looking like he’s learned from his mistakes and our team is showing some definite improvements. Gone are the chemistry issues that plagued us last year, and speaking with our players this year they legitimately seem to enjoy playing for him and are buying into his system. I’ll let you know now last year that wasn’t the case at all and we were supporting a very divided team.
We’re still a work in progress, that’s for sure, but we’re one that’s improved drastically. If we were to get rid of Howland this year, I feel that all of the progress we’ve made this year would be for naught.
BN position is clear
Howland needs to make the tournament. We will certainly enjoy the season if it continues to show sign of progress. Still for this year we have made our expectations very clear.
I can see where you're coming from
I, too, like to do my touchdown celebration before I cross the goal line.
Some meandering thoughts before Arizona
Well, not a title to attract readership!
Anyways, getting ready for Arizona and reading all my Bruin internet boards. Here’s my worry: the 4 game winning streak, awesome games from Lee, Honeycutt, Nelson, Zeke, Jerime, even Anthony with a great showing against ‘Furd, good D, and we will all just wink at the 5 dance steps he used to score just before the end of the 1st half ;-), 10-2 in the last 12 is setting up the manic depressive faithfuls for a hard landing IF we lose to Arizona on Thursday. Yes, we got a good shot at winning. But if things go the other way, this young team will have a tough time bringing enough focus to prevail against ASU on Saturday, and voila, 0-2 in zona and panic ensues.
I hope my worries are for nothing, but I do subscribe to the analysis that our toughest games are with teams who have strong frontline players. We will see.
Meandering along, I am not so much behind the thought that Howland MUST make the tourney this year to avoid the “hot seat”. I think it will be tough for any team to beat Washington for the Pac10 top spot. To go all the way in the tournament will be a very difficult task for any team except Wash. And the weakness of the Pac-10 will limit the # of teams. I would hold back on predictions on how we do until I see how the team plays this weekend.
My own “line in the sand” for Coach Howland is how he recruits the next class. If he fails to land a top PG in a situation where PT is essentially guaranteed, then I think you have say there’s too much of a track record of difficulty getting elite backcourt players. Personally, I’m NOT predicting a whiff. CBH will bring in a top pg to play with Norman Powell & Tyler Lamb and things will be good again.
GO Bruins!
Howland
Coach Howland is a top ten coach in college basketball (Don’t believe me ask the NBA scouts and GMs they rave about him). Any talk of replacing him is just that. For the money UCLA pays its coaches, the lackluster facilities, the stringent academic standards and, frankly, winning one championship the past 35 years – I consider us lucky to have landed Howland. He’s an excellent communicator. He’s a leader. He is a strong tactician and has proven he can take us to the elite level of the sport. It’s well documented that UCLA missed on an entire recruiting class – this is a process. I split season tickets and while I wish we played more in the open court and utilized a system that took advantage of our athleticism, I can’t complain about Howland’s tenure. Last year was an abberration. This year is what it is – a team that is coming close to maximizing its potential – that might lead to a NCAA bid anything above that is gravy.
Life is what happens when you're busy making plans.
Last year was an aberration alright
For UCLA Basketball. And it is because of that aberration that results are needed this year to show that the aberration is not becoming a trend. Howland can be all those things you mentioned, although it is debatable that he is even an average communicator, and still lose games because of bad recruiting and evaluation. If that’s something that he needs help with, then he needs to break out of his comfort zone and lose dead weight on his staff. Those that are uncomfortable with some actual standards for this team are going to be very uncomfortable next year when we raise them even higher.
Hear me out...
We all love our university, know it’s tradition, history, etc. We all feel that UCLA is among the top programs in the country and it is – but, every school goes through this every 15 years or so. No excuses, last season was unacceptable, but it happened, same way that Duke struggled for a while, Kentucky dropped, UNC missed the tourney, I could go on. Why should we expect to be immune?
The offensive style of play has allowed schools to negatively recruit against us. Also which top guards are going to commit to the program when the school just landed Holiday and Anderson – I don’t think anyone expected Anderson to struggle he was a tremendous player rated much higher than either Collison or Westbrook. I think Howland under estimated the impact of losing Keating and Ziegler as assistants – we all know the story by now. Bottom line is after enduring Lavin, we should really understand that we have a great coach in Howland. The results the last three seasons notwithstanding. UCLA cannot attract a better coach, that is simply fact. Ben will get this right and the Bruins will back atop the conference and a national contender, if not next year, the following. Hang in there. This year’s team is fun to watch. They are growing confidence and defining their roles in front of us, they still have a high ceiling.
Life is what happens when you're busy making plans.
We've already gone over this comparison to other schools
When UNC endured a similar stretch to ours, they fired their coach. Gillespie was let go after missing the tournament once. Duke’s idea of struggling under K is getting to the second round of the tournament. So you’ll have to excuse me if I call false equivalence on their “struggles” and our struggles.
You simply take it on faith that this will get turned around. I’m saying that I need to see momentum in that direction and I’ll be there as well. No one’s rooting for him to fail, but I’m not going to rubber stamp everything he does like some people. So no, there will not be patience if his inaction allows the overall condition of the program to deteriorate.
This year’s team is fun to watch…Sometimes.
That's fair...
It is a results business. I just believe in Howland. He took our program from, basically, the ashes to three straight Final Fours. Not counting his first season, he’s missed one trip to the dance. He built Pittsburgh. He has integrity. He is a tireless worker that actually cares about the university. He has so many positives that outweight one terrible season. I agree with you that the team is “sometimes” fun to watch. This year’s team reminds me of CBH’s first tourney team, if Honeycutt returns this club will be a preseason top ten squad in 2011-12.
Life is what happens when you're busy making plans.
I'm going to shelve my thoughts on preseason rankings
Because it’s not really relevant, but suffice it to say that that is no metric to base success off of.
I’m well aware of everything Howland brings to the table as a coach and caretaker of this program. My ideal scenario is that he turns this around, learns from what happened here, and that we have a lifer coach. That’s what I figured we had 3 years ago. Then he let the inmates run the asylum for a couple of years, and after an awful losing season here we are. All those positives don’t silence the fact that his predicament now is of his own making. You break it, you buy it.
I agree on the rankings part
Just using that as a baseline that CBH has the program back to where it should be as far as it’s viewed nationally. It will be interesting to see how not having a true home court affects next years team.
Life is what happens when you're busy making plans.
Please don't remind me of the state of the Pauley renovation
Getting a headache just thinking about it.
We shouldn't go 0-2 and the Tourney
This team has shown some toughness. We have not been blown out and ASU is in last place for a reason. We are winning the games we should win. I think 20 good minutes could beat ASU (I want more mind you.) I will be pleasantly surprised if we beat AZ but depressed if we lose to ASU.
As far as the Tourney, not saying beat UW. UW is already in barring a major melt down. However, depending on a number of factors, I think the PAC 10 will get 3 teams in. I think we can be in the equation in one of those other spots.
I think the league gets four teams...
Wazzu has a decent resume OOC and still has a legitimate chance to get an at-large bid. Take a look across the country, there are a lot of teams with unimpressive resumes. As much as the national media bashed the conference – the entire country outside of the Big East has collectively played itself back to where the Pac-10 can make a case for UW, UA, UCLA and WSU.
Life is what happens when you're busy making plans.
Well, if he is bringing in a top (or even decent) PG, it's mentioned publicly
which is entirely possible I suppose, but according to scout, we only have 1 PG in our sights for 2012: 5-star LJ Rose, as all the 2011 PG’s have committed to other schools
I foresee another JUCO transfer to get himself time since we’ve always struggled with recruiting from anywhere outside the west coast.
Maybe I shouldn’t be looking ahead to the future like that when this season is still going on.
I'm a big Howland supporter ... I even stood in line
in Pauley to shake his hand after the Montana State game (in town for family visit). I told him I really appreciated what he was doing with the program. Think I’ll replace my site pic with the picture my wife took of the two of us!
I’d like to think he can keep the dogs at bay with another JUCO transfer to start at PG in 2012, but I just don’t see how that flies with the fans. And honestly, it would really shake my faith as well. But with wide open available playing time and all that UCLA offers, I actually think he will bring in a major talent (read “elite”) to play point.
My post was mainly intended (though not so clearly written) to dispute the notion that Howland MUST make the tournament with this team. Secondarily, I proposed a better decision point would be how we recruit the 2012 class to fill the team’s critical needs.
things are trending in the right direction - all else is speculation
I took DC’s main point to be that we are moving in the right direction. That seems accurate. If there were a lockout in college basketball starting today, CBH would be unlikely to be fired, but he has done close to the bare minimum required after the black mark of last season – he has turned things around to a degree, with a team that appears to be improving, is managing to overcome some adversity, and is set up to be better next year. He clearly has not ‘earned another year’ based on what he has done so far, as if the wheels fall off the wagon the season could be a major failure. It is also conceivable that the team could miss the tournament in extreme extenuating circumstances and it not strike CBH a deathblow.
If the season had ended after the $c game, I think he would have been fired. If the season ended today, he would probably be back for another year but on the hot seat. However, things are trending positively, from the general performances and character of the team winning in some trying circumstances (where last year’s team would have folded), to positive recruiting rumors, to the emergence of some poise in our backcourt rotation giving more genuine hope for a deep run next year (the better Zeke/ML/JA play, the less people need to ask which Wear twin will play the point).
Triumphant plaudits are premature, but we have more reason for optimism today than we did 2 weeks ago, or last season. Will CBH be vindicated? A totally reasonable forward-looking question for which we do not yet know the answer, positive or negative.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
