The "Eye Test": The Homecoming Aberration Against California
After Arizona, I mentioned that the "Eye Test" for that game might have been for the last one this season. I wasn't sure I was going to do one for the Cal game heading into Saturday. I am totally ambivalent about the results on game day at this point and the win against the Bears didn't do much to change my mindset. Don't get me wrong. Saturday was cool. Saturday is always cool when it involves a Bruin victory and a loss by the team over there. Yet, we all have been around so long now, that we know better to get all worked up over one win, lose sight of the big picture.
Saturday's game wasn't much of a corner turner. That was turned in Arizona and number of other games this season that gave us a clear picture of the big picture. If anything as B mentioned Saturday's game brought up further questions about the state of the UCLA football program. The game was a coming out party for number of our talented youngsters whom we had been clamoring for week after week. So what took so long for our coaches to get them on the field? What took so long for coaches to change up the defensive schemes, the need for which was apparent to all of us in first quarter of the season.
I am not going to get into hypothetical scenarios at this point on how this season will end. I do know for sure that no matter what , I want to see a brand new coaching staff in charge of this program next season. I really appreciate how Coach Rick Neuheisel was able to hold the team together amidst all the "hoopla" (the phrase he used during the post-game press conference). As A noted so eloquently, we will always remember him as the QB who won us a Rose Bowl. But I have moved on emotionally. While I will be happy if this team can finish on a decent note, we will need change. On that note let's get to the eye test after the jump.
1) Is our defense prepared for each and every team we play?
For the first time this season, I am not cringing when I am filling out the answer to this question. By all accounts Bruin defense put together their best game of the season against a Cal team, which although average has had our number last three years. Let's point out some numerical highlights here:
- As AHMB noted in his Cal preview, the Bears came into this game with perhaps the best wide receiver combination in the conference in Keenan Allen (6-3, 205, So.) and Marvin Jones (6-3, 202, Sr.) Coming into Saturday night's game Allen and Jones had combined for 100 receptions, 1505 receiving yards and 8 touchdowns. What looked to be a complete mismatch against our hapless but talented defensive backfield, turned out to be a mismatch in favor of our Bruins. Anchored by Andrew Abbott, Aaron Hester, Stan McKay, Tevin McDonald, and Dietrich Riley (before he left the game), the Bruin secondary held these two to 8 receptions, 94 yards and 0 touchdowns. Jones was limited to 1 catch for 11 yards. That is nothing short of outstanding.
- Coming into the game Cal QB Zach Maynard completed 54.2% of his passes for 262.9 ypg and had a 2 to 1 TD to Int. ratio (12/6). Well we saw what happened as Maynard gave the Cal faithful a taste of what we experience against Texas gift-wrapping us with 4 ugly picks. He looked out of sync and reminded us of the Law Firm nightmares against Notre Dame in Karl Dorrell's last season in Westwood. Now to be fair it was more of Maynard just badly overthrowing the ball and missing receivers, but since I am in a charitable mood, I will give our D credit, especially a youngster like Tevin McDonald taking advantage of the opportunities presented to them.
- The front seven for the first time this year exerted some legit pressure against a decent pass blocking OL. Cal OL had given up only 13 sacks/35 TFLs coming into Saturday night. Led by a rejuvenated Datone Jones our guys racked up 6 TFLs/2 sacks (more on this below).
- Cal offense was only 2 of 12 in third down conversion situations against arguably (if not statistically) the worst defense in the country in that specific category.
Now why was the defense able to generate legit pressure against a decent pass blocking team? Peter Yoon has some answers:
What we saw this week was a different defense--literally. Tresey made major changes by shifting players around and introducing some new schemes.
Defensive end Datone Jones shifted inside to tackle and redshirt freshman Aramide Olaniyan got his first significant action outside of special teams. Keenan Graham got a lot more playing time at defensive end and linebackers Eric Kendricks and Jordan Zumwalt and safety Stan McKay were on the field for more snaps than in past games.
The moves paid off. Jones and McKay shared the team lead with six tackles. Kendricks was next with five. Graham had a sack and Jones had two. Olaniyan made a tackle for a four-yard loss.
The Bruins also introduced a quarter package with six defensive backs on the field at the same time and three down linemen.
"We knew we needed to change some things up, but mostly we needed to change our attitude," said Jones, who shared the team lead with six tackles and led the team with two sacks. "We needed to play with our heads on fire, everyone. We fed off each other. We were like piranhas. One guy gets the first bite and then 10 others swarm."
Now all this is good and I was happy for the players to finally see some life on our D. It was clear from last night that the Bruins had not quit like they did against Arizona. I appreciate DC Joe Tresey's decision to make these much needed changes and adjustments. The disturbing question we all need to ask is why did it take Tresey (and head coach Rick Neuheisel) until Game 8 and some disastrous performances along the way to make these dramatic changes? Why did changes such as moving Jones to defensive tackle (which we had discussed here before) or playing more of talent like Graham, Eric Kendricks, had to be forced due to suspensions? The answers to these questions provide clear cut hint to why we are going to need wholesale changes in Westwood.
There is another thing I need to mention regarding our defense. I don't really care for our guys woofing and hollering after every stop like they have won the super bowl. It was kind of cringing to watch it in the first few series - coming from a team that has underachieved all season. May be I am being too old school here but I just don't think this unit has earned the right to talk. Perhaps they can run the table and get to a bowl game held on or after January 1, then they can talk. Until then it looks silly. Speaking of kind of goofy (or is it tacky?), I didn't care much about those gimmicky BTB t-shirts either. I am glad that it's firing up the players. Yet that the players have to wear special t-shirts to get fired up in the eighth game of a coach's fourth season is kind of glaring indictment against the program.
For now though for one game at least, I will give this defense a grade of B+: 3.3.
2) Do we call offensive plays to catch our opponents off guard?
The answer to this question is simplistic terms is "yes." However, the reason why the UCLA offense caught the Cal defense, which is coached up by a pretty good defensive coordinator - Clancy Pendergast - is surprising to all of us. As AHMB mentioned Pendergast's D ate up UCLA's pistol offense last year up in Strawberry Canyon as the Bruins were limited to 26 yards rushing and 118 yards passing and throttled with 5 sacks. But here is the catch. Last year the Bruins for inexplicable reasons decided to throw out a rusty, one legged Kevin Prince against the Bears.
Last year the Bears were destroyed by Nevada's pistol attack in Reno, the Wolfpacks scored 52 points, running up 316 yards on the ground in 49 carries. It was Collin Kaepernick rushing for 148 yards in 17 carries, who befuddled the Bears with effective zone-read all night long. Give Rick Neuheisel and Mike Johnson credit for drawing up a game plan that built on that tape. They used Kevin Prince effectively in making the Bear D (with some pretty good talent) as bad ... well as the Bruins had looked coming into Saturday night. It's amazing to me that the Bears were caught so off guard by Prince's running and stunningly had no adjustments after that half.
Bruins had a total of 70 plays against the Bears, keeping it on the ground 52 times for 292 yards. Prince got it done, rushing for 163 yards in 19 carries, causing the announcers to bring up the name of a Bruin QB, even yours truly had never heard of before. That's right. Prince is the first UCLA quarterback to gain more than 100 yards in a game since Jeff Dankworth in 1976.
Derrick Coleman shined with 80 yards in 16 carries, barreling up front for 3 sweet touchdowns. Bruin rushing attack was effective enough that the suspended WRs were not really missed. Then again our WR rotations are so atrocious that not sure having them available would have hurt or helped the team.
Since we are talking about catching off-guard, I did like Neuheisel's decision to go with Coleman on 4th and 1 instead of doing a predictable QB sneak with Prince, that kind of helped us grab hold of the momentum for rest of the game.
So the answer to the question is yes the caught the Bears off-guard. But the context here is that it's the Bears' surprising defensive ineptness and inability to adjust that caught all of us off-guard. I'd give our offense an A, if the dominating ground game was complemented with an above average passing attack and if it came against a D that showed any ability to adjust. Since our passing game was so pedestrian and Cal defense was so shockingly inept (at least for one game), I will go with a grade of B: 3.0.
3) Do our players look like they know what they should be doing at all times?
Generally yes. For one game at least the Bruin team put together a decent overall performance. The unit, I'd really like to single out here is the Bruin offensive line. They were outstanding as they dominated a pretty good Bear defensive front. Coach Bob Palcic's guys physically dominated the trenches, racking up 294 yards in 52 carries. Wade Yandall - due to suspension of Albert Cid - got some major playing time and just dominated. He opened up huge holes all night which Coleman was blasting through for TDs.
On offense while our regular WRs were out, guys like Jerry Rice Jr. stepped up in a big way. Rice had only 2 catches for 17 yards. However, if you watched him closely you would have seen him out there blocking for Prince. From Yoon:
Still, downfield blocking was key in allowing quarterback Kevin prince to rush for 156 yards and the Bruins to tally a season-best 294 yards rushing.
"You know, we didn't pass that much but when I was out there I was just trying to chase down who every was trying to catch KP," Rice said. "I had a lot of fun out there. It was the first time I had played a game in a long time and it was one of the best times I had in a long time."
We can only imagine what was felt by Flash 80 and the entire Rice family at the Rose Bowl. While I am ambivalent about UCLA games at this point, it felt good as a Niner fan to see McDonald and Rice getting it done all evening. Now I hope those guys will stay in the rotation.
Since we are on this topic, I think it is worth mentioning how McDonald had struggled earlier in the season when he was put in due to injuries to Dye. However, it was clear how the kid has been learning through getting PT. This goes back to one of the central arguments on BN that it's the coaches' responsibility to ensure that our talented youngsters are getting credible playing time (and not getting buried in depth chart due to lack of seniority) so that eventually they can play up to a level when they appear to know what they should be doing all the time. Last night was a nice glimmer. Let's hope it's not a flash in the pan due to coaches going to back to same old, stale rotations at various positions.
The grade for this category is A-:3.7.
4) Do our players play for 60 G-D minutes every game?
The answer to this question is satisfyingly easy at least for the Cal game. I will sound like a broken record and ask where the effort has been and whether it will continue for rest of the season. But at least for Saturday night, the answer to this question warrants what I think is the first clean A of 2011 season: A: 4.0. [and that is pathetic.].
5) Do our players execute?
Our team generally had a decent performance on Saturday night but there were some glitches:
- Kevin Prince had a costly fumble in the second drive, when he gave up the ball after running for a huge gain of 21 yards. Prince was just careless in how he was holding the ball and coughed it after getting hit. I understand that Price was listening to Neuheisel, but still he needs to show a little more caution in that kind of situation.
- Now back to Prince again. As good as Prince was with his feet, he made some awful throws. His throw to Rice in first half, which 88 hauled in for his first career completion was awful. It was behind him and too high. Had Prince thrown a nice clean pass, Rice may have had a shot at first down. Prince also threw a pretty ugly pass towards Jerry Johnson later in the game, when Jerry appeared to have done a good job of getting open.
- Our special teams continue to be horrible. Jordon James muffed a punt giving Cal a key TO making the game close in second half. We also got penalized for an "illegal wedge" on a kickoff return. It's mindboggling how badly coached our special teams is and leads to more disturbing question about the way the program is managed.
- Speaking of bad management, what else can you really say for how the Bruins bungled the opportunity to take total control of the game in the closing mins of first half. Bruins got the ball on their 31 yards line with 1:00 min left on the clock, and shockingly had all 3 of their TOs. Instead of trying to put together an aggressive drive, setting up at least for a FG, Bruins wasted the opportunity punting away to Cal. The series was essentially botched when the Bruins ran it on the first down burning up valuable time. Prince then never got it going and the team led by the staff showed zero sense of urgency. It was a total fail.
So you can see, despite the score, there were plenty of issues from the game that remains a concern. We still have not played a clean game to date. The grade for this category is a C+: 2.7:
6) Do we have leaders on the field?
Johnathan Franklin is one of the captains of our team. I love Jet Ski and appreciate what he brings to our team, but to me it's Derrick Coleman, who may be emerging as the heart and soul of this Bruin team. I am not sure how many of you noticed during the Debacle in the Desert. While the team was imploding during the all out melee right before the half, Coleman was one of the guys who was trying to contain his team-mates. I am not sure of the exact categories for which those hard hats are awarded, but if that was given out in last 4 years, Coleman's helmet would no longer look gold. It'd be covered in those blue hats. I appreciate the effort this guy brings game after game. It's a testament to his character who he hasn't quit despite having all kinds of reasons to be disheartened and give up. It's for kids like him, I hope the Bruins can finish out on a strong note because a senior like him deserves better.
I should also add some words for Prince. While I have always preferred Richard Brehaut over Prince, I can't help but admire Prince's dedication and willingness to sacrifice his body for the four letters. Still Kevin, come-on man. Slide man, slide! We can't afford to lose you from injuries.
As for leadership on the defensive side, let's hope the coaches have learned their lessons and stick with the one game trend of giving preference to talent over experience. It will not only help the team, it will help the coaches to burnish their resumes when they are out on the market this off-season. The grade for this category is B: 3.0 (since I still can't identify any leaders on defense just yet).
Final Grade Card for California Golden Bears
Based on the discussion here is how it shapes up:
1) Is our defense prepared for each and every team we play? [B: 3.3]
2) Do we call offensive plays to catch our opponents off guard? [B: 3.0]
3) Do our players look like they know what they should be doing at all times? [A-: 3.7]
4) Do our players play for 60 G-D minutes every game? [A: 4.0]
5) Do our players execute? [C+: 2.3]
6) Do we have leaders on the field? [B: 3.0]
California GPA: 3.22
The grade card for Arizona was 0.13, Washington State was 1.95, grade card for Stanford was 1.97, grade card for Oregon State was 2.12, grade card for Texas was 0.22, the grade card for San Jose State was 0.67, and the grade card for Houston was 2.05. So the cumulative GPA after 8 games according to our "Eye Test" is now at 1.55.
[UPDATE: Note the GPA above is not accurate since I mistakenly counted C+ as 2.7 instead of 2.3. I updated the post to reflect accurate GPA for Cal, but the overall one is not accurate. It has been updated here. 11/21/11 - N]
So after that the Bruins cumulative GPA is nowhere close to even a C average. You see the problem here?
The numbers above is a good reason why so many of us are feeling ambivalent about a nice win over an average California during home-coming week. Now don't get us wrong. We think Jeff Tedford is a solid coach who has done a great job with Cal. However, he is having a down season with a new QB. The win against the Bears was nice but it does nothing to change the big picture dynamics in Westwood.
If anything the win against California further refocuses disturbing coach about roster management and player development, which we think has had a negative impact on the results of this season to date. We are rooting for this team to finish out on a strong note. That said the frontpagers remain resolute in their position for the need of a wholesale change in Westwood, so that the game we had on Saturday is not an aberration (out of 8 games), and is a regular occurrence for UCLA football every game day.
GO BRUINS
110 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Minor tweak in point 6
Assuming you mean to say ’can’t help but admire’ KP.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Totally agree about Coleman
I mentioned it in another thread, but I’m also not seeing why Franklin is the starter whenever he’s available. Coleman is rock solid. He does everything the coaches ask of him (he even plays special teams).
by SonOfWestwood93 on Oct 31, 2011 6:50 AM PDT reply actions
" We will always remember him as a quarterback that won us a Rose Bowl "
This is the consensus on BN, especially some of us that had the good fortune of witnessing the game in person then.
As the season winds down, I really feel a sense of nostalgia about him as a former Bruin quarterback converging with the finality of his UCLA coaching career . Somebody put it even more poignantly, hoping he would win a few more times before exiting with his head HELD HIGH.
When it is all said and done, I know this would be the fitting end. The image of him bragging about the Bruin pride always sticks out in my mind as I watched him pacing the sideline at Boulder, Colorado as its new, young coach, or jubilantly leading his Huskies team in Seattle before his troubles began.
What if.....
The Bruins come up with a game plan that beats ASU and wins out with victories over remaining three games including beating the Trojans in the Coliseum, will you and your other co-writers take off your stained glasses and admit it just took a little longer for CRN to turn the program around than desired?
As a former player and co-captain of a Bruin team and as I have been around the horn more than a few times (class of 61’), perhaps my perspective is a bit more patient than yours and I believe coaching at this level requires a maturing of the coaching staff and the depth of strong recruiting each year to attain the level we all desire.
My suggestion is to lighten up, be patient and see how the year finishes out before hanging CRN in effigy. And for those of you who believe some other great coach can walk into the LA arena and perform a miracle even with Coach Ricks’ recruited talented players, well I say again, take off your stained glasses.
As one former bruin player and one loyal Ucla fan, I say Go Bruins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! including CRN, his staff and his team.
I suggest you finalize your opinions after you have the rest of the data before making your assumptions that CRN and his staff must go. However, I am with you on the AD.
I for one look forward to seeing CRN, a former super Bruin player and MVP of the Rose Bowl his senior year, as the best possible head coach of Ucla’s football team for years to come. His coaching, recruiting and enthusiasm with patience can become legendary and his critics will disappear into the heap pile.
'CaptainJack65'
Jack Metcalf
Please no lecturing on perspective
We have been patient for 10+ years. A win over ASU is not going to change a think. It is incredibly condescending for you to come over here and ignore the body of work analyzing this program for months, telling us to be patient. We are patient. If we weren’t, we’d ask for Neuehisel’s firing after the debacle against the Trojans last year. So don’t lecture us on patience again. We have shown more of it than anyone else following UCLA.
Perfect example of why UCLA football is irrelevant.
As we saw on Saturday night, this team has a lot of young talent that was wasting away on the bench. In addition, the coaches have zero clue on how to be creative/flexible with their personnel.
This empathy for Neu is a microcosm of why UCLA FB sucks. It’s not personal, it’s just business. Once again, it’s not personal, it’s just business. If you want to compete with the big boys, you make decisions like a big boy.
What has one seen in the past 3+ years to conclude that Neu is the right man for the job? If anything, Saturday night was an indictment on how ultra conservative and clueless he is and has been. Same goes for Tresey. Saturday night pissed me off even more.
Only at UCLA do feelings matter more than results. UCLA needs to stop hiring UCLA guys because when they fail, we keep them around a lot longer than they should be. Neu needs to go. Gu-error needs to go. Wholesale changes need to be made. This mom and pop operation needs to be blown up and it’s time to get serious.
I am totally with you Jack
I think Arizona should have been more patient with Mike Stoops.
I think Florida should have been more patient with Ron Zook.
I think Notre Dame should have been more patient with Tyrone Willingham and Charlie Weis.
I think Washington should have been more patient with Tyrone Willingham.
I think Alabama should have been more patient with Mike Shula.
I think Kansas State should have been more patient with Ron Prince.
I think Syracuse should have been more patient with Greg Robinson.
What were those fools thinking? It’s not like things got better after they got rid of those mediocre coaches.
Now, if you want to go and show me a coach (in modern times) who started as badly as CRN but turned it around into a consistent winner, I will listen. You are correct on one thing…his coaching has been legendary all right.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
A small correction...
My wife the K-Stater would kill me if I didn’t call you out. The Oklahoma game not withstanding, K-State is doing quite well and in the top 20 just 3 years after canning Prince.
Tasser agrees with you.
Reread his comment. All the schools above are doing better for their “impatience” with the previous coach, KSU included.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
I admire your unflagging hope
But it isn’t realistic. How many more years of patiently waiting are you prepared to endure before the football program is permanently irretrievable?
You also contradict yourself when you tell us to give Neuheisel to the end of the season since he might turn things around and win out, but then you say that no other great coach could walk in and perform a miracle. So you are saying that Neu is the only coach with a chance to fix this? You can’t have it both ways. You are simply showing your emotional allegiance to Rick. And that’s ok that you like Rick. I like Rick. We all really like Rick. He is a great Bruin. But he has proven to be not a very good football coach for us, and it’s time to take off your emotionally stained glasses and see that this program needs a change if it wants to be consistent and competitive again.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Hang on a second (to all the responses to captainjack)
I recently joined the fire Neuheisel/Guerrero (immediately) camp, and I’m still in it. That said, if the Bruins do pass the eye test with flying colors (don’t see how that is possible, but still) for the rest of the season, I’m personally willing to back down and accept that things just took a lot longer than they should have to develop. Throwing out that progress and resetting, late in coming as that progress may be, seems short sighted to me.
As happy as I am with the victory on Saturday, our first complete game in years maybe, I haven’t forgotten our destruction at the hands of Arizona. Do I still want Neu fired today? Yes, but if he lasts till the end of the season and we win out, I could give things one more shot with Neu.
@ Gbruin – I don’t think Jack was inconsistent in his statement about another coach not being able to turn it around this year. Putting in a new system and coaches sets a team back, pretty much no matter what. IMO Neu does have a better chance turning it around than any coach except maybe someone we already on staff, which I really, really don’t think is the answer at this point.
Nope
That kind of short-sighted thinking saddled us with Karl Dorrell for two extra years and further gutted our program.
A 6 game win streak at the end of the season (again laughably implausible)
would give us all sorts of recruiting momentum, off season motivation, etc, etc. If Neu is still around at that point and we’re in that position, you seriously wouldn’t rethink your position?
Our program would not be gutted, we’d have multiple highly touted recruiting classes, on pace to resume for our 2012 class, and CRN would be a coach that took us from a place that was totally bereft of talent to a place where we’re solid talent wise again.
I still think we should fire Neu now, but if he shows me something like my impossible scenario above, I am open to rethinking it.
Our recruiting
has taken a step back this year already. Certainly not done, but not looking like the previous classes so far.
We have staked out our position. It’s not up to us to make the decision, but we’re also not going to sit back and wait for it either. We’ve played 8 games so far, I really don’t understand why people think things will “turn around” all of a sudden just because we beat a crappy Cal team at home.
Guerrero is banking on that kind of thinking to avoid making the decision, and I guarantee you that if we barely get to a bowl game (which is how this season is shaping up) or beat U$C, he will totally back Neuheisel, and that’s what we’re trying to avoid.
If a flying pig mates with a unicorn and their offspring shits out golden eggs that help UCLA win 6 straight games, then our argument may not be received as well but that doesn’t mean we’re going to stop making it.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Yep
Recruiting already took a hit last season. It has taken a hit this season. May be there will be an uptick if we “win out.” However, to data the data shows no reason to be optimistic that RN will put together a BCS run next season. Dorrell was retained after his 13-9, 7 win regular season with the expectation that he would win the Pac-12 the following season. It turned out that the body of work didn’t lie. Same is applicable here.
Not only that
But the potential availability of some elite coaches who will not be available the following year should always be another factor. Not relevant to us maybe — because we should be changing coaches no matter what happens or who is famously available — but not a non-factor either. Florida canned Zook to hire Urban Meyer, who won an NC with Zook’s recruits his first year. Miami Dolphins were desperately trying to hire Harbaugh before even firing their own coach, who still has his job as part of the Luck sweepstakes. UCLA never thinks competitively when it comes to coaches, which is one of the reasons for a wholesale regime change.
Was CAL a Crappy Team
or did our Bruins make them look like a crappy team? It seems like people thought CAL was a pretty decent team. Not Stanford or ASU or that other team over there, but still decent. The announcers thought CAL had potential to win out and get to a bowl game. If CAL was such a crappy team the eye test scores should be lowered.
The "announcers"
It was Bill McDonald. If he tried to share his comments here, he’d be banned for stupidity. JJ is learning but his broadcasting IQ goes down when he has to shared the stage with guys like McDonald. These announcers are there to do nothing more to shill for the coaching staff.
Mighty Cal
has beaten Fresno State, Colorado, Presbyterian (for shame), and Utah.
They’re a pretty average team, as their record suggests. I guess “crappy” is unfair, given what our team looks like. In fact, they remind me of us a bit…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Yeah, I wouldn't call them "crappy" at all
They had talent but to date they have played like an average team to a below average one. Their QB certainly has not been good at all.
Actually it could be 7!
if you count the new PAC-12 championship game. What kind of animal poop do we need for that to happen? I will begin my search immediately.
As far as the inability of a new coach to turn things around with existing players...
I think that Urban Meyer did a pretty good job of doing that with Ron Zook’s players at Florida. Jeff Tedford took Cal from a 1-10 record in the year before being hired to 7-5 in his first season in Berkeley. Hell, even Sark did a decent job in his first season, following up Willingham’s 0-12 farewell to Seattle with a 5-7 record in 2009. Brady Hoke is doing a solid job so far in building up on the remainders of Rich Rod’s tenure at Michigan.
formerly bruinhoo
Captain, I have the utmost respect for you and for your history and for your opinions.
I disagree with the the opinion part.
If the team wins out, it will be a monumental achievement. It will be a five game winning streak, something we have never had under our current coach. But even if that happens, it still does not change the overall body of work. If we win out, Coach Neuheisel’s record in four years will be 23-26. That’s a 469 winning percentage. That would make him the worst coach since World War II, when Edwin Horrell was 24-31-6 for .442 winning percentage. At .469, Coach Neuheisel is still behind (barely behind, but behind) Billy Barnes at .471. it’s pretty bad when you’re looking up at Billy Barnes on the coaching success ladder. What’s worse, he would still have to go 12-1 to catch his predecessor, who was so bad as a coach that I can’t bring myself to type his name.
Beyond the wins and losses, I can’t ignore the way we’re losing. Look at Wisconsin. They lost their last two games after leading at the 59:20 mark. Two plays in their last two games make them 6-2 instead of 8-0. You need only look at the Arizona game to see that we have a long way to go before we’re a good team, and the Arizona game was not an anomaly. I’ve posted this before: Here are our margins of victory and defeat during Coach Neuheisel’s tenure:
Victory: 1, 3, 3, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 10, 14, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 25, 36
Defeat: 4, 5, 7, 8, 8, 9, 14, 14, 14, 17, 17, 19, 21, 21, 21, 21, 21, 25. 26. 28. 28. 29. 35. 36. 47. 59
Twenty of our 26 defeats have been by two touchdowns or more. Six of our 18 wins have been by a touchdown (plus a 2 point conversion) or less. Or to put it another way, based on what’s happened in the past, if we’re going to win, it’s a one-third chance of being a squeaker, and if we lose, there’s almost an 80% chance of a two-plus touchdown blow-out. From my own perspective, admittedly pessimistic, I look at every game as an opportunity for us to get wiped out, not just beat.
Those results will obviously change if we wend with an 8-4 season. But if we do, to me it’s too little and too late. I remember the euphoria after our first game with our new coach and a nice win over Tennessee. Then I remember the next game, which was the biggest wipeout in my memory. 59-0. Our players were not 59 points worse than BYU. Our coaches proved that they were 59 points worse than BYU’s coaches.
Here’s the most telling statistic of all, I think. Again, I have not personally checked this, but I believe it to be true. In Coach Neuheisel’s tenure, we have exactly one win over a team that finished over .500, and that is a win over Tennessee which finished 7-6.
In my opinion, 45 games is enough of a sample size. It is a body of work that says this man should not be coaching our team.
That’s my opinion, tempered by the fact that I have never placed my strong right arm and my body’s valor in the face of the enemy on the football field as you have, Captain. Again, I salute you for that. I simply disagree about our coach.
A very convincing part of your argument is our lack of success
against winning teams. To get to the scenario Jack is talking about, we’d have to beat two top 25 teams. When those games are in your recent history, there has to be something said for the team’s trajectory.
Another convincing part of your argument is our overall record. Considering the situation when we got here, I’d throw out Neuheisel’s first season altogether. We were playing a QB that started the year 3rd string playing behind a very weak offensive line. If we win out the regular season and say we lose the PAC-12 championship game and win the bowl game, we’ll be 9-5. That would put our overall record for the past 3 seasons at 20-19, which is still unacceptable, but at least on the positive side of the scale.
A long run at the end of the year with a win against SC, would indicate to me at least, that Neuheisel’s tenure thus far has been aberrational rather than the norm, because he has a history of success at other universities.
Again, would I fire him today? Yes. Do I want him gone today? Yes. If he hangs around though and aces the rest of his eye tests, well heck, I have to take that into account.
The only other team we beat that finished the season with a winning record was Temple
not that my opinion matters, but for the record, I agree that Coach Neuheisel must be replaced. If he is still the coach next year, we will have missed our last good chance to become relevant in college football for many, many years.
I wish it would have worked out for him because I admire him as a person. Unfortunately, as our head coach, his record speaks for itself. If the AD can hire the right person to lead the program THIS YEAR at least we can look back at Neuheisel as having brought in the talent to help the next coach restore UCLA Football to glory. If we wait an additional year, many talented class of 2012 seniors will have graduated and be gone by 2013 (Prince, Brehaut, Franklin, Fauria, Carroll, Dye, Hilliard, Abbott, Tepa, Price, Hester, Datone, Larimore, Baca, Downey, Bradford). I believe this group of seniors would provide great incentive to entice a top tier coach to come to Westwood.
by truebluebruin on Oct 31, 2011 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions
I hoped for RN's success when he was hired....
but I’ve come to the conclusion he was a tenacious and dedicated player, but it did not translate into being an innovative or inspirational coach.
We will be a good team next year regardless of who is coach
We don’t lose too many players on either side of the ball and have young players starting to contribute and show that they can play. IMO we will be a good team next year whether it’s Neuheisel or somebody else because there is a lot of talent, and for the first time in a while, talent up front. Anybody who knows a thing about football will tell you the game is won in the trenches and for the first time since 05, we actually could be good on both sides of the ball. That has to be attributed to CRN and whether they let him stay another year and see his plan and hard work come to fruition remains to be seen. But if he is let go, we will bring in someone and he will certainly have a much better foundation to build off of then Neuheisel did, and he will win. Even then most won’t credit Neuheisel for it, but whether he is our coach next year or in two years, the success our program will have has to be to his credit
by Passionbucket on Oct 31, 2011 9:01 AM PDT via iPhone app reply actions
I get you're point but disagree
We should/will be good next year with a HC that knows what to do with personnel, knows how to scheme to his personnel’s strengths, gameplans well before and during games, creates an identity, instills discipline, etc. That HC is not Neu. Neu has failed to show me or any of us that he is capable of these things. He has had 3+ years to show us. 2011 was the “Big Year” that many in BN (not just this BN) have been waiting for. 2011 was the year when talent plus experience meshed well in order for us to take a step up.
I’m confident that if we had a reputable HC this year, we would be a Top 25 team. I have zero doubt about this. A reputable HC would either turn Rosario into JJ Light or sit his arse on the bench for not giving maximum effort or reaching his potential. A reputable HC would utlize Fauria to exploit the defense whenever possible. A reputable HC would find ways to get JJ into space. A reputable HC would not contiually trot out Embree as a punt returner. A reputable HC would have played Kendricks/Oly/Graham/McDonald more. A reputable HC would have moved Datone to DT and used the speed of Graham/Oly to get pressure on the QB. A reputable HC would have seen that Hester’s size and strength is better suited to play press.
Talent has never been an issue. Talent was/is not an issue this year either. Does anyone doubt if a legit HC was leading this team, that we wouldn’t have a better record? Neu still wouldn’t have a clue on what to do with this team next year. The guy is too much of a “players coach” who doesn’t instill discipline. You can have the fastest car on the track but if you have no clue on how to drive it, you ain’t winning the race.
by BlueReign on Oct 31, 2011 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
A few things.
Talent has been the issue, when have we had talent up front? We couldn’t run the ball because we have no lineman and had to switch to the pistol. We couldn’t pass block and had QBs dropping like flies. We haven’t had a good DE since Justin Hickman and Bruce Davis in ‘06. We’ve had one good DT in Brian Price and look what happens with him gone. Lineman are like Big Men in basketball, they take lots of time to develop, so until you get that time to groom them and teach them technique and how to use leverage and everything, they aren’t going to be very good. Conversely, our team isn’t going to be very good.
This program is now primed to be in good shape for a long time because of Coach Palcic and CRN’s ability to recruit and groom these lineman. Our D Line is also progressing and starting to show that we just might have some talent up front for a change.
And in regards to the rest of your concerns. Rosario isn’t quick enough to ever be JJ Light since the only effective patterns he can run are a hitch, out, deep post, and go route. And to his credit, he does those well.
Fauria is not open because every defense has a LB with a blanketed safety over the top to not allow the seam route anymore. As a result, we have Rosario open on that deep post which we have completed 3 or 4 times this year.
Embree is the only person on this team who can catch a punt. Anyone who has been to practice or saw JJ muff that punt Saturday will tell you the same thing.
Kendricks plays half the snaps at WLB and has been playing more and more every game, Olaniyan is 210 Lbs still, so unless it’s 3rd and long he can’t be in the game, Graham has played a lot just hasn’t made any noise til Saturday. Tevin McDonald has started at safety every game since Dye got hurt, so not sure where you got that notion.
Moving a 6’5 275 guy inside to DT isn’t going to go well, you can’t get leverage and can only do so on passing downs. Asking a guy who is 275 to stop the run is like asking $C not to cheat, just not gonna happen
by Passionbucket on Oct 31, 2011 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions
All those things might be true
but it doesn’t explain
- the embarrassment at Arizona
- the decision to play KP against Texas
- the conservative, boring, play-not-to-lose attitude prevailing the whole season
- the lackadaisical efforts throughout the season
- the pathetic tackling shown throughout the season
- absolutely ridiculous special teams performance
This is year 4, not year 2, or even year 3. It’s Neuheisel’s fourth year. We still don’t know who our QB is, unless one gets injured. Neuheisel’s preference is to not even return punts. Taylor Embree should keep the bench warm the rest of the season, as far as I’m concerned. The only reason he gets so much PT is because he blocks a little better for the running backs.
This is unbelievable. Where were you guys last week, after the Arizona game? One win against a crappy team, and the Neu loyalists are out again.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
His data is completely out of context as well
It’s downright trollish as it ignores the extensive discussions on depth chart we had leading into this season showing how we had experienced talent in our front 7 and more than enough on OL. As noted yesterday through links even RN conceded how we had more than enough talent after he was debunked on BN.
So no need to feed the trollish arguments on how there hasn’t been enough talent for this team to make a run in a depleted Pac-12 south division. People who are doing it now are simply engaging in drive by trolling completely ignoring the body of work from last three years and painstakingly, detailed discussions on BN. It’s the kind of messageboardish nonsense that we always have strived to get away from in this community.
Look at our front 7 on paper all you want
Our starting DL to start the year was Jones, Edison, Marsh, and Holmes. Datone looks like he may actually have himself a solid year, Justin Edison gets blown off the ball, Cassius Marsh is Okay but just nothing to brag about, and Damien Holmes has a great motor but just isn’t all that good. Behind them are Owa who is a freak athlete, but doesn’t have very good technique. Donovan Carter who is playing well but is a converted LB and still learning on the fly, Nate Chandler who has been moved around so much I don’t think he knows what position he’s playing, and Keenan Graham who is solid.
Our starting LBs are Westgate, Larimore, and Love. Westgate is in position but is tiny and gets blown back and on top of it all, is now playing with one arm. Larimore gets blown out of the hole or misreads it all the time and it’s hard to stop the run without a MLB in position. Glenn Love has been hurt and still doesn’t seem to welcome contact the way a LB should. Kendricks is very talented and is playing more and more every game but is still just a RS FR. Zumwalt is very athletic but can’t do anything in pass coverage, and also misreads holes and often over pursues.
by Passionbucket on Oct 31, 2011 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions
You are so full of sheister
Now I’m getting pissed.
You just said below
He’s on his way and if we let him, I know that he will show you a good product on the field. And if we don’t then we will win with HIS players and HIS athletes and he probably won’t get the credit he deserves.
and now you’re saying the players aren’t good enough?
No no no, not here my friend, I don’t think so.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
If only they all had a coach to teach them how to play the right way
Oh well, after RIck is fired, maybe we’ll get one.
Uhhh
Why was Westgate our starting LB to begin the season when it clear Kendricks had more talent. Why has Larimore and Zumwalt regressed since last season?
Why has Edison been starting all this time when there were other players clearly better than him?
Cassius Marsh is nothing to brag about? That comment itself just reveals how you really don’t know much about our program. I’d suggest you chill at this point because if you keep up this kind of drivel, you will be gone.
So..whose fault is that?
Whether it’s an identification of talent issue or development issue, that is still on Neu. Love the sweeping statements on some of our guys. Did you ever consider that the coaches don’t know jack s**t and that could be the reason why they look so lost out there?
Like everyone has said, talent is not an issue. That isn’t even debateable.
I think that most look at the turn over from KD to RN as normal
But the turn over is a much tougher job then most cases when a coach is fired and new coach is brought in. He had nothing to work with at all in terms of talent outside of 5 players or so (Rahim, ATV, Price, Akeem, and Reggie Carter)
In most cases yes you would see that year 3 is make or break and shows what the program will be but that’s apple to oranges and not apples to apples.
Arizona was absolutely terrible, no way around it. Our defense is a terrible matchup for their offense, and even if they played well, would have given up around 35 points or so. And we got behind early and had to throw the ball which is not what our offense is designed to do. They had just fired their coach and for whatever reason, it always pumps up a team. People look and say Arizona is 1-5 and they suck, but they only lost one game that they had a shot at. Our defense was shit, our offense was shit, players acted dumb and started a fight.
The decision to play KP against Texas was predicated on what we did to Texas last year. I do not agree with it, but as seen on Saturday, he runs the offense incredibly well and we thought we could do the same thing.
Conservative play-calling is a result of not being able to block worth a lick. How can you have any form of innovative offense or play calling when your QB gets hit in his drop, or simply can get a push. I’m sure you wanted to go for it on 4th and 12 on Saturday at the 35 also, that woulda been a shit show.
And if you want to talk about special teams performance maybe you remember Terrance Austin? He was a two time All Pac 10 kick returner in ‘08 and ’09. Remember where Sean Westgate made a name for himself? Blocking punts and recovering them as a freshman and sophomore. And that guy Kai Forbath was a pretty damn good kicker for us, and Locke ain’t too bad either.
I’m not saying this is where we should be because it’s not, but Neuheisel has had to deal with much more then a rebuilding project. He’s on his way and if we let him, I know that he will show you a good product on the field. And if we don’t then we will win with HIS players and HIS athletes and he probably won’t get the credit he deserves.
by Passionbucket on Oct 31, 2011 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions
You are cherry picking and providing out of context info again
You provide Arizona as the example yet ignore the fact that our defense has been atrocious across the board and have not made any significant improvement from any category from last season. Arizona and Texas was not the only atrocious performance of this season, as has been exhaustively detailed in this specific series of post and numerous others. Yet you completely ignore that and the fact that you are doing it only proves you are coming here to engage in trolling.
You also cite Texas game and conveniently leave out how Prince was kept in even after 2 bad picks which had an impact on the game.
Our OL has been all right last two years. The conservative playcalling is not just an issue in putting together our unimaginative and uncreative “power running” game. It is a problem that has rotten the core of every aspect of this program including the bend don’t break defense and our special teams.
So your arguments are not fact based. They are out of context. The argument on whether Neuheisel should be retained is over. If you want to keep him you are more than welcome to start a blog making that case. Otherwise, don’t come here to provide cherry picked, out of context data that do not stand up when compared to the overall body of work.
LOL
Sorry man, every time a coach is about to get canned, someone like you comes along to give us the same old sob story as your last paragraph. By that logic, no coach should get fired.
So, let’s go through this, shall we?
Year 4 of the Neuheisel tenure:
- can’t block worth a lick
- our defense is terrible
- can’t win games in which we fall behind “too much”
- Terrence Austin graduated, Westgate is no longer on special teams (I don’t even get your argument here)
Oh yeah, and we were 4-8 last year, in the “make or break” year.
How do you like dem apples?
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
So basically
You’re saying he should get preemptive credit for whatever success next season’s coach would have with the players he recruited, but should shoulder none of the blame for the current state of the team because it was the last guys fault. How incredibly convenient. One problem with this, among many others, is that you can extrapolate this out to virtually any given year. The failures of this year are a launching point for the failures of next year, but because of excuse X and excuse Y (and there are always excuses when you lose), he just deserves a little more time to get it right. This is, of course, a giant load of crap.
We have been incredibly fair to Neuheisel, and next year’s coach will absolutely inherit a better situation than Rick himself did due to his recruiting. We have shut down many ignorant and uninformed posters on this very site trying to push the talent excuse. That said, everyone knew this was the year that we absolutely needed to break out nationally. Where the first of Rick’s recruits mature and the schedule breaks just right to create a perfect storm for national attention. And we did get national attention: an epic beating on national TV from a team without a coach. We have documented extensively the long odds Rick faced in his first two years due to Dorrell’s cratering of the program, so for you to come here and preach like it’s something we’ve overlooked is disingenuous. There comes a time when those excuses no longer account for the overall sum of terrible football. That time was two weeks ago. It is over for Rick, and hopefully for Dan as well.
I believe we have been top 25 in recruiting classes the last several years
I reaearched this a while back, and have no urge to look again. We are one of a handful of teams which have had recruiting classes in the top 25 but have not finished in the top 25.
I disagree with the notion that our talent level is substantard,, unless, of course, the ratings bureaus (which get paid substantial money for their ratings) are also substandard.
?
I’m pretty sure Rosario is as fast if not faster than Stokes. The guy just doesn’t maximize his physical gifts and doesn’t have that killer mentality. The stuff that the TO’s, Marshall’s, Megatron, Fitzgerald’s of the world. The kind that says….oh snap! I’m like a foot taller than these munchkins. The pigskin is freakin mine and if these munchkins get in my way, I’m going to put a hurting on him.
Damn! Why the hell does Stafford throw to Megatron when he is covered? That is a baaaaaddd play. Oh wait…maybe it’s because he has a size and leaping advantage over the defender? Hmm….So, if there is a safety cheating on Fauria, doesn’t that mean 1 on 1 coverage on the outside?
Neu has the parts, it’s up to him how to maximize it and utilize it properly. To date: FAIL
He may be as fast
but he fights like a hippie. I remember an NFL coach saying that Wayne Chrebet was always the shortest receiver in the league, but if you ever tried to break his route or jam him, he’d break your forearms.
Nelson might be a good kid, but he’s just not a fighter, he’s not cut of that cloth. He’s never caught a ball in traffic. Any surprise that he’s the one receiver who didn’t get suspended after the Arizona brawl (not that I’m condoning that)? Scouts are drooling over his physique and all he says is “eww”.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Yup
Just to clarify, the being covered thing was in reference to Fauria. I’d throw to him at times even if he was covered. I’ve seen him get laid out trying to catch passes although he knew he was going to get killed. Also, even if he doesn’t make the catch, I’m pretty sure he’d get some PI’s.
As for Rosario, he truly is the track guy playing football. He is what he is…unfortunately.
Eye Test
My perspective as I watched the game agrees with the grading criteria and conclusions as to the ratings. I also agree with the body of work we have seen this year. IMO this week was the first week I felt that the Bruins actually did have their heads in the game from the beginning. One would think that the UA game was a wake up call, but that denies any influence that good coaching has on a team. Good coaching shows every time out, win or lose. Unfortunately for RN and his staff, that is a fact…..
Mensgym
The excessive celebration really irks me
I think it shows a lack of discipline and a depressing sense of underachievement. Standard routines for other teams such as stopping someone on 2nd down suddenly becomes a big deal because our team has set lower standards for themselves.
We Support the Team on the Field
It seemed liked the Rose Bowl was pretty full. Lot of CAL fans which you would expect. We were on the typical Bruin roller coaster watching the game. Prince is not a passing QB and that is a huge problem this Saturday against ASU. I hope they find some creative plays to get our receivers involved in the game and have a balanced attack.
The players were animiated throughout the game and I really don’t think the coaches had much to do with that. It seemed to me that the players collectively decided to just go out and kick some arse and have fun doing it. They were pumping up the fans all night by asking us to stand with them. Look if the players want to celebrate every single play of the game that is fine with me. If there are 70 plays in a game I can live with seventy successful stops and a bunch of hoopin and hollerin.
The Rose Bowl was less than 60% full
We know what letter grade 60% equals.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Lets just say
that I didn’t feel alone like the Rose Bowl game against Wisconsin.
That's understandable
Not sure if it’s worse for the Rose Bowl to be empty or completely red.
We gotta find a way to get it full of blue again. And the same color blue would be nice, while we’re at it.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Im down for that Gb
and when we are successful, and we will be, I would hope that it happens when I can still drive to the game.
CRN is our man
CRN’s players didn’t quit last Saturday night, so why should we?
LOL
What about Texas? What about Arizona?
The measure of a good coach and a good team is not whether they bounce back after a pathetic and embarrassing performance. It’s not having those performances in the first place.
And no one is “quitting”. We all want the team to finish on a good note. That doesn’t mean CRN is the right coach in the long term.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Custer's men certainly didn't quit...
But really, the Bruins have now played 1.5 good games out of 8, and that is enough to save Neuheisel’s job? Really??
formerly bruinhoo
Karl Dorrel's players didn't quit in 13-9
So why did we get rid of him again? Oh right… because one good game does not make you “the man”. Give me 4 years worth of games, and I’m sure I could get at least one signature win out the team.
Also, this Cal game was not even a signature win – just a nice one to have after last week.
Bruindog7, your argument is not convincing.
There is no evidence at all about whether the team quit on the coach or not. The team may very well have said to themselves that they don’t care what the coaching staff said, they were going to play their games. (Plus, didn’t we have an interception when there were only ten guys on the field? Maybe one guy quit on tthe coaching staff on that play, but Cal was to intept to capitalize on it.)
The evidence from the Cal game was positive, obviously. It showed us doing a lot of things well. If your sample size for determining whether the coach should be retained is one game, then if the sample size is the Arizona game, then the coach should be gone.
In other words, Bruindog,7, your argument is susceptible to being destroyed from just about any perspective.
I do not want to insult you, I want to convince you. Look at his entire body of work, which may people have analyzed at length in many places. Put a different coach’s name on the numbers. Imagine if these numbers were at Texas or Oklahoma or Nebraska or Ohio State or even just$c*, and you were being called upon to make the decision as to whether the coach should be terminated. Would you, as the athletic director at any of those schools where football expectations are high, retain any the coach?
The Best...
UCLA Football game I’ve seen in over a year, September 25th 2010 to be exact. Now CRN needs to work on being consistence. And don’t turn your heads too fast, cause here come the Sun Devils!
GO Bruins!
by Travis L. Marshall on Oct 31, 2011 10:10 AM PDT reply actions
Point #2 is a concern
We need to be passing the ball more to have a balanced attack. It was nice to see the offense pass the ball vertically against Wazzou, and the offense looked good at times at Stanford when Brehaut was throwing the ball.
I would assume that ASU is going to show a lot of looks with 8 men in the box. I hope the offense works on their play-action passing game this week.
Around 25 pass attempts per game would be ideal.
Well, BN's frontpagers and main contributors
have their standards, and I have mine. To me, any Bruin victory anywhere, anytime, against anybody is a good win, so I left the Rose Bowl about 40% full of quiet pride and satisfaction. Beating the Bears, though hardly a major athletic achievement, did show that the team had regrouped and had not fallen into the complete demoralization or sulky indifference that could have resulted from the Arizona debacle. So good for them, coaches included. It was enjoyable to see the running game work so well, to see the defense actually defend, and especially to see some unfamiliar numbers on the field. And Datone Jones’ name was called! I thought he had left school. I don’t think beating ASU would save Rick’s job, though. He would have to win two more and then be competitive against the resurgent Trogans. Not all that likely. I do agree that next year’s team will be better, through the process of natural growth, if nothing else. Sorry about mentioning the slight possibility that Rick might be back, but that’s just the way I see it.
There is nothing wrong mentioning that Rick might be back
Believe me, I agree that the possibility is there, especially if the team finishes strong.
That doesn’t mean that I agree that Rick should come back, but I don’t put it past our pathetic admin to stay with Rick for another year if we end up 6-6 and in some forgettable bowl.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
I am not joining the barrage of mortar fire against captainjack's words regarding Neuheisel
Honestly, what he said represented the mentality regarding Neuheisel on BN last winter. So when I started saying adamantly that " Rick should do the right thing, just walk away ….." It irked BN to the extent that after I repeated the refrain once too many times, a warning came.
Incredulous, surprised, I thought I merely said what my perceptions told me. Clearly, the guy had trouble coaching the program. Norm Chow was only one of several issues. Besides, UCLA is my alma mater. I was not advocating its overthrow and an ominous warning window appeared on my computer screen ?
I stopped to think perhaps I was ahead of myself. Neuheisel deserved our patience.
In hindsight, we are not new to the game. Many of us followed UCLA athletics even before we enrolled. Over the years, coaches came and went. This one arrived with instant name recognition. His actions, warts and all, were widely known. He tugs at our collective heart strings because wherever he coached, he carried the Bruin pride well.
He is, and will always be, a member of the Bruin family with a stellar records as a player.
The debacle at Tucson hit us simply as the very last straw. I was in Toronto, watching the game on ESPN. Imagine when play after play, the Wildcats literally ran up and down field, unopposed. Where was everybody ? What got me over the boiling point was the announcers’ yearnings to please step it up, they were bored to even call the game, etc.
Not to repeat what I said previously, but I switched channel in the nick of time before the brawl erupted. Then CNN mentioned it on its newsbreak. Wait a minute, I said. Do UCLA football woes have to be bugging me even when I am out of the country ?!?
A regime change IS the appropriate step after the season ends. UCLA does not have to show Neuheisel the door. It can reassign him to another job with the athletic department until his contract expires. But it needs another coach to steer its football program.
This is the way it has got to be.
That’s why
Did you watch their game Saturday night?
SC still has the talent up front that no team in the Pac 12 has, and only a handful of teams in the country have. Their DLine is nasty, undersized but fast and good tackling LBs, and a decent secondary. They still have a solid OL and can run the ball with some effectiveness. They have IMO the second best QB-WR combo in Barkley and Woods.
So what is wrong with playing a good game against a top 15 team on the road?
by Passionbucket on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
What is wrong with being happy with moral victory against Southern Cal?
Yes, I watched the game. And if I have to explain to you about what is wrong with a Bruin justifying a moral victory against the Trojans, you are hanging out in the wrong community. Try that shtick somewhere else.
How pathetic
Man…I guess a decade of being mediocre has completely brainwashed some Bruins.
I guess after the game we should also thank them for the opportunity, right?
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Seriously?
What is acceptable about losing to *$c year after year after year?
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Losing to suc
is like going to the dentist for a root canal with no anasthetic. Lets hope we start the decade of 2011-2020 with a win streak like we had in the 90’s.
The game against ASU will tell us something about this team. Have they in fact found the formula and the mojo to beat a truly good team like ASU?
Meh
The classic UCLA thing to do will be to beat ASU, get casual fans “fired up” and then face plant in one of the remaining reg season game or bowl game. It will prove nothing.
by Nestor on Oct 31, 2011 3:57 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
That would actually be nice
However, I expect Neu to bench all those youngsters and us to get waxed by ASU. We’ll have this BTB thing floating around and get blown out at Utah like we always do. We’ll then squeak by Colorado. Then the suc game will be all hyped up with “Will this be the end of the Neu era” and “Bowl eligibility” and we’ll get smoked like we always do.
It’s sad that there are still people out there who fail to see that we must make wholesale changes. You better bet that we haven’t hit rock bottom yet. This program can crater even further unless we make the move now.
Their whole mentality
is to squeak by.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Forgot to add
Neu deserves a contract extension because if my scenario plays out, we have “improved” by a game. And with all this talent coming back in 2012, we’re going to dominate the Pac 12 and get to the BCS title game!
I am going to throw up
If Embree gets back in regular rotation and Rice is relegated to the scout team. Then again I guess I should have a bucket ready or something.
by Nestor on Oct 31, 2011 4:08 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I feel like we're debating whether KD should stay or not again.
Is it just me or am I going crazy? Wow….
Its worse than that
I feel like debating with Lavinistas whether he should be fired following another Steve 16 charade “run” in the Big Dance. I am hearing people telling me "dont worry guys. Lav is gonna put together a “monster” season in 2001!" Unreal. No I am not comparing RN to Lav, I am comparing the arguments advanced by those who vehemently kept asserting we needed to stay the course.
by Nestor on Oct 31, 2011 5:57 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Hmmm....
Does a DL of: Tepa (DE), Graham (DE), Jones (DT) and Marsh (DT) with Oly, Owa, Carter and Epenesa = “undersized but fast?”
How about Kendricks, Zumwalt and Larimore at LB? You think these guys could tackle better? Would Larimore be able to take better angles and tackle if he didn’t have to dodge centers, guards, Edison, Chandler, etc.?
Once again, talent is not an issue.
Also re defensive adjustments
I am supposed to be impressed that Greedy figures out in game 8 moving DT to inside could be helpful. How is that any different than Chuck Bulllough figuring out in game 10 in 2009 that …geez this kid Akeem Ayers ..may be I should him move him around and try him out at DE in few snaps?
by Nestor on Oct 31, 2011 3:28 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Doh
I meant Tressey not Greedy. Android spell fail. LOL
by Nestor on Oct 31, 2011 3:55 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
It's a good one!
http://damnyouautocorrect.com/
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Any time you need a laugh
that site is updated daily…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Cal
What jumped at me was how thoroughly BAD Cal was.
Knowing that they just had to stop the run, they let our QB run all over the field. And their QB play was atrocious.
This win needs to be qualified and nothing changes in the big picture.
But...but...
Neuheisel is the greatest! He beat Mighty Cal!
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Right on the money, SPNB (which I always remembered as Security Pacitic National Bank)
I remember one play that I counted ten Bears in the box right at the snap, and still we gave the ball to the running back right up the middle. The play made a nice 5 or 6 yard gain. Against 10 in the box. Cal had a baaaaaad night against us.
I really did enjoy that win
What I didn’t enjoy was wondering all game when the wheels would come off and we would revert back to AZ form.
Also, that drive, or lack thereof, at the end of the first half was a perfect microcosm of the Neuheisel era, even within an otherwise very well executed game. The indecision, confusion and poor play-calling in that minute plus has become far too typical. Fortunately this time it was on the offensive side of the ball so it didn’t cost us 14 pts, as against Houston. When a Bruin team has the will and skill to execute under those circumstances, I’ll know we have arrived. Till then, I’m not convinced.
We Support the Team on The Field
I agree with the sentiment that says, “We want the team to win every time it steps on the field”. Reading this thread is something like watching a UCLA Football game. Encouraging words mixed with stark reality makes for an intellectual and emotional roller coaster. I salute the great job by BN Managers.
Wanna know the hilarious part?
After all this, UCLA still controls its own destiny in the Pac-12 :)
Speculating on a run deep into the March tournament (the first North/South game)...
… is useless. Nothing can change the “data” derived from the AZ debacle. That will stay on a balance sheet that’s been developing for years now.
Still, what’s real? Next Saturday against a top 20 team. Some arguments would be mitigated should we school ASU. But until then, I am not holding my breath.
There was some thread over at BruinGold or somewhere that said we should be pulling for a loss else Neu get a reprieve. Hell no. Go Bruins… stick it to the ’Devils.
Clock Management at the end of the first half
I liked the call to run a draw on 1st down when at your own 30 with less than a minute, with Franklin, there’s always a threat to break one and that’s as good a call as any given our offensive struggles. Sure, we had 3 timeouts but Cal also had 2, so if we can’t get anything going on 1st and/or 2nd down with the pass then Cal’s got a shot to get the ball back with maybe 40 seconds left. This way if Franklin doesn’t get anything we can still pretty much run the clock out, and if he breaks one, then we can get something going.
I know people at the rose bowl were booing his decision to not call timeout after Franklin was tackled on that run (it went only 9 yards so the clock kept running), that’s a Homer Smith move (who Rick played and coached under, and who literally wrote the book on clock management). Coach Smith was a huge fan of not using timeouts or the spike, but instead getting your offense to the line and running another play quickly – that’s what Rick tried to do, but it took like 18 seconds for us to get lined up and the ball snapped even though we were in 2-minute mode (Oregon averages like 13 seconds or something in their up-tempo mode, and that’s just their regular offense).
Execution in the 2 minute drill was lacking but I see the logic behind most of the decisions (except for the run up the middle at midfield on the last series).
With Franklin
there’s always a threat to break one. Or fumble.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I appreciate your perspective
Remember my original premise, “What if”. In no way did I indicate this outcome was highly predictable or probable. I was simply raising the question.
Yes, I must confess I am driven by a sense of loyalty to any former Bruin player who has given it his all on the field as well as someone who IMO has given his all to turning around a program that was in shambles, no thanks to KD.
However, for those of you “locked in” on comparing the state of the program today under CRN to the program left under KD including the disparity in the win/loss category, I do beg to differ with your perspective in that the quality of recruits both in numbers and in talent are like the difference between day and night including Hundley the missing link, so to speak, the potential franchise QB of the future, thanks to CRN and his staff who have held off due to great peril throwing his freshmen year under the bus.
My big doubt is that an outsider would be able to come into the LA area and be an immediate success in attracting CRN’s level of talent. What is your assumption based on? The reputation of being what, a house of exceptional higher education (because it is obviously not currently known as a football “powerhouse” as it once became back in the 50’s under the tutelage of Red Sanders, unfortunately the equal we have not seen since, even under the great Tommy Prothro and or the few other successful coaches we have had the good fortune of having since) pardon me but I digress from my point, or his (who or whom ever he is) reputation is as a highly successful coach from some other part of the country, even such as an “Urban Meyer”.
Ask yourself again, where are these millions going to come from to attract and retain a coach of such a fine reputation? An allocation of the “new” deal TV revenues or are you going to get out your check book and write a check given the schools ambivalent policy of possibly directing your donation to the incoming coach.
Imagine sitting down to negotiate an agreement and employment contract with any highly desirable prospective coach of your choosing and meeting his compensation expectations as the new incoming savior of Ucla’s football program given this university’s administration and attitude toward its football program.
I as one, and as highly desirable as recruiting someone of that caliber would be, I find it as highly improbable that that future event could even possibly take place until there are some incredibly astute changes made at the top or an exorcism, including the chancellor and the AD and some absolute clarity in the policies under which the athletic department is forced to operate under.
Just stop and think about it. Who in his right mind would want to walk into that quagmire of stupidity other than a CRN, whose motivation is entirely different than the big bucks mentality.
I would suggest your what if’s are no more possible than my pie in the sky “what if” about Ucla’s chances of winning out including winning the conference championship and a major bowl game.
On the other hand I shall remain optimistic and hopeful that CRN wins out not only this season but in the long run. IMO, he deserves to hold on to that thread of possibility given the intense heat he has put himself under and the nearly complete wholesale calling for his head.
Unlike many of you, I do see light at the end of the tunnel and I will remain positive and optimistic, as foolish as that may prove to be.
Go Bruins and Beat ASU for starters!!!!!!!!!
'CaptainJack65'
Jack Metcalf
Uh, money is not going to be an issue at UCLA
UCLA will have additional revenues from the Pac-12 contract. Moreover, UCLA can also use resources from outside boosters to pay for first tier coaches (at their own discretion). So the argument about funds not being available is an uninformed excuse.
Also
I’d add that the excuse about an outsider coach not being able to recruit LA is laughable. It also shows you don’t really have a grasp of how recruiting really works. The argument you just made sounds like a classic argument from Lavin days who’d argue an outsider would not be able to recruit for UCLA basketball like Lavin. If UCLA hired a big name coach, who has had his share of success at a nationally recognized programs with ties to Southern California recruiting scene, it will not have a problem.
So that part of the excuse doesn’t fly either. You can chose to be blindly foolish and ignorant of the facts. Don’t lecture and implore us to follow.
That light at the end is an oncoming train
Please educate yourself on our financial situation before popping off again on situations you clearly don’t understand. Thanks.
Ben Howland
was an outsider. I think his recruiting went just fine.
Ironically, by your logic, Colorado and Washington shouldn’t have hired Neuheisel.
Also, you are making you assertion based on the assumption that nothing will change within Morgan Center. Change is exactly what we are trying to accomplish within Morgan Center.
But of course, we don’t speak for every UCLA fan out there, not even every member on BN. So, if your preference is to keep things the same, low-ball the coaching staff salaries, have the team use mediocre facilities and market the UCLA football brand like the local little league team, it’s perfectly fine. Perhaps, like the Morgan Center, you are happy to coast, squeak by, and hope for something great to happen. Others try to make great things happen.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.

by 



















