A UCLA Football Chronicle: The Path to Our Lost Decade of Mediocrity
Well it has already been an interesting night (open game thread for various actions going on here) on the eve of our rivalry game against Southern Cal. Bruins are backing into the Pac-12 "Championship" game thanks to the unbelievable mediocrity of Pac-12's "South" division and to cheating ways of Southern Cal. No doubt handful Morgan Center apologists and Neubs will be out in force celebrating this as some sort of "accomplishment," but savvy UCLA alums who have been following our program for decades.
Speaking of years of mediocrity and our lost decade of irrelevance (don't put too much stock into what happened tonight in Salt Lake City), people seem to wonder a couple of things these days. One group wonders how our program has gotten so mediocre, while the other cannot figure out why so many of us are up in arms and are demanding a wholesale regime change in the Athletic Department.
So, for the sake of history and filling in some blanks for some who do not know how we got here, here is a chronicle of our beloved UCLA football since Donahue's last days. The point is really to illustrate glaring mistakes that should not be repeated going forward, not to wallow in our past glory. Even the lazy, misinformed MSM repeatedly touts UCLA as a sleeping giant, a program with huge potential that consistently underachieves. What they fail to address, with the exception of Randy Cross, is the common thread that permeates that fact: a conservative, cheap and arrogant administration that refuses to provide the product that its alumni want and deserve.
Follow me for a digest of the last 20 years of UCLA football.
Terry Donahue (HC, 1976-1995)
I don't want to belabor the Donahue era yet again, we have spent a lot of time on it already, so here it is in a nutshell. TD was 151-74-8, and 9-4 in bowl games. He took the team to 4 Rose Bowls, winning 3 of them, and won the conference title 5 times (tied for 1st in 1987 and lost tie breaker for the Rose Bowl). He had a solid streak of 8 bowl games in a row from 1981 to 1988, at a time where there were fewer bowl games, and most of them were significant ones. He lost the first but won 7 in a row in that streak.
I'm pretty sure a lot of us would take that record today. So why are so many of us unwilling to worship Donahue? I have met him three separate times and really like the man. He always took a moment to chat with me. But if you look closely, you will see that TD underachieved somewhat during his tenure. This is a period in which the Pac-10 was dominated by 3 teams: Southern Cal, UCLA and Washington. How dominant were they? In Donahue's years, only 2 other teams went to the Rose Bowl: ASU in 1987 and Oregon in 1995. So, think about it. Donahue only had to recruit against two other schools, in the talent-rich SoCal area, during a period in which players tended to stay close to home. And given the ridiculous amount of talent that went through UCLA in that period, it is really mind-boggling that they consistently took themselves out of national championship contention. But if you saw how conservatively Donahue used to coach, you would understand this. His goal was to compete for the Pac-10 title, not national championships.
By the mid-90's, it had become apparent that Donahue's tenure at UCLA was coming to an end. Sure he ended with a 5 game winning streaking against those SCumbags from cross town, but people still seem to forget that he was responsible for the incredible letdown of a hugely favored Bruin football team against the Badgers in our home stadium in the 1994 Rose Bowl. After that, he was just coasting, and it was evident in his conservative, boring coaching in those final two years. Donahue ended up a respectable 10-9-1 against Southern Cal, but started out 0-4, with 3 of those losses having the Rose Bowl on the line for UCLA (ps: all those games were being played at the Coliseum until 1982).
Not only that, Donahue was an insecure head coach who was never truly confident in his abilities. So much so that he did not have the balls to promote Neuheisel from wide-receivers coach to OC, when Homer Smith left the OC position for the second time in 1994, right after the Rose Bowl. Instead of promoting Neuheisel, Donahue decided to hire Bob Toledo, a loser OC from R.C. Slocum's Texas A&M program, who was never going to be a threat to TD, unlike Neuheisel. Rick Neuheisel instead ended up HC at Colorado. So you get a sense of the mindset there already. That Rick still puts Donahue on a pedestal shows that he has a lot of class given how he was treated.
Bob Toledo (HC, 1996-2002)
Now, you've got essentially the modern icon of UCLA football leaving the program, after a pretty successful run. You would think this is a desirable job. Enter pea-brain Pete Dalis. Dalis somehow blows the hiring of the coach, whiffing on Snyder (KSU), Barnett (NW), Neu (CU), Mason (KU), and then settling with Toledo after being implored by none other than Cade McNown.
As documented thoroughly here on BN, Toledo had a great run mostly due to having Cade McNown as his QB. His best team was probably the 1997 squad which had just as good an offense as the 1998 squad but a much better defense. The thing about Toledo was that his offense was exciting to watch and he at least talked about national championships instead of conference championships. That was his goal, and we all know how close we got. But the Toledo tenure got undone by few things:
- Handicapped parking. That was just dumb, but a public relations nightmare.
- December 5, 1998: "Our Bill Buckner" Moment(s): Not much to add to this pain.
- Recruiting of JP Losman: JP was an elite recruit from Venice High School and was supposed to be our next great QB. After graduating early, he showed up in spring training after enrolling early just like Brehaut and Hundley had done at UCLA. Basically he never fit in with his team-mates and reports were that he specifically didn't get along with Cory Paus. He then demanded that Toledo make him the starting QB before the season starts, but Toledo refused, even though he would have been the starter unquestionably. Everyone acted incredibly immature and as a result Losman took his ball and went to Tulane. The biggest shame of this all was that Toledo had no handle on what was going on. With Losman leaving, Cory Paus became the unremarkable starter for the next 3 years. What is significant here is that because UCLA took Losman, Kyle Boller (who grew up a huge UCLA fan) went to Cal instead and ended up being a much better college QB. Losman eventually played in the NFL for the Bills, while Boller went to the Ravens...
- Mishandling of DeShaun Foster's SUV gate/Cory Paus DUI Arrest. Aside from the drug snafoo in 2001, which also garnered a lot of negative publicity, DeShaun also was not allowed to play in his last 3 games because of illegal benefits involving a "borrowed" SUV. Many of us still believe that was a Trojan plot. The Foster scandal came out just couple of weeks before the game against Southern Cal. Right around that time news came out that UCLA QB Cory Paus had been arrested for DUI. While UCLA and Toledo didn't waste any time in suspending Foster for rest of the season, they let Paus play in the SC game despite Paul's arrest story had come out. It was a case of uneven discipline and we heard reports that it severely undermined the moral of the team heading into the SC game. It was clear the Bruins were not focused during the SC game, resulting in Pete Carroll's first blowout win against UCLA. The history of this "rivalry" took a dramatic turn (not in a good way for the Bruins) following that game. All of this was keyed off by how badly Toledo and UCLA botched the handling of Foster and Paus situations.
- Various other scandals: guys like Ricky Manning got in trouble for getting in fights with students, recruits like C.J. Niusulu beating up a parking attendant at a drive through movie (before he got to UCLA). This raised questions about kind of kids Toledo was bringing in the program. Niusulu eventually did become a Bruin butkept getting suspended by Dorrell until he was essentially thrown out of the program.
In all of Donahue's years, and much to his credit, he never brought the school any negative publicity and ran a pristine program with great student athletes. Unfortunately for Toledo, that was the standard he was held up against, and all the negative attention essentially did him in. I am not so sure that without those, UCLA would have fired him. Except for his two 10-win seasons, his record is quite mediocre (29-28). He ended up 3-4 against Southern Cal, losing the last 4. When Dan Guerrero got rid of Toledo right when he arrived on campus, his stated goal was to make the team more competitive...but the real goal was likely to "clean up" UCLA's reputation, and for DG to "make a splash".
Karl Dorrell (HC, 2003-2007)
So Guerrero comes out talking about having a perennial top-25 program, winning conference championships, etc. His solution is to fire Bob Toledo and hire...Karl Dorrell? Sure, he was a good WR at UCLA, but what was his experience? 11 years as an assistant in college football...the last 5 of which were as Neuheisel's offensive coordinator at Colorado and Washington (which essentially means clipboard holder). 3 years as WR coach for the Broncos. So what on earth made DG decide to hire him, in his grand effort to make UCLA a top-25 program? It makes no sense whatsoever.
Now we have discussed repeatedly how DG's choice for the position was actually Mike Riley, but that he was urged by Chancellor Carnesale and Vice Chancellor Peter Blackman to hire Karl Dorrell because they were impressed by his suit. So what were the true motives? Instilling discipline with Dorrell's military upbringing? Making a "progressive" hire? Keeping it in the UCLA family? Regardless, the reasoning behind the hire was shaky at best. And allowing a chancellor who knows jack squat about football to meddle in that decision was another huge failure by DG and representative of Morgan Center's ineptitude. I met Carnesale once and he struck me as elitist, dismissive and arrogant. But maybe I'm a poor judge of character.
At this point, Dorrell was quite possibly the worst type of coach to have at UCLA. He had a subdued personality and his game-day management was terrible, on top of trying to install a west coast offense in college which is simply ludicrous. This was the worst counterpart to Pete Carroll. At the same time, it is possible that he was mandated to recruit players of high character (to avoid more scandals) and it is possible that academic standards were more strictly adhered to.
In any event,. He would consistently lose out on top local recruits to Cheat Carroll and was left with the "scraps", so to speak. After one decent year in 2005, any coach who was remotely good left the program. Dorrell floundered in recruiting, until DeWayne Walker and Eric Scott showed up. He plain sucked at establishing relationships with the player and had a revolving door of coordinators.
Dorrell was 0-3 against Southern Cal, and reports were that UCLA was looking at Mariucci if Dorrell hadn't won that game in 2006. The 13-9 victory looked like a turning point. Dorrell had a golden opportunity to seize the momentum but blew it against FSU in the nut bowl. In fact, Dorrell's teams, while they went to 5 straight bowl games, were 1-4 in those games, against inferior opponents. Like Wyoming. After another blowout loss to the cheaters across town, DG fired Dorrell, likely one year too late.
Rick Neuheisel (HC, 2008-present)
Here we go. DG is on the spot. The community college across town is in the midst of an amazing run, snapping up every top recruit in the region and getting its butt kissed by every newspaper and overrated sports network.
Which candidates will he go after?
Keeping to tradition, DeWayne Walker is a frontrunner. With many supporters pimping his recruits, Walker was a serious candidate for the job. No one stopped to really see how ordinary his defenses truly were. And, here was another candidate without head coaching experience.
Norm Chow was seriously considered. The guru, the offensive genius...who for some reason has been passed over every single time he was considered for head coach.
We heard reports of Al Golden (then the Temple HC, now Miami HC) and John Harbaugh (now the Ravens HC in the NFL) also being considered for the position, but it is unclear how serious this was and the deal may have already been done before interviewing these guys.
Enter Rick Neuheisel. On paper, this seemed to make sense. Neu had experience, success, a great personality to counter Cheatey, but came with some baggage (which was mostly overblown). DG gets his man, for cheap, with UCLA connections. He must think he's brilliant.
Except, what do they do? They meddle with the process yet again. Neu was essentially forced to keep Walker, to "save" the recruiting class (as if Neu's recruiting skills were chump change). It wasn't a terrible decision, but when you hear that Rick's first choice was actually Vic Fangio (Harbaugh's DC at Stanford, now with the 49ers), it is quite bothersome. It is unclear if Norm Chow was also forced on Neu, but regardless that hire looked much better initially. We should have known better though, and so should they. Of course this is hindsight, but why would a coach who has made his living on the offensive side and involves himself in playcalling and QB coaching hire an offensive guru who does the exact same? Of course Neu said he would stay out of the kitchen, but that is not realistic. We also started hearing rumors that Chow wasn't really pulling his weight, that he would constantly refer to his U$C days and put little trust in the players.
Not surprisingly, Walker jumped at the first head coaching opportunity he got...New Mexico State. That begs the question, why force the coach you hired to keep a guy who's looking to be a HC and who interviewed for your job? Really stupid managerial decision. His replacement? LB coach Chuck Bullough...on the cheap, of course.
2010 was the culmination of a perfect storm. A switch to an unfamiliar offense that left Chow useless, a clueless defensive coordinator and a rash of injuries. The switch to the Pistol may be the type of risk-taking that we value in someone like Neuheisel, but somehow his game management was excruciatingly conservative.
After a third year of losing to Southern Cal, Neu was allowed to fire both his coordinators and a whole host of other assistants, setting up the whirlwind that drove us crazy. You have to wonder if any other AD would have allowed him to do that, given that he hadn't "earned" it (unlike Mack Brown, for example). So you also have to wonder, did DG do that because he had forced his first coordinators on him, or because it was cheaper than going out and getting a new coach? And would DG have allowed it if he wasn't already sure that he would keep Neuheisel at least through his contract?
In any case, we have laid out our expectations, but if things hold true to history, it is once again the Southern Cal game that could hold Neuheisel's future in the balance even if UCLA has "won" the Pac-12 South. A fourth straight loss and he is likely gone, but you can see DG keeping him if UCLA wins that game or pulls of a miraculous win in the "championship" game.
Ask yourselves if you really want a repeat of Dorrell's fifth season. We cannot allow the Morgan Center to perpetuate this cycle of mediocrity by ignorantly meddling with football and hiring unqualified candidates on the cheap.
40 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great recap
I definitely think the Dorrell hire was for “progressive” reasons. That was when we were constantly hearing about how there were only 4 black D1 head coaches. He didn’t even look good on paper.
you think?
i thought that Doughnut Dan made perfectly clear that it played in Dorrell’s favor in some articles after the hire. IIRC, they even mentioned it during his introduction presser.
Frankly, don’t pretend that being Latino didn’t play into Guerrero’s hiring as well. He was introduced as the only Latino AD.
If it wasn’t a factor, don’t make a deal of it.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 25, 2011 6:55 PM PST up reply actions
The last line before the jump was "Follow me for a digest of the last 20 years of UCLA football."
My thought was, “Gee, Tasser, do I have to?” I weighed the options and decided not to read it. I don’t have to read it because I lived it, along with many others. I’m sure there are subjects in the article that I have forgotten, and very frankly, I don’t want to be reminded of them.
Sorry, but some of us geezers have a low threshold for retching.
I get tired of the blame Bush, er, Donahue
The fact that Dorrell was lackluster and Neuheisel a snake oil salesman have nothing to do with Donahue. He recruited consistently well against USC—bringing players in from far flung places that became All Americans.
Bottom Line- Stop lumping the Donahue years in with the crap that UCLA has become the last 10 years. His record at UCLA deserves better. There were disappointing losses but NOTHING like the shit at Utah, BYU, Arizona, the Notre Dame loss at the Rose Bowl and all the other humiliating defeats to teams UCLA never lost to before.
The fact that the UCLA Athletic Director sucks along with the Head Coach can stand on it’s own.
Can you read?
I’m not lumping Donahue with them. But Donahue is the one who established the conservative mindset of UCLA football and the low expectations.
Read carefully. A lot of out troubles go back to Donahue’s last days.
Finally, don’t tell me what to write. If you have your own opinion of how things came about, feel free to blog it.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Sorry for the harsh response
but the defense of Donahue is exactly why I wrote this post. Donahue had it easy. He didn’t have to work hard to recruit during his days and didn’t have much competition. His play calling was excruciatingly conservative, and he could afford to do that because of the superior talent on the team. He routinely found ways to demotivate the players when they got " too high on themselves" and had ideas of winning national championships.
Given your graduation year, I can understand the positive memories you have of Donahue, teams were great in that decade, but they actually underachieved. More importantly, Donahue established the administration-friendly, conservative nature of the head coaching position and made it so that reaching the lowest fruit was the way to go (that way, he always looked good). Think of how well his predecessors did. They weren’t satisfied with just the Rose Bowl.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I always liked Donahue, from his first game.
His first game was against No. 1 ASU on the road and we won. That said, there was a very substantial flaw in Donahue’s coaching character which the moderators describe as a conservative mindset leading to low expectations. It’s like the NFL coaching mindset which makes obeisance to the field position god, and whose statements of faith are “punting is winning” and “never ever do anything which might backfire on you.”
Do you remember the commercials featuring Bob Toledo and Cade? Those commercials talked about something Coach Donahue never considered. Toledo talked about winning national championships. That was his expectation. He didn’t talk about a monopoly on recruiting being over, he said the Bruins were not goint to be satisified with anything less than a national championship. His players thought so to. I thought so. We all did. We did not impose that expectation on the coach. (Other coaches uses fan expectations as an excuse for underperforming, because fan expectations were invariably described as “unreasonable.”) It wasn’t an unreasonable expectation in football under Toledo, because that was his expectation.
We need someone as a coach whose aspiration is not just to survive. We need someone who wants more than simply to win the field position battle, and to do nothing that might get him fired. We need a coach whose expectation of his players is that they play their hardest and play well and ultimately win the game. And that’s every game. Of course, that’s bulletin board material, but who cares. If you ask Les Miles if his goal is only to win the conference, I think he would proably say his goal is to make it to the national championship game, and then to let put his team in a position to play their best football and win that game.
I confess I was a bit to young to remember much of Red Sanders. We have never had a coach in my memory who made a national championship a goal. Even the great Tommy Prothro used to say to Fred Hessler, “Fray-ud, mah goal is to wee-in the conference.” Which is why he treated non-conference games basically as scrimmages. I want our next coach to come in and say that he is not going to be satisfied with anything less than an undefeated season and a national championship.
That, to me, means that anyone who has the mindset of Terry Donahue is ineligible for the job. He was one of my favorite Bruins, and as a 196 lb defensive tackle, an inspirational “gutty little Bruin,” but he was truly only a mediocre coach. He was a terrible strategist. His coaching really consisted of telling guys like Skip Hicks or Eric Ball or Freeman McNeil or Big Foot Brown or Kenny Easley to go into the game. Frankly, when you have players of that caliber, coaching is not all that difficult. And as much as I loved Terry Donahue the player, I think that Terry Donahue the coach lost games we could have and should have won because of his coaching decisions.
Wasn't TD essesntially hired as an quick-fix, interim coach when DV left for Philly
TD was what, 34-35 years old? And no visionary, genius, innovator. But he did relate to his team as a past Bruin who was closer to their age than most coaches, a motivational advantage.
In 1976 provincial football was alive and well, with its limited bowl games and biased NC voting by sportswriters, resulting in endless debate on who was really the #1 team. TD had enough success to hang on, and as the bowls proliferated, we were able to make a 7 bowl win run, as I remember a NCAA record at that time. Not always the top bowls, but something to be proud of nevertheless.
As much as people hate the BCS, it is what broke up the provincial mentality once and for all. Winning a regional football bowl hasn’t been good enough for 15 years. Of all administrations UCLA should accept this, what with our first to 100 motto and all.
This was awesome
I have strong doubts that anything is going to change in this off season, because there are too many (mostly meaningless) things that can be said to justify leaving things exactly like they are to give this coaching staff a chance to make the improvements we thought they might have made in their second year.
Thanks for a recap that catches everyone up with the salient points about why we’ve been frustrated with our coaching for so long!
Cliff's notes version
T Donahue started the spiral down. We had 2 great HC before him. Crap after. TD was a get along guy. Schmoozer. AD liked him. No enemies. He was lucky to get a string of our types at SC like P Hackett. We need to break the in-breeding finally.
"We need to break the in-breeding finally."
These last two “offspring” were bad apples.
As players, loved ’em. As Head Coaches, disaster.
Beautifully summarized. We had a couple of shots at a national championship with TD and one with Toledo, but it was the little things that kept us out each time.
Red Sanders was a wizard with the little things. And the big things. Too bad Red was only a John Wooden type on the field and not also in his personal life. But at one time we had two of the greatest coaches who ever lived in football and basketball, and the greatest Coach of any sport.
Those were the days.
thanks for this
I started attending UCLA at 2003 so all I am familiar with is Dorrell and Neuheisel. This does put everything into perspective and how we got to where we are.
+1
Thanks for the recap. The parallels between 13-9 and the game tomorrow are erilie similar…
I hadn't thought that Chow was forced onto us
Though I always thought he did not have full reign over the offense. Our offense always just looked disappointing while he was around. I’m glad after he left that he didn’t say anything sour.
Thanks for putting this together
It’s amazing to see all of it put together in one place like this. Makes me want to cry.
by SonOfWestwood93 on Nov 25, 2011 9:37 PM PST reply actions
Doesn't seem like anyone is posting in the game day thread anymore
Cal and ASU are having a real shoot out..
HOLY CRAP
AWFUL CALL IN Cal game against ASU
ASU’s runner was down, the ball came out, but SPTR’s said the ball was loose before he was down. I don’t particularly care for ASU but that was a terrible call.
really?
i thought that was a good call. it could’ve gone either way, but i would’ve made the same decision
by bucknellbruin on Nov 26, 2011 5:54 AM PST up reply actions
Unis
Now that we’re in the championship game, can someone PLEASE call the Morgan Center and tell them to unveil the all whites next week instead of tomorrow? THAT would be the right way to do it.
You are being very fair to Donahue.
I loved TD the player. He was a 195 pound defensive tackle who battled 267 pound All American Ron Yary of SUC when TD played for Tommy Prothro and we beat SUC on a Cornell Champion scissors play for a touchdown 14-7 even though our QB was understudy Norm Dow for the injured Gary Beban in 1966. We went 9-1 but were denied the Rose Bowl by the PAC 8. I think I’ve got the facts straight. It was my first SUC game as a freshman at the Coliseum. I was nearly crushed (as were many others; very frightening actually) in the student jam of 10,000 straining to get in before the game. I got a 50 yard seat by giving the alumni ticket holder my “Trojans Pop Under Pressure” button, whereupon he proudly placed it you know where on his pants.
TD the coach was absolutely frustrating. He preached low expectations, never expected an undefeated conference season, underachieved with unbelievable talent and recommended poorly when it came to his replacement for reasons I cannot fathom. He had some wonderful seasons and great wins, especially against SUC, but rarely when it mattered on the big stage. His last few seasons were underwhelming. He was good but certainly no Sanders or Prothro. Worst of all he was the quintessential proponent of playing it safe, field position football, which certainly has its place especially under the era of three yards and a cloud of dust football, but evolved half way through his tenure into the play not to lose ethos that continued almost seamlessly under KD and CRN, both players for TD. I will always wonder how TD’s teams would have done if he ever let it loose. We will never know.
While TD was only an assistant before being hired, Red Sanders was a head coach from Vanderbilt with a solid regional reputation to those who knew football. Tommy Prothro was an assistant coach for Sanders but he was already very successful as a HC at Oregon State with Heisman winner Terry Baker in 1962. Perhaps a similar background would be appropriate in our next coach. Of course, CRN had success, at least initially at the two places he was head coach. In mitigation, as tasser10 notes, there is substantial evidence of meddling in his own hires of assistants by DG, Morgan Center and even the Chancellor’s office. Which is why, if CRN goes, we need a regime change.
In the final analysis our history shows a lack of commitment and vision to the football program for many decades, a willingness to compromise and settle, and then to interfere in decisions that are more properly the head Coach’s. No, we do not ever want a situation like Penn State where perspective was truly lost, but if the four letters really mean what we say they mean, and we are the place where Champions are made, then we need to get an athletic director and a Chancellor ready to at least equal the commitment made recently by our older sister, Cal.
Backing in to the PAC 12 South championship game slot is an embarrassment. It is unacceptable. UCLA must defeat SUC just to avoid continuing as the laughingstock of college football. We must continue to expect and demand more. Let it start tomorrow. I hope it does. Right now I just want to win tomorrow, more than ever, to justify our even playing for the PAC 12 Championship. We can do it. It starts with never compromising your standard of excellence.
GO BRUINS! CRUSH SUC!
History: facts and interpretation
Because I’m a historian, I went to Wikipedia to check out some numbers.
Red Sanders won a putative national championship but couldn’t play in the Rose Bowl that year because in those days teams couldn’t play there two years in a row. The year before and the year after, he lost in the Rose Bowl, which the Big Ten dominated in those days.
After he had an unfortunate heart attack in a hotel room, he was succeeded by Bill Barnes, whose record compares unfavorably with Neuheisel’s and Dorrell’s. In fairness, he won two Pac-8 championships. He lost his only Rose Bowl. His final record was 32-36.
He was succeeded by the great Tommy Prothro, an offensive genius, who took his first team to the Rose Bowl and beat a highly favored Michigan State juggernaut—the gutty little Bruins, with Terry Donahue on the team. Next five years, no championships, no bowls.
Then came Pepper Rodgers and the wishbone. he could beat anybody but USC. Three years and out. His last year he was within a USC game of a conference title, and he’d turned around a program that had been floundering.
Dick Vermeil? Two years, culminating in a Rose Bowl win against Ohio State. Then, in what became a tradition for Coach Vermeil, he left.
So, pre-Donahue, 56 years, one national championship, 8 conference championships, 2 Rose Bowl wins.
As Sipowicz would say, Just sayin’ is all.
I remember Barnes vaguely
As a man, he led a wonderful life as summarized by this obit from the LA Times: war hero, successful businessman and lifelong friend of John Wooden. I do remember the loss to Syracuse and Ernie Davis on the radio, and the loss to Minnesota in the Rose Bowl, but he defeated SUC, too, at least once when we were the underdog IIRC.
http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-bill-barnes25-2009apr25,0,4419737.story
As a head football coach he was, unfortunately, mediocre with a poor record, one of the worst overall until Neuheisel, especially his last three years when across town a young coach named John McKay went undefeated in 1962 and won a national championship with the “new” I formation. We were still playing the single wing with Kermit Alexander, then switched to the T formation. When we did our triple threat tailback became our QB, Billy Kilmer. IIRC we went 3-0 in 1963 until we lost to Notre Dame in the Coliseum. Things went south after that. Face it, too, Barnes had a tough act to follow. For what it’s worth, I believe most of Sanders’ early replacements were all southerners: Barnes, Prothro and Rodgers, as if we could recreate the legend by pedigree.
Barnes apparently never liked the man who fired him, J.D. Morgan. At least he made it clear they were never friends. But reading the obit you might say Barnes had the last laugh with a very good life.
But, yes, TD had a very nice record over twenty years, compared to the previous 56. Yes, Rodgers could never beat SUC and Vermeil left after a cup of coffee, but the three best coaches, easily, at UCLA were Sanders, Prothro and Vermeil, who really made his mark in the pros. TD’s great advantage was longevity, 20 years, and a bowl setup that expanded wildly so very good non-champion teams could still play.
Again, what seemed to limit TD was his legendary “play not to lose mentality” and his stubborn refusal to dream big about national championships. Of course, I’m sure he himself did, but every year was the same mantra. If I met TD today I would thank him for his great contributions to UCLA football and for being a great, always classy Bruin who ran a squeaky lean program, but I will never understand his oft-stated philosophy of diminished expectations. That is what was so frustrating about him.
1988 vs Washington State
In 1988, after the awesome Nebraska game where we were ahead something like 35-0 at the end of the first quarter, we were 7-0, number 1 in the nation and kicking the crap out of Washington State when Donahue went into the “shell”. Washington State came back to beat us, we lost to $C and didn’t even play in a rosebowl. I think that the post sums up Donahue perfectly, great guy, good coach, but did not have the stuff to push over the hump and take the program to a level of winning a national championship.
A frustrating moment . . .
. . .to be sure. It was 27-7 at halftime of that game. TD’s offesnive scheme frequently revolved around “dive up the middle, dive up the middle overthrow the out-route, punt” and he expressed genuine concern over the “toughness” of opponents like even Oregon State (he meant it, too), and while he finished with a winning record against U$C he was petrified of that game each year. In fairness, with good reason. Fellow Geezers, please remember how many times the blue and gold got scr*wed arising out of the $C game – whether in the game itself (the killer’s slashing run in ‘67 – when all the tackling just disappeared, The cheesy PI call to keep Jimmy Jones’ team alive in ‘69, so he could find Sam DIckerson OUT OF BOUNDS in the back of the end zone, Two words (Zenon Andrusyshun), “Conference votes” to determine the Rose Bowl rep, etc., The point being TD was nurtured on Bruin Football as a perennial underdog. Just part of who the man is/was a a coach. As maddening as his play calling was at times, as close-but-no-cigar has he might have been to equalling Red’s NC acheivement over a 20 year career, his numbers still are something we’d all trade the Toledo-Dorrell-Neuheisel era for seven days a week and twice on Sunday. Plus, I agree with Tasser – TD is a nice guy. So, warts and all, he’s part of the family, even if you don’t want him carving the turkey.
The Mad Bruin
Did you have to bring all those up?
Wasn’t there also a phony call against Aikman when he was signaling a play and the refs claimed he was calling a timeout?
And of course the Norm Dow game that was followed by the conference vote that was followed by Bruin students closing the San Diego Freeway? (You know I’m old because I don’t call a freeway by a number.)
Maybe today we’ll get the calls.
Yep
And the Santa Monica Freeway, too! First one I remember being called by number was the 605, cause it essentially led nowhere.
Don’t remember the Aikman call, but I do remember Measles Rodney getting away with a head wrenching facemask on Eric Turner at the end of the First half in ‘87. turner had picked off Peete’s pass in the end zone and was streaking down the sideline toward a 17-0 Bruin halftime lead, when Peete’s hand reached out and grabbed Turners facemask at ate $C 10. The SSPTR. (stupidSLOW PAC ten ref) was way behind the play and didn’t see what the TV viewers did…
But I also remember Freeman McNeil and the sacred tip in 80,, and Matt Stevens’ hail Mary in ‘86, and Barnes-Stokes, and McElroy to Jordan in 95 and a whole host of other great Bruin moments from this game. I hope Rick reminds them. I hope he gets em ready. I hope they pull the bus over and burn those effing stupid white unis and come out in the blue. I hope there’s magic out there, waiting to happen.
The Mad Bruin
I'm pretty sure the phony time out
Was Aikman’s rookie season in Dallas. It’s one of those obscure memories that for whatever reason sticks in my head. Could be wrong, though. It was before I was at UCLA.
by the blur 98 on Nov 26, 2011 10:03 AM PST up reply actions
Cruel and unusual memories.
All the more reason to crush SUC today. It’s the only way to crush hose lingering demons buried deep in our collective history.
GO BRUINS! CRUSH SUC!
I don't think I've ever been so sick after a game.
I drove directly from the Rose Bowl back to my parents house for the weekend. Was just in a state of shock.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Excellent Recap
Thanks very much for putting together this analysis. I only have two quibbles about Donahue in this thread. One is excusing his success by citing the weak coaches at $C and the built-in recruiting advantages at UCLA. He played the favorable cards he was dealt, unlike CRN who dropped the ball when we had the chance to take advantage of $C’s post-cheaty turmoil. The other comment was not by tasser, but in a reply, that Donahue rarely won on a big stage when it mattered. Winning 5 straight New Year’s games seems like a pretty big stage, particularly given where the program has sunk.
I absolutely agree that Donahue’s last years set the stage for the downward spiral. There was a fairly strong correlation between UCLA’s success or lack thereof in Donahue’s tenure and whether Homer Smith was present or not. It sounds like, as Tasser rightly points out, without Smith’s presence, Donahue’s conservativism helped set the stage for the current disaster.
It seems like we are seeing the same thing with Howland. At other schools, a successful coach builds a program which feeds itself and becomes a champion year in and year out. Wish we had the same.
Again, thanks for the excellent recap of how we got here.
See WSU post above
Agree on the Miami Fiesta Bowl victory. Remind me how many times he beat SUC when the Rose Bowl was on the line. How many times did Troy Aikman beat SUC? Yes, he came close with some great OCs in that run, some top ten finishes, but he preached settling, hated playoffs and a true NC, et cetera. Not my words; his mantra every week, every year. Very frustrating. Worse, it eventually became our culture, the UCLA way of football, if you will. Still, compared to the last ten years, a giant.
Agree
I was thinking more of winning the big games once they got to New Year’s Day. But you raise an excellent point re $C game with Rose Bowl on the line.
The answer to how many times he beat $C with Rose Bowl on the line for both teams- 1 (1993). Lost to $C with Rose Bowl on the line for both teams- 4 (1976, 1978, 1987, 1988).
How many times beat $C with $C out of the running but Bruins needing to win to clinch- 2 (1982, 1983).
My hatred of $C stemmed from my 1st $C-UCLA game as a freshman- 21-20 loss on missed extra point (Beban, Simpson) to miss the Rose Bowl. UCLA also lost with Rose Bowl on the line my junior year. So I was 0-2 in those situations with Prothro as head coach.
I therefore had gentler memories of Donahue actually getting the team to New Year’s Day, but the record confirms your point.
And then there was this
Once upon a time, there was the Pacific Coast Conference.
From Wikipedia:
The PCC had a history of being very strict with regards to its standards; it suspended the University of Southern California from the conference in 1924, performed a critical self-study in 1932, and a voluminous report was compiled by Edwin Atherton in 1939. The PCC had a paid commissioner, an elaborate constitution, a formal code of conduct, and a system for reporting student-athlete eligibility.
Despite this, the conference was wracked by scandal in 1951. Charges were made and confirmed that University of Oregon football coach Jim Aiken had violated the conference code for financial aid and athletic subsidies. After Aiken was compelled to resign, Oregon urged the PCC to look at similar abuses by UCLA football coach Red Sanders. The conference spent five years attempting to reform itself. In 1956, the scandal became public.
The scandal first broke in Washington, when in January 1956, several discontented players staged a mutiny against their coach. After the coach was fired, the PCC followed up on charges of a slush fund. The PCC found evidence of the illegal activities of the Greater Washington Advertising Fund run by Roscoe C. “Torchy” Torrance, and in May imposed sanctions.
In March, allegations of illegal payments made by two booster clubs associated with UCLA, the Bruin Bench and the Young Men’s Club of Westwood, were published in Los Angeles newspapers. UCLA refused for ten weeks to allow PCC officials to proceed in their investigation. Finally, UCLA admitted that, “all members of the football coaching staff had, for several years, known of the unsanctioned payments to student athletes and had cooperated with the booster club members or officers, who actually administered the program by actually referring student athletes to them for such aid.” The scandal thickened as a UCLA alumnus and member of the UCLA athletic advisory board blew the whistle on a secret fund for illegal payments to Southern Cal players, known as the Southern California Educational Foundation. This same alumnus also blew the whistle on Cal’s phony work program for athletes known as the San Francisco Gridiron Club, with an extension in the Los Angeles area known as the South Seas Fund.
I guess the 50s weren’t all Father Knows Best. How about this:
http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2010/5/18/1473469/the-sordid-tale-of-ronnie-knox-and
That's for sure. Read how Red Sanders died.
Back then the newspapers covered it up. Today it would have been Twittered in ten seconds. His fans would say he died like a man; his critics would say he was fallen. I would say it’s none of my business, but certainly the Fifties was no more a golden age than now. Coaches are people, too, legendary or not. They do their best, or not.
I choose to forgive Red and judge him on his coaching, period.
Ditto there
Let’s hope our next coach leads is into another blue-and-gold age of great football. It’s about damn time.

by 




















