Spaulding Roundup: Initial Coaching Search Notes - UCLA Opening The Checkbook
by Patroclus on Nov 29, 2011 6:02 AM PST
in Football
Email
PrintAs any Bruin - or College Football fan - not located under a rock for the last 24 hours now knows, after Friday night's game at Oregon, Rick Neuheisel will no longer be UCLA's head football coach. After telling the media after The Saturday Night Massacre in south central that Neuheisel would coach the team this week, something changed Chianti Dan's mind on Sunday. We pushed hard of course, and Tracy Pierson outlined the problem with waiting to announce the inevitable decision to terminate Rick, but a single tweet from a major UCLA donor summed up much of what we have all been thinking.
Only thing worse than losing is apathy about losing...UCLA Football can't be that way, and it didn't used to be...
#UCLA
That tweet came from Casey Wasserman, who is if not the biggest of donors to Morgan Center, is likely the most visibly powerful. Among other endeavors in support of UCLA Athletics, he was one of the driving forces behind Ben Howland coming to UCLA nearly 9 years ago. If he feels that way about the culture infecting the football program, he is not the only big donor feeling that way. And if Chianti Dan listens to anyone or anything outside of his yes-men, it is money and the people that control it. Keep an eye out for Casey's name in news of the coaching search; wherever he pops up, there is likely something to look out for.
Speaking of money, it is of course one of the main factors in the coaching search. As we have blogged in the past several weeks and months, UCLA has the resources to offer a significant salary to a head coach - at a level consistent with the top 10 or 15 programs in D-1. Early reports coming out of the search back this up: The LA Times reported that Chris Petersen is the early leader in the game of 'name the next UCLA Head Coach', with UCLA ready to offer a salary exceeding $3 million/year, plus at least an additional $2 million for assistant coaches and facility upgrades. ESPN's Rick Reilly talks of an imminent 5 year/$20 million offer for Petersen (the $4 million average is consistent with what we have heard from other sources).When specifically asked about the financial resources available for a new coaching staff, Chianti Dan talked about the new media contract as well as support from supporters.
"We will have obviously more resources at our disposal to be more competitive in the marketplace. The new Pac-12 contract will provide some resources in that regard. Have had wonderful support from external community that they're willing to help in that regard."
Chris Petersen has been the most talked about name so far. As the biggest name currently in the coaching market, it makes sense for folks to talk about him and for Chianti Dan and those holding power over UCLA Athletics to talk with him. With that said, the editors here have made our thoughts clear as far as the criteria for hiring a new coach. Following the right steps in identifying a pool of candidates is more important than simply going for big names - Petersen certainly may (or may not) fit the criteria, as is true of others in the market. Other names that have been floated since Neuheisel's firing became official - retreads such as Mike Bellotti, Herm Edwards and Tom Cable, as well as inexperienced and/or overrated coaches such as Steve Sarkisian and Kevin Sumlin - we already know are not acceptable. While this hire might not fit Chianti Dan's need to not make the smallest of waves with his fellow administrators and possible future employers, Vincent Bonsignore of the LA Daily News makes the case for Mike Leach.
In addition to the newfound ability and willingness to spend money for a coaching staff, Dan told Jon Gold of specific upgrades to the football facilities that are now being planned, particularly to the undersized Spaulding Field.
"Spaulding were looking to improve. We've already met with campus architect about facility that can be utilized for a training table, possibly academics for football, really to augment what we have existing in the football program. We're not sure whether the footprint of Spaulding enables to do that. The constraint that we have in a lot of respects is we're on a postage stamp, and there's a master plan for every square inch of this place. But we're working on what we can garner on campus for additional facilities."
Peter Yoon wrote about maybe his final extended talk with Coach Neuheisel with him in that role at UCLA, talking about among other things, how he found out that he would no longer be the Bruins' head coach.
He showed up to tape a television interview Sunday at UCLA and the questioner asked him about a newspaper report that said he would be fired.
"I said, ‘What does it say?’ and it had sources close to the top said I would be dismissed," Neuheisel said.
Neuheisel said he then asked athletic director Dan Guerrero for a meeting, and that took place Monday morning. The school issued a news release immediately after.
As much as I hate to credit the LA Times, and Bill Plasche in particular, even that trojan-loving outfit gets that UCLA can and should hire a game changing coach. In making the case that UCLA can and must hire a great football coach, he echos the case that we have been making ever since the debacle in the desert.
First, there will soon be an infusion of millions from the new Pac-12 Conference television contract, money that can be used to lure a star head coach and his staff.
Second, the Rose Bowl is undergoing more than $160 million in renovations, shining up the old jewel and countering Neuheisel's recent comments that UCLA officials care only about basketball.
Finally, with Stanford proving that tough academic standards can be hurdled by tough football players, the Bruins can no longer claim that coaches are afraid to come here and recruit.
The search committee has run out of reasons to fail. And after the dreadful hirings of Karl Dorrell and Neuheisel, the athletic director running his first college football program is nearly out of strikes.... No more apologies. No more leftovers. No more back slaps for beloved coordinators like Bob Toledo, or homecoming parties for popular former Bruins like Dorrell and Neuheisel.
The next Bruins coach has to be an accomplished coach, period. He cannot be somebody's buddy. He cannot be somebody's favorite former player. He cannot be some other school's coaching search leftovers.
In terms of the upcoming week and beyond, UCLA has now applied for an NCAA waiver to allow the football team to play in a bowl game this season in the event that the Bruins lose to Oregon on Friday night, causing their overall record to fall below the threshold for bowl eligibility. Meanwhile, the football program picked up another verbal commitment for 2012 on Monday; Justin Combs, a CB out of New York and the son of P-Diddy.
118 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Very nice reset P
And welcome to Westwood Justin.
by Nestor on Nov 29, 2011 5:41 AM PST via mobile reply actions
Bonsignore makes a great point about Mike Leach
Overlooked in all of that is Leach’s ability to develop college football players, which, aside from his offensive brilliance, is his greatest strength.
Leach didn’t always get the best recruits at Texas Tech. He lost his share to traditional powers Texas, Oklahoma and Texas A&M.
He relied on his ability to project undervalued high school prospects as big-time college players, then brought them into his program, coached them up, developed their bodies, refined their skills and churned out productive players.
Not only is this something Neuheisel failed to do, it is something that Leach also brings his brand of thinking outside to box to. From the NY Times article on Mike Leach.
When Leach recruits high-school players, he is forced to compromise on most talents, but he insists on speed. All have been conditioned to run much more than a football player normally does. A typical N.F.L. receiver in training might run 1,500 yards of sprints a day; Texas Tech receivers run 2,500 yards. To prepare his receivers’ ankles and knees for the unusual punishment of his nonstop-running offense, Leach has installed a 40-yard-long sand pit on his practice field; slogging through the sand, he says, strengthens the receivers’ joints. And when they finish sprinting, they move to Leach’s tennis-ball bazookas. A year of catching tiny fuzzy balls fired at their chests at 60 m.p.h. has turned many young men who got to Texas Tech with hands of stone into glue-fingered receivers.
I sincerely suggest anybody who has not read this article, (cough, Dan, cough) take the time to read it through to the very end. It is a great look into how this man prepares his team to win.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Just read this article
Everything I read about Mike Leach makes me want him as UCLA’s head coach.
That is pretty much everybody's response after reading the NY Times piece.
Therefore, we can’t expect The Donut to actually perform due diligence and get to know who the available coaches are out there.
At this point, all I can hope is that the power brokers at UCLA steer him to Leach if the Petersen hiring does not work out.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
This is why I love this guy
West Coast football (not to be confused with the WCO, an overused term anyway) is all about speed and more speed. Leach runs the perfect offense for a UCLA team competing for recruits in SoCal. He would turn these kids into left NFL prospects, which is the main factor in any high school football player with ambition’s choice. I did some homework after ’66 replied to my earlier question – screw ESPN, screw the Tech administration, this guy is a great choice for UCLA.
like some of these alternative training ideas
But sprints (unless they’re 10-20 yards) really aren’t modern training. The Prowler on the other hand, would be a great addition to the training regimen.
Would love Leach too
I would love to have him just for the thought of imagining him sitting across DG’s desk with a piercing stare, saying “Geez, you’re an idiot”.
The sand pit is awesome and it works.
If we could get Leach with a top notch DC, he’d be my first choice.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Leach is "culture change" squared
He is strong and knows how to use humor and ridicule to its full advantage.
And, DG will be in a position of weakness with Leach — for if he stands in Leach’s way to the detriment of the program Leach is strong enough to speak out and make DG look bad.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
Why would Jon Gruden want to coach college ball?
Some of the names being listed in the media and blogs don’t make too much sense.
Couple of reasons
Jon Gruden is a longshot (and he is not the top target). However, this name is not as absurd as the names we have seen bandied about by ESPN reporters such as Cable, Walker who are complete joke.
Jon Gruden could potentially be pitched because of connection to Casey Wasserman. The Grudens and Wasserman are connected through ventures such as the arena league. Moreover, Gruden may be eying for the job of the next coach of an NFL team in LA. If he comes to UCLA for 3-4 years, that could set him up. This is a remote shot for both parties, but it is not absurd as names bandied around such as Cable, Walker, Edwards etc.
I'm very afraid of Petersen...
Petersen Might be good, might be okay, might be really great. But he’s too safe of a hire and, ironically, too much risk. My big fear is what happened to the past BSU “greats” like Hawkins and Koetter.
We need to swing for the fences. We need a guy that swings his sword…… Hey, we know of someone like that, his name is MIKE LEACH.
Read his book. Read the NYT article. This guy is the friggin’ the real deal and it isn’t even close. Those poor inbred Lubbock simpletons couldn’t understand him…. and so they bullied him away.
This innovative guy, who was born in California and has a law degree from a respected California university (Pepperdine) belongs at the most innovative university in the nation, that being UCLA.
We need Mike Leach.
On. So. Many. Levels.
by rich87 on Nov 29, 2011 6:32 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
They are both solid candidates
We are not emotionally invested in one or the other. However, those two are the kind of candidates Guerrero will have to lock in.
Great article
A must-read for everyone. I can picture Leach doing to $UC what he did to aTm.
So obvious...is it the wrong thing to do?
You’re right, Petersen is the obvious "get."
Too obvious for me frankly. And what is scary is that nothing in his past known thinking suggests he would leave Boise for the madhouse of civilization that is LA. He loves Idaho. If we do land him…how long before remorse sets in with him?
Leach is a crazy hard pick for UCLA. Bonsignore:
My goodness. Is there a more boring, stale sports program in all of college football than yours these days? Is there a more tedious, dreary football atmosphere than a football Saturday at the Rose Bowl? Is there a football team that needs a complete culture shock more than UCLA?
Is it that obvious?
The hard pick is Leach…that’s why is it the smart pick, the smart "get." His record speaks for itself. His ability to scout and develop talent. And most importantly, the ability to speak his mind…forcefully, playfully, sarcastically if needed…and be 100% right. He would force us out of our comfort zone…and about time if you ask me.
He’s not an evil genius…he is a brilliant football mind and what we need right now, more than anything, is a little Pirate Swagger!
by GemCityBruin on Nov 29, 2011 7:01 AM PST up reply actions
I did a bit of research...
Leach’s best QB he ever had was ranked 14th best by the scouting services, and that guy ended up breaking a record or two: [Single-season passing yards (4,825); Career passing yards (12,532); Single-season touchdown passes (67; Career touchdown passes (167); Single-season pass completions(334)] .
Leach would be inheriting Brett Hundley (I think #2 by the scouting services) … and if ya think about it, this might actually be illegal in certain jurisdictions. The things those guys would do to opponents would require certain safeguards that aren’t currently in place in professional or college sports, to my knowledge. Someone’s going to need to get a binding friggin’ UN resolution to contain the Hundley-Leach juggernaut.
I'm wondering if you guys really looked at Leach's record...
Leach is famous for being outrageous, and his offenses put up points, but in reality, he’s really a coach who’ll get you to third in (maybe second) in the South division each year. He lost to Texas and Oklahoma almost every year (which would be USC and Oregon in the Pac 12), his defenses were challenged, to say the last. And before the whole Craig James issue, he was seen by most Texas Tech fans as the guy who couldn’t get them over the hump. In other words, meet Jeff Tedford south.
Lawrence Ross
Is that the best you can do?
Sure he lost to Oklahoma and Texas. He was supposed to lose to them. Those two programs suck all the recruits up in the Big 12. The very fact that he got tiny little Tech to compete with those two powers speaks volumes. And, if I’m not mistaken he did beat Texas in one of the biggest (nationally) games of that year.
The point here is Leach’s explosive offense coupled with UCLA untapped recruiting possibilities could launch the both of us into uncharted heights. You gotta think outside the box. We’ve been playing it safe for far too long.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Bring in Leach
and a big name D coordinator and problem solved!
"Success is never final, Failure is never fatal. It's Courage that counts" - John Wooden.
+1
No reason we can’t get both. I think Leach chose to spend all his time looking to the offense, and never had resources or recruiting cache to get the defense going. At UCLA he will have far less of an issue getting the recruits, and should not have a problem passing the duties to a fantastic D-Coordinator.
Aren't you supposed to win?
You’re never supposed to lose right? I really think the whole jump ship for Leach movement is going too far.
There is hard evidence all over the place that says Mike Leach’s style will never compete at the highest of levels. He will get UCLA to win, but he’ll never accomplish what UCLA is really capable of.
For one, I love Chris Petersen. He’s way more than just trick plays: he tapped into the elite recruits from SoCal, and established a huge identity of multiple, creative shifts and sets to make mismatches all over the field and then actually utilize his talent. He doesn’t run gimmicks, and he is aggressive, and hires good coordinators around him, something Leach never did, especially on defense.
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 29, 2011 8:31 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
You're supposed to compete.
The wins will come on their own. Ask Coach.
Nobody is saying Petersen is not a good coach. He is. As I said earlier, hiring Petersen is probably the only news I would welcome ahead of hiring Leach. But, as others have said, Petersen is a ‘safe’ hire. Hiring Leach is forward thinking and ballsy. Something I don’t think we’ve ever been.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
totally agree with your praise of Petersen
has clearly proven to be a real head coach with command of a program, with the ability to get some elite talents out of SoCal, and also discover some hidden gems.
And while people dismiss the ‘baggage’ around Leach, I think other coaches will find it pretty easy to recruit negatively against him, simply because the BSPN spin machine has made it so. Yes, he has wrongfully been tarnished by ridiculously conflicted journalism, and yes, in a just world that wouldn’t be damaging to him. But, based on the media, Leach would have an advantage with kids that read the NYT magazine, and a disadvantage with kids that watch ESPN…
Petersen – for those who don’t know him by name – can wheel out the tape of BCS games and signature OOC wins. Leach can bring out gaudy QB numbers and a win against Texas. Both come from a position of disadvantage relative to big teams; what Petersen has achieved is signficantly more impressive than what Leach has achieved.
3rd place in a conference
that had Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas A&M and Oklahoma State. He coached at Tech…in freakin Lubbock. He turned a program that was a bottom feeder into a program that had goals and aspiration to win a national championship.
He had less talent than just about every team I listed above and was able to win and win big. I’m not saying he’d be a savior but he’s a damn good choice.
Looking at the rest of the Big XII, it looks impressive
From 2000-2009
TAMU (63-59) 5 .500 or below seasons, 2 8+ win seasons
OKSt (67-56) 3 .500 or below seasons, 4 8+ win seasons
TTU (85-43) (66 pct) 0 .500 or below seasons, 8 8+ win seasons
On the other end
Nebraska (84-44) 3 .500 or below seasons, 7 8+ win seasons
Texas (110-19) 0 .500 or below seasons, 10 8+ win seasons
Oklahoma (110-24) 0 .500 or below seasons, 10 8+ win seasons
For Comparison:
UCLA (67-57) 5 .500 or below seasons, 2 8+ win seasons
USC (102-25) 2 .500 or below seasons, 8 8+ win seasons
Oregon (87-38) 1 .500 or below season, 7 8+ win seasons
Cal (71-53) 2 .500 or below seasons (0 under Tedford), 7 8+ win seasons (all under Tedford) Tedford’s winning Pct 66%
Eerily similar
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 29, 2011 9:04 AM PST up reply actions
Big difference being
The recruiting pools Tedford and Leach have had to work with.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
And here we go back to recruiting...
If I remember correctly, this was the same argument folks had when talking about why CRN would be a better coach than Karl Dorrell. Rick would come in and recruit, while Dorrell didn’t. And for the most part, that actually came true. But things have changed. Remember, Leach was in Texas, probably the largest pool of football talent next to Florida, California, Ohio and Pennsylvania. He just wasn’t Texas or Oklahoma, or even Texas A&M, the big elephants in the conference. I could argue the same thing for Tedford. At a school without a long tradition of winning, poor facilities, and is competing against schools with stronger traditions like USC, UCLA, Washington and now, even Oregon.
I’m not saying that Leach wouldn’t win. And he’d probably win 7-8 games per year. But I don’t think there’s anything in his history that suggests that he’d consistently win conference championships (and beat USC in the city) which is what I think most UCLA fans want.
Lawrence Ross
The difference being
Neu couldn’t develop the talent he recruited. No one in their right mind would argue that Neu recruited far better than Karl. Leach can pick and choose great recruits, AND develop them. At UCLA he will get even better raw material (rather than the dregs he had so sift through at TT) and then develop them!
I do not know which I would prefer between Leach and Petersen, but I think both of them have shown they know how to develop talent. The recruiting, ie raw material, they will be working with would be even better. I am slightly concerned with the defenses Leach fielded, but hopefully a new coordinator, and better recruiting that Lubbock allowed would shore that up. Peterson seems the real deal, too.
Defense
Leach openly ignored his defense (and not in the Brady Hoke ‘hands off’ style like he has with Borjous). I don’t think he had the backing for a good coordinator hire anyways.
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 29, 2011 10:21 AM PST up reply actions
Leach Did Not "Ignore" Defense
Leach admits the mistake he made with his defense.
He stayed with a DC too long out of loyalty to a man who had given him a break and in sympathy with the man because his wife was very ill.
He changed DC’s and the D improved. His second DC is now an HC.
It is wrong to say he doesn’t honor defense.
And, at least he had the courage to fire someone close to him and hire a proper replacement.
This is all old news.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 11:01 AM PST up reply actions
His players were quoted
Saying that he openly ignores defense in practice. It was on DTN a while back (back around his firing). He also never recruited for defense.
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 29, 2011 8:20 PM PST up reply actions
Is that good or bad?
And what do you mean by “he never recruited for defense”? Just that he didn’t go after good players there? I mean, they did have players on defense, do you just mean that he let his coordinators do that?
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Not literally
I mean he didn’t just leave the whole defense to Walk ons. He concentrated nearly all of his efforts on the recruiting front to offensive players.
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 30, 2011 7:59 AM PST up reply actions
OK but they still had a defense
So who was recruiting those guys, and would he let a good DC take on that recruiting.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Debatable
And mum now. Wazzu will do well to play spoiler up north now.
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 30, 2011 2:20 PM PST up reply actions
I would counter
that it is much easier to win conference championships in the Mountain West (or is it the WAC?) than tbe Big 12
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
I'm not saying Leach is bad
Either, but it feels from the comments like PetersEn is already out of the running. Personally, I like what PetersEn has done even better (especially when it comes to developing talent. At least Leach was recruiting to the Big XII, PetersEn was recruiting to Idaho!)
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
No I meant
That some in the comments have already dismissed him as a successful coach. At least, it sounds like more on BN support Leach than PetersEn. I don’t know anything about the search itself.
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
My guess would be 50/50 on the Petersen vs Leach supporters on BN
time for a poll!
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
My problem with that NY Times article is that it is by Michael Lewis
That guy can make anyone sound like the next Jesus Christ. How many world series have the A’s one since he published Moneyball? I’m not saying Leach wouldn’t succeed, but let’s base the evidence on more than one article.
At the least, both PetersEn and Leach sound like tough disciplinarians, which RN was not over the last four years.
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
Read Leach's Book
It’s a great read and you’ll get the perspective you seek.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
and then we can read the Petersen book
and genuinely have a balanced perspective on these two candidates. :-)
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 12:03 PM PST up reply actions
I like Petersen and think he's a great choice
I don’t think I’ve ever said a word to denigrate him.
I’m troubled by the fact that the pro-Petersen group makes their case by denigrating Leach.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not denigrating Leach
I think the pro-Leach people are doing what you say about Petersen. However, it does say something that when Leach’s back was to the wall over the ESPN story, no administration people tried to support him the way, say, Tressel was defended until OSU had to send him along. Just saying, regardless of the merits of the initial story, Leach didn’t have a lot of support, that is my only criticism of him.
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
Leach's beef was with the administrative people
They and a group of wealthy alum’s resented the contract THEY and given Leach the year before. They used James as a pretense to fire Leach.
The attack on Leach came from the very people you think should have been supporting him.
Doesn’t make sense to me.
sjh
But Petersen still won the big games
For example, Oklahoma and TCU in the fiesta bowl
by Trojanswearskirts on Nov 29, 2011 10:50 AM PST up reply actions
Petersen also lost to TCU.
Which reminds me. Why isn’t anyone talking about Patterson? Much like with Meyer, there is no reason we can’t at least talk to the guy.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Because Patterson already has a gig that pays him $3M/year
and he’s moving up to a BCS conference next year.
Much different situation than Meyer and Petersen.
by Kenneth Powers on Nov 29, 2011 10:58 AM PST up reply actions
Again, no reason we can't at least talk to the guy
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Read the Texas Monthly Piece on Patterson
And, see if it changes your mind.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 12:01 PM PST up reply actions
Well, opportunity cost.
By that logic, no reason we couldn’t at least talk to any coach in college football, but this guy is already at a soon-to-be-BCS-conference program making a top 10 salary.
I believe this is the article 66 refers to:
http://www.texasmonthly.com/preview/2011-09-01/feature2
by Kenneth Powers on Nov 29, 2011 12:06 PM PST up reply actions
found it, but it's behind a subscription firewall.
I know plenty of guys that found the woman of their dreams when she was still with another guy. Sometimes you have to be selfish.
You basically repeated your argument re: BCS conference. That doesn’t mean we can’t at least talk to the guy and see what it would take.
At least ’66 brought new info to the table.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Much like you repeated
your “no reason we can’t at least talk to the guy” for the third time.
No reason to get snippy. It’s a free subscription, btw. Just sign up with a dummy e-mail address and you can read it.
Maybe we have? If we have, I certainly wouldn’t want it getting out to the press (and thus, us as fans) unless it were a done deal, because you start looking desperate once you’ve courted and been turned down a few times. So like I said, opportunity cost. Petersen, on the other hand, is absolutely worth the public courtship and potential public rejection given what we have to offer.
At the risk of repeating myself, there is a significant difference between Patterson’s circumstances and Petersen’s (low paid, non-AQ conference) and Meyer’s (unemployed).
I mean, I suppose we could ask Lane Kiffin what he’d want to coach UCLA too.
by Kenneth Powers on Nov 29, 2011 12:36 PM PST up reply actions
NEVER!!!
and good points made.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Yes, it's a very good article.
I like Patterson.
The article speaks to whether he would want to come here and whether he would fit. Also, in some ways he plays football the way the best Howland teams play basketball — if you love defense, which I do, you will love Patterson football.
The yelling is not an issue to me; it’s a matter of how it is done and received. I only mention in because many here were bothered by the way RN yelled at Prince.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
My Suggestion
Don’t fall in love with any candidate. There is no guarantee with any coach we hire. Urban Meyer might not work out for tOSU and if we get Petersen, there’s a chance he wouldn’t work out. The important thing is that UCLA goes out and hires top guys that give UCLA a chance to be national player in CFB.
Also, hiring a good coach will not be the end of the hard work by those here on BN and other Bruin communities. We’ll still need to put pressure on the administration to ensure that the new coach is getting the full support necessary to be successful. We’ll need to make sure that those football facilities are being improved, that there aren’t any “monopoly is over” ads and that the money is there for assistants.
Most importantly, we’ll have to keep fighting to ensure that the next coach has a competent AD.
by King J77 on Nov 29, 2011 8:02 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
This is a massive point KJ77
I think it may be worth it if you do a fanpost on it. “Don’t Fall in Love with Any Candidate”
It’s a huge one.
Petersen..
Nestor, I asked this before, but what’s up with Petersen turning us down four years ago to stay in Boise? Wouldn’t he do it again? More money this time? Water under the bridge? Have the stars re-aligned? Situation’s changed with him?
..genuinely curious.
by War Planner on Nov 29, 2011 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
More money available.
World-class treatment for his son at UCLA Medical Center.
Boise State’s conference situation is in flux.
Kellen Moore is graduating.
Another year of a missed FG pushing Boise State from a BCS game to a low-tier bowl game.
by Kenneth Powers on Nov 29, 2011 10:59 AM PST up reply actions
The conference situation is a huge, undermentioned deal
If the Big East fails to become an AQ, then what is the point of Boise joining? Short of Boise being invited into the Big XII, then things could get tricky.
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
Add in Bleymeyer's firing
Don’t know what his relationship with the new AD or the other Boise State admin is like, but losing the AD that he worked with his entire time in Boise could also be a factor.
formerly bruinhoo
..thanks..
..so the situation has definitely changed..that’s good.
Watch DG lure some old has-been out of the woodwork and we’re on this merry-go-round for another 4-5 years.
by War Planner on Nov 29, 2011 11:33 AM PST up reply actions
Falling in Love
If the reports are true, Casey Wasserman has fallen in love with Petersen and is trying hard to make it happen.
Chianti Dan, fearing for his job, is going with the flow.
Maybe, there is a deal already made.
But, if not, if we have fallen in love with Petersen, we will come crashing down.
I’ve seen what people settle for with “rebound sex” and I sure don’t want that to happen with our coaching search.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 12:03 PM PST up reply actions
ha
if what you’re saying is we need a break from having a coach for a few months so we can reassess our priorities, I think you’re going against BN sentiment, given how many attractive candidates may be swept up by other suitors if we wait. Yes, perhaps if they go with another, they weren’t “the one”, but only if you take a romantic view of true love between a school and a coach…
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 12:11 PM PST up reply actions
if we announce Petersen tomorrow, I for one
will not concern myself too much about ‘the process’, mostly because I hope the current AD will not be around to conduct any future processes.
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 12:14 PM PST up reply actions
No we don't have to abstain
we just have to go after someone with the lights on and after a full and meaningful conversation.
I’d be happy with Petersen, too.
However, if we don’t get him, I don’t want a rebound to Cable or Walker or another unqualified prospect.
I think that’s how we got both KD and RN.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 12:50 PM PST up reply actions
KD and RN interviewed great!
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
Yes, I agree -- that's a plus on the Leach Balance Sheet
The man knows “locker room” talk.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
good that you think so
we’ll see whether players’ mothers think so
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 11:26 AM PST up reply actions
If you watch the entire video, it is a point made on BN all the time
and, it’s been written about here, in depth.
It is a locker room rant against entitlement, against believing sycophants and hangers on, it’s a rant saying that he’s going to play the people who deserve to play not the people who think they deserve to play or are told by their posse that they deserve to play.
It’s a rant in locker room language.
And, it’s a rant that I wish CBH would use today — and one that might have helped rn.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 11:58 AM PST up reply actions
not disagreeing with that sentiment particularly
disagreeing with the idea that you allow cameras in, when those recordings are subject to FOI requests.
But also – don’t you think Coach could have made the same point in a way, whereby even if broadcast there would be no controversy?
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 12:01 PM PST up reply actions
I agree about the cameras
and, no, Coach would not have said the same things.
But, Coach was not faced with the same situation — the power of self-agranizing media and self-promotion created by the new media.
I’m sure that Coach, today, would have effectively handled it without coarse language — perhaps, with a stern look.
But, there was only one Coach and we were blessed to have him. Others will try to be like him. Few will succeed.
BTW — if you read Leach’s book, you will see how profoundly influenced he was by Coach and his teachings and how he incorporated them into his own.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Nov 29, 2011 12:07 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with a thoughtful coaching search...
But lets face it Urban is going to demolish NCAA football at Ohio State. I think Petersen is our guy, UCLA gives him the PAC 12s guaranteed BCS bowl berth every year, so he doesn’t have the pressure of being the dark horse (blue horse really). He’ll get to recruit 4-5 star CA athletes, instead of taking 2—3 star CA athletes and turning them into 5 star athletes. Guys like Tom Cable/Herm Edwards need not be discussed. Erickson’s out at ASU, it is totally crunch time.
by Strathmore&Gayley on Nov 29, 2011 8:54 AM PST reply actions
Didn't "thoughtful coaching searches"
turn into RN and KD? Just saying. We know who the studs in the coaching openings are, now we need to get them.
Then upgrade facilities and ease off academic recruiting restrictions. (A point PetersEn or Leach will demand before their hire.)
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
The last search unearthed some good prospects...
The executive search firm brought Al Golden and John Harbaugh to Chianti Dan’s attention. He ignored them, of course. But there was a thoughtful aspect by some actors in the task of identifying candidates.
formerly bruinhoo
I just mean
we can overthink the process. That is what I believe really happened with KD.
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
Petersen and Leach are tops for me
Dantonio would be alright from what I have read. All head coaches with history of success. What about up and comers and coordinators? I can only really get behind Malzahn and Kirby as far as the coordinators go. I like one point someone made on the boards – even if they use us as a stepping stone, they would need to leave the program better off than when they started. If we are going to lose someone back to the SEC in 4 or 5 years it would be because we were so successful and I could live with that. We would then be in prime position to hire another top tier coach.
Nope
We need a proven head coach. That is what Florida and other SEC powerhouses did to win national championships. And we need a coach who will be young enough and satisfied enough to stay 10-15 years if they win.
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
couldn't agree more.
we need a coach who will be young enough and satisfied enough to stay 10-15 years if they win.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
losing someone after we develop a program over 5 years is fine
losing someone after 1 year of ‘rebuilding’, secondary violations, and a ton of video clips about why the coach’s previous team was awesome, would be bad. Ask Tennessee.
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 11:28 AM PST up reply actions
Up and comers?
Strathmore&Gayley made the point in another thread:
This ain’t 2002, we aren’t just looking for another head coach. This is realignment of the PAC 12 for another decade.Not now.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
by KSBruin on Nov 29, 2011 10:21 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Well, if we get either one of those guys
I’ll toss away my walker and do a fandango in the rec room here at the Home. My son loves the Pirate (and the opinions of Mexibruin), so there would be joy in the family. ( At least until the first big loss and the subsequent press conference.) I do prefer Petersen, if only because I don’t see the kind of footspeed on our roster that the Leach system requires. The major sources all agree that Guerrero (who seems scared out of his usual complacency) is going first to Idaho, so I am guessing that there must have been some little sign at least that Petersen will listen. But again, either one would raise my blood pressure into the 100’s. But what is an acceptable fallback position? Gruden? (Not very exciting) Cable? (No, no, no!) Manny Diaz (young and smart, I think) Or who???
There is a lot of good discussion going on wrt to Leach vs Petersen
I would love to have one of our esteemed Xs and Os experts write a fanpost weighing the pros and cons of each. Right now, as I see it, Leach and Petersen are 1a and 1b in terms of choices.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Josh (03rdn9) has repeatedly panned Leach's offense and his candidacy generally
so that’s one Xs and Os guy on the side of Petersen
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
Where has he panned them Venice?
Michael C
www.onviolence.com
I have great respect for 03rdn9's football acumen; it's far greater than mine.
But, I shudder anytime someone refers to Leach’s system as ‘gimmick.’ It speaks to the kind of prejudice John Cooper showed when refering to the 3 bad things that can happen when you pass the ball.
Football is an ever evolving sport, and to stay mired in one mindset is to invite death. Hell, it’s a law of the jungle that you adapt or die.
Take Petersen’s shining moment in the sun; the win against Oklahoma. What people remember the most are the timely use of ‘gimmick’ plays to win the game. I don’t see the difference. It’s either effective or it isn’t.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
That isn't why they won though
Trick plays aren’t what got Boise to that point, and isn’t what catapulted them to BCS conversations in literally every week since then.
Petersen takes all those fun concepts, like shallow, stick, screens, etc. and also adds a run game, complex personnel packages, and pre snap shifts almost as dramatic as Stanford’s.
Taking a step back. I thought that the pistol offense was a legitimate catapult for UCLA’s offense. I thought Neuheisel and Chow would adapt and remake an offense that had been in the frying pan forever, but once they started using it against fast defenses, it broke apart. It became a one trick pony that was just begging to be stopped once the defense could contain the QB.
Mastro came in, and made us much more potent, but when UCLA played defenses with speed, it failed.
When UCLA played Houston this year, it was obvious, and I mean very, very obvious that when UCLA put pressure on the receivers and used THEIR speed to their advantage, and blitz and get off the ball, and all that jazz, Houston’s offense was clueless.
I have studied a lot of Airraid offense since Chow’s initial hiring, watched a lot of film from that 2008 season at TTU, and noticed that when Leach’s teams played fast defenses (Texas, OU, Ole Miss) they were ineffective, with the exception of that great game in Lubbock against Texas.
The air raid encompasses the West Coast styles and swaps the intermediate run game for screen passes. Once you take away the draw game, those screen passes, or get pressure on the QB the offense is done. It is a huge task to take those away, but fast or dominant defenses (duh) are capable of doing that. Subbing out a Defensive end for a pass rusher is what you’d see weekly because there is no threat of a run.
It is a beautiful offense, no doubt. It’s extremely effective, but it is so one sided that it will never consistently be able to compete at the highest of levels.
Then again, Leach might be able to recruit out of his socks, and renovate the offense yet again. But his failures in recruiting on the defensive side of the ball, and attentiveness to the defensive side of the ball have crippled his team’s higher ambitions.
I have watched Chip Kelly throw something new into his offense literally every week since the beginning of the season, and realized that the kryptonite to that offense is a good defensive line, but at least his offense is capable of making dramatic, dramatic changes between drives that still stick to the general concept of inside/outside zone runs.
If Leach (who BTW isn’t even being considered realistically by our AD right now) were to come to UCLA, he would definitely succeed. He would win 8, or maybe up to 10 games now and then, but 1) He would never beat SC consistently, and 2) He would never win a PAC 12 Championship.
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 29, 2011 8:49 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Not trying to impose on you or anything with this question. But what do you actually do?
Somebody on one of my posts said it reminded them of your specific name, so I looked through your posts and am a fan of what you’ve done.
I’m just curious because it is mostly really informed commentary, like you either have a really sharp take on the schematic aspects of football or have put in a ton of work to research it (or bits of both).
My freshman year in college, my team ran a almost identical offense to the Air Raid. So I looked into it a lot to try and give myself an edge on defense schematically. Most of your commentary here is spot-on.
One note on Leach, in an aside, he has made it very clear that he adapts his offense and isn’t stuck in his offensive scheme.
But I agree with your take on the running game being eliminated. I would argue that Leach never had running backs like he would at UCLA and that would no doubt change up his scheme a bit.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
Just a fan
Been a Bruin for life, but I go to Oregon now. I work for University of Oregon Media Services, and write for FishDuck.com.
I lurk around here now, been really busy with Oregon Football, but things are slowing down now. Should be around a little more
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 29, 2011 11:05 PM PST up reply actions
Like the site a lot.
Switched our offense here to include a ton of zone read type stuff, researched a bit using the tutorial videos.
Wondered why there isn’t a surplus of defensive breakdown stuff there though. Obviously, when you think Oregon, you think Nike and that offensive scheme. But I’m a defensive focused guy, would be something interesting to look into. Just a suggestion.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
We're planning on going into that
Check back in the offseason. Oregon runs a really interesting 3-4 hybrid. We’ll have more during the offseason
@joshschlichter
by Josh Schlichter on Nov 30, 2011 12:02 AM PST up reply actions
Chis Petersen
The Broncos are also on probation due to their former AD committing NCAA violations so they have less scholarships to hand out, due to a self-imposed probationary period. That might weigh into Petersen’s decision too. I would love to see Petersen come to UCLA, but if that fails I just want to see a well developed coach come to the Bruins and win. I’m not asking for a National title right away, but at least be in contention most years and kick the living shit of Trogans most years too!
by Trojanswearskirts on Nov 29, 2011 10:38 AM PST reply actions
Off Topic...not really...
Here’s a fun "What if" question about persepctive to add to the discussion…(both guys are good candidates.)
2012: $UC at UCLA at the Rose Bowl. Tommy T comes out with the band and stab’s the UCLA logo at the 50 yard line…what do you think Petersen or Leach’s response is…?
Have joe bruin mount his horse and ride away giving him the middle finger!
by Trojanswearskirts on Nov 29, 2011 11:22 AM PST reply actions
Petersen and Leach
both have negatives…the only slam-dunk hire would have been urban meyer, and he said that he wouldn’t have un-retired if not for the OSU job, so we had no shot there.
my $0.02
I’d prefer leach over Peterson, he’s had experience rebuilding programs – he was part of Oklahoma’s rebuilding project under bob stoops’ first staff, and then went to TTU where they had success at a program that wasn’t doing that great either. I also like the fact that leach is a big academics guy – players graduate. He went to college for an education, not to play football, plus he also went on to earn a law degree. Also, as he didn’t play football, he’s not married to one system. Many coaches run what they were taught and what they played in, Leach just made up his system (he went to BYU and was a fan of the old BYU offense so it’s based off that stuff). So I believe he’d be willing to change if needed/if it wasn’t working. His offensive success and other aspects are well documented already, the guy understands how to attack a defense.
If we hired Leach, he’d imprint our teams with an identity, something we need – we’ve been so inconsistent over the past decade, you can’t put any kind of label on our teams. Under Leach, we’d (hopefully) have a balanced, aggressive offense at least and a coach who isn’t afraid to take chances.
Petersen’s teams work hard and execute, they don’t make many mistakes which is what’s been missing for some time from UCLA. You can’t argue with the consistent success he’s had – yes, they dropped 2 upset games in the past 2 years, but it’s not like they were getting blown out by Arizona. They lost to two very good teams in Nevada and TCU and both could have easily gone the other way with made FGs. People try to point out the lack of success of Dan Hawkins and Dirk Koetter after leaving Boise. Both those coaches won games, but not on the same level as Petersen – they won the WAC/Big West but got blown out in games against good/ranked teams, they lost like 48-14 to Georgia the last time they played. Boise State was not Boise State until Petersen came in and beat Oklahoma. Tressel (Youngstown state), Urban Meyer (Bowling Green/Utah), even Houston Nutt at Boise before Koetter had success at mid-majors/FCS before going to the BCS level, so success at the lower levels can translate to BCS programs.
I don’t really follow off-field stuff but you’ve got to figure that Leach’s legal issues are a concern – either way it’s a distraction. Even though the allegations have been shown to be a bunch of BS, it definitely can’t help when he’s making in-home visits and a recruit’s dad asks about that, and it’ll be a distraction if it drags into the season. As unfair as it is, people will always associate him with that until Craig James or TTU issues a public apology or something (never going to happen).
Leach’s last year was also a concern – he seemed to lose the team as they kind of fell apart before the wheels came off with the Adam James stuff. What’s telling is that there wasn’t 100% support behind Leach when the news broke and he was fired, some players were happy that he was gone while others supported him. He seems like he’d be a divisive figure which is never good in a locker room – he’d need to make sure that he had a bunch of people on his side on the coaching staff and administration. If he was forced to adopt a Norm Chow/Walker like RN had to do then I think it would fail.
Petersen already turned down Stanford, I don’t think he’d leave Boise easily. He doesnt strike me as someone who’s looking to move on up – seems happy with where he is, like Gary Patterson at TCU or Chris Ault at Nevada. I don’t know if his success would translate to the Pac-12. Sometimes if you are able to do more with less you aren’t able to do even more with more. Currently he recruits players from all over, like the Netherlands and Canada – I dont think he’d be able to get these same guys into UCLA. He’s got it good over there, everyone loves him in Boise and he wins a ton of games – don’t really see why he’d want to leave.
Also, he stepped into a Boise program that was already established. Nutt and Koetter helped build the program, they were already picking up 8-10 wins when Petersen came in, the Boise culture and identity were already in place at that program. He doesn’t have any record of establishing and building a program as a head coach….Dan Hawkins was kind of similar in that he inherited a successful program from Koetter when he left to ASU (Hawkins was OC under Koetter) and won a bunch of games. Hawkins moved on to take over Colorado when they were down and wasn’t able to build.
I also wouldn’t read too much into the win over Oklahoma in the ‘06 Fiesta Bowl, his signature win. Not to say that it wasn’t a great win, but even Dorrell had one great win in 13-9. The trick plays got all the publicity but the offense was run by Bryan Harsin, who’s now at Texas. Boise was also up 28-10 late in the 3rd, and almost choked the game away before digging into their bag of tricks. That was something of a down year for OU.. Rhett Bomar was kicked off the team before the season and they were starting a converted wide receiver at QB.
in fairness to Petersen
he was a part of Boise State’s development in the 2000s, OC as they started dominating the WAC (which is/was a better conference than the Big West). You could argue that Hawkins failure at Colorado was because he didn’t take Petersen with him. (though no way of proving that)
I agree that he hasn’t experienced the turnaround job – though he was involved in the early Belotti era at Oregon with a program that went from mediocre to good.
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 11:49 AM PST up reply actions
I should also be clear
that I think Leach would be a decent hire and elevate us from our current level. If we hire Leach after trying and failing to land Petersen, I will not be negative about it. But if we take Leach because he is cheaper than Petersen on account of his current unemployment, I think that will be disappointing.
One more thing I want to say in Leach’s favor – I do think he has the capacity to learn from his past mistakes, so I expect him to do a better job with defense at his next gig. Whether he can learn from any of his PR issues, I am more doubtful, as I think that speaks more to his personality than his intellect.
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 11:57 AM PST up reply actions
I am ready to bet you
that if Leach gets a good deal on his next hire, he would be encouraged and likely willing to drop his suit.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
hope so
would speak to his ability to swallow pride and look to get even on the field rather than the courtroom. Living well is the best revenge…
by VeniceBruin on Nov 29, 2011 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
I wouldn't dismiss the "trick plays"
In the most pressurized of pressure cookers, his players were clear-headed and disciplined. When they needed to score in crunch time, the players exhibited well-practiced deception, not desperation.
Oklahoma bought the hook and ladder play and the deceptive two point conversion, not just because they didn’t expect those plays, but because Boise State sold them. None of the BSU players leaned or flinched or gave away the deception until Oklahoma had already committed to another direction.
Obviously, BSU had practiced those plays. Equally obviously, they didn’t just practice them as when-we-need-a-miracle plays. Rather, they were part and parcel of their attack, to be brought out when they needed them most.
So, in short, the players were well-prepared, extremely disciplined, and clear-headed. Even in crunch time in a big-time bowl against a giant of an opponent. That’s great coaching. And, those are three of the qualities that UCLA has been lacking, and without which they have been self-destructing.
But, I’d be thrilled with either Petersen or Leach.
Boise struggled initially in the Big West as they had just made the leap from D-IAA to D-IA. They were already a good I-AA program in the 80s and 90s with a winning tradition, which is why they decided to make the jump. After a few years they had already reached and won bowl games at the I-A level when Petersen came on board with Hawkins. Nothing like they are now under Coach Pete but he wasn’t taking over a program (either as a HC or OC) in the same state we’re in today. I’d support his hiring as well but I was just pointing out that there are negatives to every candidate.
I'm just throwing my input in here from experience.
This is not a rebuilding process type of hire. UCLA football does not need to be rebuilt.
The talent is overwhelmingly there, it needs to be coached and developed.
This is a great opportunity for any coach because of how easy it would be to make this group of players into a 9+ win team.
If you’re a new coach, you are going to get all of the credit for turning around a program that was mishandled but crazy talented.
Also, a new coach (regardless of who it is) instills a more competitive atmosphere instantly.
Reasons:
New coach/staff equals a new first impression. The new guy will watch practice tape and game film to assess what he has. But that first day of practice with a new coach is always intense because it provides the opportunity for a guy like Randall Carroll or Jordan Zumalt or Devin Lucien or Malcolm Jones or Richard Brehaut to show that he is flat-out better than the player ahead of them on the old depth chart.
I would be ecstatic about Mike Leach or Chris Petersen; but the key for me in this hiring process is that the new coach bring in an entirely new staff with a completely open mind about what talent is currently on the roster.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
I haven't seen any news about this anywhere
But I noticed Tony Dye walking around campus with a boot and crutches this week. I remember him being helped off the field on Saturday.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
