The Morning After, Part 9: Arizona State
by gbruin on Nov 6, 2011 5:10 AM PDT
in Football
Email
PrintMore psychology. On the Morning After the San Jose State game, I wrote about learned helplessness and how it explained the pitiful state of fatalism within the Bruin fan base. Another favorite psychological concept of mine is cognitive dissonance, which coincidentally was mentioned in a comment on BN earlier this week. While it may not have the same fascinating experimental demonstration as learned helplessness (and yes, reconize, science shouldn't shock dogs), it's clear that it still a powerful force in the behavioral universe. All these years later, and Dr Grijalva and Psych 10 are still driving the world. Who knew that I could have quit school after that first fall quarter and still had it all figured out?
The clasic example of cognitive disonance is the fable of the fox and the grapes, and it's pretty simple. Fox (not Fox71) wants grapes. Fox can't reach grapes. Fox is conflicted because he wants something he cannot attain and this makes him feel bad. So to resolve this, he decides the grapes are probably sour and that he wouldn't want them anyway. Fox feels better about himself after reaching this conclusion and resolves his own dissonance.
Dissonance is that inner conflict when how we feel differs from what reality gives us. It is stressful to our psyche, and rationalization and justification relieves that stress. Another example of cognitive dissonance is how I felt when I saw Nestor giving props to Ethical Pat and Lame here on BN this week. After I woke up on the floor and got back into my chair, checked the calendar to orient myself, and made sure I was still located on Planet Earth, I simply assumed that N had been kidnapped by agents from the Morgan Center and forced to write that fanpost in an effort to discredit BN. This seemed as likely an explanation as any, and then I stopped shaking and I felt much better and life went on.
Cognitive dissonance also explains why I claim that I wouldn't want to deal with LA traffic anymore, or that being a rock star isn't worth having all those calluses on my fingers from playing guitar every day, or why I am pretty convinced that Salma Hayek is really a man.
And cognitive dissonance is alive and well in Bruins Nation following last night's win.
The Bruin fan base is definitely conflicted. Just look at how contentious the arguments in the post game thread last night became. While almost everyone was happy that we won, there was a lot of disagreement over the context of this win. Some were minimizing it, some were overhyping it, some were just happy to have it no matter what, and some are using it to obviate the past. The fact that the Bruin fan base is arguing amongst itself, after a win no less, is pretty telling, and also totally unsurprising. That right there tells you a lot about the state of our football program. Ah, the dysfunctionality surrounding U.C.L.A. football continues even in victory.
Fortunately for everyone, I am here to relieve your anguish by providing all the correct answers and bring you a clear understanding of the present, a look at our history, and a pathway overall inner peace. Ommmmm
Or maybe it's just how I'm resolving my own dissonance. You can decide.
After the Arizona embarassment, BruinsNation (which includes me) posted a front page article calling for the immediate firing of Rick Neuheisel and Dan Guerrero. After extensive and thoughtful documentation, which originally began back to the Karl Dorrell era, we concluded that the failure of the football program lay in the diseased culture of mediocrity which has been perpetuated by the Athletic Director over a decade, and by the inadequate job of coaching on the part of our Head Coach and members of his staff over the last 3+ years. Our decision was based on previously published criteria which the football leadership failed to meet. We drew a definitive line in the sand and this regime crossed it with the performance in Tucson. But while Arizona was the final straw, there was already a mountain of problems present. It was on that mountain that we based our decision, and when we made our statement, we all knew that the possibility of winning out still existed. And almost everyone agreed with us at that time - maybe not with respect to the timing, but certainly with the action that was needed.
Then a funny thing happened. After that article, we won the next two games.
Now, the first thing I thought of is that we should have written that piece before the season and maybe we'd be undefeated. But I had to reject that idea because I'd hate to be karmically responsible for any of our difficulties. It's similar to how I'm sure it's purely coincidence that we last won a Rose Bowl on Jan 1 1986, and since I enrolled that fall we haven't won one since. There's no way that can be my fault, right?
Let me begin by saying that I was really happy with last night's win. It was a thrilling finish, especially dodging the bullet with our late turnover and their missed FG, followed by our late TD drive, and finally capped by the insane forward lateral/penalty with time runoff/traded for a time out/reversed under review/we're sorry you can have everything back weirdness in ASU's last drive. When their last kick thudded short and right, both my kids jumped on my back and we danced around the living room. That was certainly our best win of the year, considering the opponent and the gravity of the game. It showed a lot of character that the team didn't quit after the Arizona embarassment. It showed there have been some improvements in both the defense and offense in terms of scheme and personnel and execution. For these things, the players and even the coaches deserve credit.
But if you think Rick should stay based on one win last night, then by the same logic you have to say Rick should have gone after one loss like Arizona. And that kind of flip flopping seems like it would create an awful lot of dissonance.
Last night was one game. And while it is fine and appropriate to celebrate a victory, that one game has to be taken in context. Beyond last night's win, there was still Arizona 2 weeks ago. And there was still Texas this year. And there were still San Jose and Wazzu. And Stanford the last 2 years. And BYU and Arizona and Cal and ASU 3 years ago. And Oregon and Arizona and Cal and 2 years ago. And Cal and Oregon and Washington and ASU last year. And there was *Sc every year. How many wins like last night do we have to balance those losses?
Any call to save Neuehisel based on one game is contrasted with our call to replace Neuheisel based now on 46 games and bad assistant hires and bad schemes and poor development and poor personnel choices and a play-not-to-lose mentality, all of which have contributed not only to this team failing miserably to reach its potential year after year, but which has led to multiple incredibly embarrassing moments and to the football program's worst 4 year span since the 1940's. It would be crazy to forget all of that for a victory over an ASU team can be as bad (Illinois) as it can be good (*$c). Simply put, this wasn't Oregon or Stanford last night, and ASU itself knows that.
Similarly, our call to replace Guerrero is based on nearly 10 years of malaise and apathy and tolerance of mediocrity that permeates the upper levels of our University. This was notably demonstrated by our Chancellor pathetically responding to multiple alums' honest concerns about football by disregarding them and instead leading an 8 Clap for beating Cal. This mindset is what is killing U.C.L.A. football. We want better. Until this mindset is changed, the overall direction of our football program will not. And that is a gigantic screw to the players who are dedicating their heart and souls to the team, to the students who need to be part of the University's tradition and spirit, and to the alums and fans who simply want to see U.C.L.A. return to competitive greatness.
The arguments last night got pretty contentious. There was a lot of criticism of the people celebrating the win and defending Neu last night. And those Neubs were awfully critical of anyone still reminding the community of the ongoing problems with football. How do we reconcile these seemingly opposing camps with contradicting positions? How do we resolve this dissonance within our own minds and across our own ranks?
Good news, Bruins. The solution to everyone's dissonance this morning is simply that we CAN have it both ways. This was we a win we can celebrate. And we can still demand a change of the people in charge of our athletic department and our football program. We can be happy for winning last night, and we can continue to hope we win next week in Salt Lake. At the same time, we can hope that Guerrero and Neuheisel are ushered out in the near future and that better leaders and teachers are brought in in their places. I don't feel in the least bit guilty combining the two ideas. The ideas are not mutually exclusive, and there is no logical disconnect. In fact, the two ideas are both necessary as a Bruin fan. I want what is best for the team today, and what is best for the program in the long run. Is there anyone who doesn't want that?
Some people are stuck on the idea that if this team keeps winning that we shouldn't fire Neuheisel. I think that's awfully narrow minded. I have made up my mind on Neuheisel based on his 3+ seasons in Westwood, and based on standards for U.C.L.A. Athletics that any self-respecting Bruin should share. Still, why should that make me any less anxious to win every week? Heck, I'd love to see Rick go out of this program a winner. See? No dissonance here. My mind is at peace.
Well, at peace until people keep pushing all the "What If?" scenarios, anyway. What If Neu does this or What if the team does that? My answer is going to be the same. Look at the record. Look at the results. Look at the pathway this team has travelled. Is that good enough for U.C.L.A. football? I think not. A couple wins in the last 2 weeks doesn't erase that. Beating *$c this year doesn't change that. Getting to the Pac-12 Championship game doesn't change any of that. Getting to and winning a Rose Bowl?
Well, that's a degree of dissonance that I certainly hope I have to deal with.
101 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Very well written!
I was disturbed by the disparaity and hostility towards each after last night win on BN. After attending the Rose Bowl last night, it felt great coming home from back to back wins. This piece sums up most of my thoughts and I hope it brings everything back into perspective for everyone. Thanks and lets hope for the improbable scenario!
We can have our cake...
DG and C Block are the first ones that should go. DG set up this disaster when he forced RN to use NC and DW as coaches. In seemed like a dream team but chemistry was a disaster. When RN finally changed this he again could not go after his first choice most likely cause of money! Our current malaise starts at the top so sorry DG and CB. Your leadership has really handcuffed our major sports programs. I hope your lack of support doesn’t hurt our BBall team this year with this traveling road show you brainstormed.
GO BRUINS!
by BruinArts on Nov 6, 2011 5:48 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
I think that's a bit extreme
I love UCLA football as much as the next guy on BN and boy do I have my gripes right now, but I don’t think the chancellor should go because of the way he’s reacting to the football program’s woes. He has a couple of other responsibilities.
DG and CRN though, they’re blowing it on their respective matters of focus. They both need to be shown the door at the end of this season.
That raises a question I have often wanted to ask
Which responsibilities is the chancellor allowed to ignore and still keep his job?
I want to ask the same question of the critics of the mean company which wants to prosecute the person for some minor shoplifting. How much stealing is OK? You, Mr. Critic, tell me how much is OK for me to steal from you, let me steal it with impunitity, then we’ll talk about the mean company prosecuting the shoplifter.
Block has lots of responsibilities. We would sure want to fire him if he simply ignored fundraising and attending cocktail parties and instead devoted all his time to improving the football program. So why should we not consider firing him for doing just the opposite. (This does not include leading an eight clap every three months. This means actually Doing Something.)
Fair point, but his job has way more dimension to it than that. You’re making it sound as if there’s athletics and everything else — one or the other. While he has seemed tone deaf to our gripes with the athletics department, my argument would be that he needs to focus more on it than he already does, but not that he should be fired. Once the school nosedives academically, can’t fundraiser respective to this economic climate, the innovation engine isn’t chugging like its used to amongst other pressing issues to UCLA as a whole WHILE being tone deaf to athletics as a whole, then I’d reconsider whether he should be at the school at all. But right now he just needs to grasp how seriously we’re upset with the athletics dept.
Those whose jobs are solely athletics however, or more specifically football, should be ashamed.
by deepdish on Nov 6, 2011 9:55 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
It just seems like he looks at athletics like the the snooty people on the Titanic looked at Leonardo di Caprio.
Athletics needs to be recognized as one of the integral party of the university experience. I remember every aspect of the X post H and Beban to Altenburg. I can’t say that I remember much of anything about whole years of academics. (Of course, the fact that it’s 40 years in the past may have something to do with that.)
I've been reading BN religiously since 05
and this is by far the best piece of writing I’ve read here, and that’s saying quite a bit. Well played gb.
Great analysis gbruin
Block holds a bachelor’s degree in psychology from Stanford University and a master’s and Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Oregon. Could Block recognize if he himself lapsed into cognitive dissonance?
UCLA should be making a serious commitment to unite both the student body, the alumni, future students, and the public on a social level. A successful athletic program can be an effective way of maintaining such a connection. However, what I perceive is an athletic department in contraction. Looking at the major sports, football and track in decline; baseball and basketball treading water. Compared to years past, other sports eliminated from the varsity level. Do we currently offer either a Kinesiology or Physical Education major?
Read Block’s priorities for UCLA:
“a singular goal: developing UCLA as the model public research university for the 21st century.”
Does anyone see a lot of encouragement for the future of Bruin athletics at http://chancellor.ucla.edu/priorities ?
+1
You must have attended a very sound University.
Well-Stated, gbruin
To wish Coach Neuheisal well is the absolute right thing to do—he is a good Bruin, and a Bruin to his core. To wish him gone is also the right thing, as he has greatly underacheived in his job as head coach.
Love My Bruins
Agree 100%
You have captured the arguments for parting ways with RN regardless of future games this season.
For me, the questions are where do we want to be in 4 years, and can our current head coach get us there?
4 years from now (hopefully sooner although we have a mountain to climb), it would be great if we were a relevant player in the BCS equation. That means a January bowl game, top 10, etc. Others may want to aim higher, but first things first.
In any event, can you see RN as the head coach of that team? If not (and I can’t), then he should go even if the team wins out this year.
Last night reminds me of the win over $C under Dorrell, and the Sun Bowl. We shouldn’t keep riding a lame horse because of the occasional nice win.
Remember- in the early 80’s, we beat 4 different Big 10 teams in the Rose Bowl in 5 years, sandwiched around a win over Miami in the Fiesta Bowl, while beating $C 8 straight times.
We can and should get back to that standard. But it won’t happen with RN.
Here’s to 9-4 record this season, and a new head coach.
Question
Fairly new bruin fan here, class of ’11. I am wondering why the name terry donahue so negatively here on BN. Did he not win several rose bowls and beat sc 8 straight times? I am not too familiar with Bruin football lore back in the 80s, seeing how I was not even born until the tail end of that era, so can someone please educate me?
His biggest offense, imo,
was infecting the team and the entire culture at UCLA with PNTL disease. His successes only strengthened the disease’s hold on the culture.
Not everyone thinks quite that negatively about Coach Donahue.
As a general statement, I think the moderators think Donahue has few redeeming qualities, and even though he left the school in 1995, many blame him for the disaster that is now Morgan Center. I disagee with the moderators in many respects with regard to Donahue. He was much too conservative in his game strategy than I would have liked to see, but at the same time he made it a point to get quality people, especially Homer Smith. (The moderators and I and everyone else in the world agree that Homer Smith is the best offensive coordinator every to have walked he face of the earth. And that’s an understatement.)
I don’t see the link between Donahue’s conservatism and the Morgan Center mind-set, especially after 15 years and several chancellors and athletidc directors.
My recommendation is to read what you can read and ask questions.
By the way, I think I’m in the minority on this, but that’s not a problem. The majority thought Columbus would sail off the edge of the earth and that would be that. (And before the smart alecs start making age comments, I was not around when Columbus sailed.).
Overall, I'm not negative on TD either
After all, I got to watch several bowl victories and wins against that other place. And, homer smith was indisputably brilliant.
I’m not agile enough on this smartphone to look it up, but at some point (probably when smith left), unmistakeable signs of conservatism and PNTL crept in. I remember screaming at my tv when we were in the red zone – mix it up!
But, no. It was run-run-pass with the pass coming when everyone knew it was coming. I don’t remember being equally frustrated with the D under TD, but the O in his twilight years told me it was time for fresh blood.
Toledo was an exception, but I saw that same maddening offensive conservatism polished to a nauseating shine under KD and now RN.
I could well be senile, or just plain wrong, but I see the current PNTL mindset as having gestated under TD.
by Bruinut on Nov 6, 2011 5:22 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
You have a point (as do the moderators).
Donahue was ultra conservative, and he was like that his whole time. To me, though,, there was more good than bad.
I don’t understand how Donahue can still be influencing our choice for head coach 16 years after his departure. I’m not disputing the horrible mindset in Morgan Center, but I doubt that it emanated from Donahue.
This is like trying to figure out who was the original black plague carrier.
Well, here's my theory from the cheap seats
It’s a variation of the good-old-boy network. Donahue was the longest tenured and most successful coach (in terms of wins) at UCLA. He had those bowl wins and successes against you-know-whom.
Moreover, his successes were tangible and obvious to all. His name could be spoken by anyone, inside or outside of football, as one of the premier coaches with relative impunity, because the record and the reputation were firmly in place. So, everyone, including administrators, hiring managers, and check payers, could be secure in their knowledge that the Donahue way was the way to go.
His record was unassailable, in tangible terms. He didn’t embarrass the university. The inner details of Donahue’s system, such as conservative play, were there for the football geeks to argue over, but the overall mindset was firmly in place—Donahue’s way is the right way.
As for coaches since Donahue, both Dorrell and Neuheisel played for and achieved great success under Donahue. Dorrell’s first job as coach was as a graduate assistant under TD. Neuheisel was also a graduate assistant under Donahue. He tutuored one Troy Aikman, a QB who managed to achieve some success, using the Donahue way.
There are probably other connections, as well. But, my long-way-to-get-there point is that both Neuheisel and Dorrell were “infected” with the whole Donahue package, along with everyone else. They knew the system, and the system worked.
And, it did work. I remember many a gratifying New Year’s day during Donahue’s time. His playing days as an under-sized lineman under Tommy Prothro were inspirational. I consider him an all-time great Bruin.
Trouble is, as with all marriages and all relationships, you don’t get to pick and choose which parts you like. You get the whole package, and that package includes an inbred conservatism that has been growing and thriving for decades. Donahue didn’t invent conservatism, but it was surely present during his time, and it has surely flourished ever since. [Sorry to call you “Shirley.”]
It’s going to take someone like Mike Leach, I’m afraid, to change things. Not so much for the football philosophies and strategies, but for the self-secure knowledge that he won’t take football orders from outsiders. It will take someone like Leach who will stand up to the entrenched Donahue-is-God mindset.
Anyway, that’s my crackpot theory.
I think Donahue was lucky
That he got to coach at a time when Bruin alums didn’t have an outlet to organize and speak their minds. His first 12 years were ok. But during his later years he clearly mismanaged the program and had us on a downward trend. If we were around back then, it would not have been a comfortable ride for him.
He knows that. That is why he lashed against “blogs” to protect Karl Dorrell in his later years. We took apart his whining just like we would have picked apart all his underachieving seasons at UCLA.
He also got lucky
because during his time, the Pac-10 was U$C, UCLA and Washington. That’s it. All the other teams were also-rans or one-hit wonders. Players tended to stay close to home, flights weren’t as cheap, the internet wasn’t around yet. Everything fell into his lap given UCLA’s amazing location and advantages.
You could see why he started losing the ship in the 90’s when other programs started catching up.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Granted
And Nestor makes a fair point about the lack of feedback and criticism during TD’s run. Yes, he had some under-achieving seasons. He also had some achieving seasons. But, the overall degree of success or underachievement of Donahue’s tenure is perhaps a subject for another discussion.
In my thoughts above, I was attempting to respond to Fox’s question about how it was possible that Terry Donahue could possibly be affecting the thinking of staff and coaches today, given that none of the same people are in place.
My theory is that TD’s achieving seasons gave everyone who ever invoked the name of Terry Donahue cover. The good-enough coaching of TD became the good-enough aspirations of administrators. No need to shoot for the top. Just keep playing it cautiously. A decent bowl every few years is good enough.
That’s my crackpot theory, and I’m sticking to it.
I'm cured of my CD!
Excellent writing on what ills so many of us! Reading it took me through all the frustrations and caused me to realize that what we in BN expect is reasonable, achievable, and the reason for our hope and pride. This pursuit for excellence, not just better, must not end! Many thanks and do carry on!
Nice perspective.
Your rundown of all the eggs UCLA football has laid the past couple of years cannot be ignored by the RN supporters and must be addressed by the administration at the end of the season. This morning, there seems to be a light at the end of the tunnel, but seeing how things have been going, that optimism can vanish in the blink of an eye by playing poorly against Utah or Colorado.
IMO Guerrero must go, win or lose. People may like underdogs, but willingly choose to be one is a fatal mistake
As for Neuheisel, I don’t think ASU changes anything, because of the poor performance overall for this year and the past 3 years. It’s understandable of the poor hand he was dealt when he started, and the whole QB issue has partly been a self inflicted wound for all that time. The AD most certainty handicapped the program, because football is essentially about money now. However, all that doesn’t change the numbers, and by the end of the season, even if Neuheisel wins out the remaining game of the season and goes to the Rose Bowl, he would be under 0.5, 0.4898 to be exact. And the loses this year were immensely bad. UCLA was blown out, and the wins were essentially loses for the opponent, instead of valid wins for this team.
So far, this season, the best two games were the Cal and ASU games. And I’m hoping that after the UofA game, the team and the coaching staff found something that they can use to improve upon and win out. Maybe that will give Rick one extra year, but again, that’s a maybe. The numbers don’t lie and history don’t lie; what will truly save Rick is if we see convincing wins through the end of the season, and a fundamental change in the culture of football. However I doubt that, especially in this short amount of time. So good job Rick for a win, but the damage’s been done. I’d love to see him prove me wrong though.
Nothing has changed......
We are not an elite football program. We are not even a good football program. Does anyone think we could score on LSU or Alabama? Can we beat Stanford, Oregon or even a mediocre $C? Until Bruin fans can say not only can we play with anyone – we can beat anyone…..change must take place and it starts with DG and RN.
Good Piece GB!
I had to give myself some time after last night’s win to calm down a bit and try and see things a bit more rationally. Yes, last night’s win was good (and fun – in the end anyway) and I’m damn happy for our players; particularly Kevin Prince who has finally had an opportunity to come into his own a little bit and have some good moments. Hopefully, he’ll have many more.
Now, looking at the big picture, how much does last night (or the next three games) change the whole situation? It’s difficult to tell but I’m guessing not a whole helluva lot. I know beating Utah over in Salt Lake is not going to be easy and we SHOULD be able to handle Colorado at home. Beating USC over at the Coliseum may be a bridge too far, I fear, but it would get us a 7-5 record and one of those lower-tier bowls. So, while there may be some “feel good” aspects about all this, I just don’t think that’s anywhere close enough to meet UCLA standards. We ARE an elite program and we SHOULD be in the national discussion/top 5 every few years.
The question I have is, if RN is gone after this season, who/where is Mr. Perfect?
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Nov 6, 2011 7:36 AM PDT reply actions
PI Call On Aaron Hester....
Was absolutely the WORST defensive PI call I’ve seen on us since the phantom PI call on Johnnie Lynn late in the game against USC back in ’77 which helped get the Trogans into position to kick the winning FG against us and knock us out of the Rose Bowl.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Nov 6, 2011 7:55 AM PDT up reply actions
I Know...
I still have that damn game in my hard drive after all these years.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Nov 6, 2011 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Oh, you want a painful memory?
How about the non-pass interference on Danny Graham in about 69 or so. (A long time ago.)
ah, the johnnie lynn call
i am still bitter about that one.
Turnovers
After last year’s debacle, I was thinking we could be 8-4 at season’s end. What were the 4 losses? Well, I figured we were going to lose to one of the 2 Texas teams out of sheer revenge (turns out both). I gave us a snowball at Stanford, so there was loss #2. I thought we would lose to 1 of the Arizona schools and honestly thought that Thursday on ESPN was going to be the one we lose. OK, so we have 4 losses, fine if we win out, right, especially with 2 remaining on the road and 1 of those against SC?
Well, not exactly. Its how we have lost and the headaches we endure during the wins that is driving people nuts here. Every Bruin wants the Bruins to succeed (CRN’s head another subject). I just can’t get over the stupid turnovers and at key moments. Spot Texas 21 points on 3 turnovers as a result of an oft-injured qb who looks like he is afraid to get hit. Against Stanford, we are 1st and goal on like the 6 and can’t punch it in. And then when we are still “in it” in the third quarter (albeit a long shot), defense actually holds and forces a punt. We muff it, Luck does the rest. Arizona—smelled like a setup—emotional game with head coach just fired on prime time ESPN. Recipe for disaster and we add a dash of pepper with a few timely fumbles. Even last night in a “good win”, Franklin kills a drive with a fumble and even our kick return specialist (who has earned a “by”) coughs it up and almost costs us at least 3 points (and the game). And don’t forget, we probably would have blanked Cal if not for turnovers.
I can’t help but wonder where this year’s team would be without the turnovers. I’m not sure the record would be much different, but I’m thinking 21 points against Texas, 14 points against Stanford and 14 against Zona maybe changes the games.
We can’t change much, but holding on to the ball is fundamental and we are a turnover away from a loss or win in the next 3. If we somehow find a remedy here (say benching a player or 2), I can see us running the table, salvaging the season and even looking forward to a really good season next year. If we continue to play all thumbs, let’s just move on.
Turnovers are significant
Go here http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs
and look at the list of teams with the fewest turnovers. It’s pretty close to the list of top ten teams (although LSU may have dropped out after last night.)
If IE Angel is reading this, or 03rdn9, aren’t there drills to designed to help guys hold onto the ball?
Yes and no
If a player has an issue fumbling, it is one of the hardest things to learn away.
Examples: Adrian Peterson, Tiki Barber, many others.
There have been drills with Franklin that I recall. I think there was a period where the team made him carry around a football throughout the day for a few weeks or so.
Every running back coach is going to stress keeping the ball high and tight, and also using the 4 points to secure the ball (palm, elbow, shoulder, chest). It is up to the player to apply it at a certain point.
I don’t think Coleman has had any real issues fumbling, in addition to consistently averaging more yards per carry than any running back on our team. I think giving him the starts and the lion’s share of the carries would eliminate those issues.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
Best post of the year
G, you summed it up perfectly. My inner turmoil is resolved, and I thank you.
by hicalliber on Nov 6, 2011 7:49 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
well written
I think the conflict is that I love to see the Bruins win, but the “powers that be” aren’t as critical as we are. I know I’m not alone in my belief that there’s no way we’re getting a new AD – that would seemingly require a new Chancellor as well, unlikely.
So assuming we’re stuck with Donut Dan, the same fool that extended KTS after 13-9, we can’t win out and we certainly can’t win games against ranked opponents, whether they are good road teams or not.
Last night on the post game recap, the commentators confirmed my fear. They talked about our program, then about Neu and how he started the season on the hot seat and that it’s getting “cooler”.
Let me get this straight
You want to dump the chancellor because football is not his highest priority at a time that budgets are being decimated (and I use the word correctly), tuition is skyrocketing, and he’s struggling to keep the university a national leader (tied with UVA, behind Berkeley, but narrowly, at #25 in the US N&WR rankings, the top three state universities in the country). Would you rather be LSU—great football team, #128 in the rankings?
You want to dump the AD because of football, despite the fact that UCLA is competitive in nearly every sport and has two or three teams with good shots at national championships this fall.
Do you honestly think any coach will look positively on a head coaching job at a university whose fan base has dumped its last two football coaches (and threatened to do the same to its highly successful basketball coach after one bad season)?
The only university with remotely the academics of UCLA that is thriving in football is Stanford, and that may be fleeting. Take a look at that top ten: one football factory after another, without an academic strength among them.
I guess my cognitive dissonance is that I thought that UCLA was a University. I didn’t get my degree there because of football, and I certainly didn’t choose to attend because of football. Did you? If so, maybe you should have gone to Florida or LSU or Oklahoma, gotten a big football fix, and then looked to see where the degree got you.
I have to make a confession
One of my main reasons for attending UCLA was football. UCLA FOOTBALL. The Band. The Games. Especially the USC game. It’s all been talked about here in BN in very descriptive , rapturous prose. Yeah, you got ME, anyway.
Actually more than decimated...
… which would be a 10% cut. For the first time in history tuition is a larger source of revenue than state funding. The University of California’s paradigm has radically altered and the brain drain of faculty and students destabilizes the economy of California. The Chancellor is doing a pretty good job of surfing these waves of change, and despite our hunger for a top 5 football team and the unquestionable necessity of humiliating SUC once a year, the Chancellor really cares little about these things.
Football is the steak in the steakhouse
Basketball is seafood and the rest are sides. It’s asinine to judge an AD’s performance at UCLA, where the fine education and excellent location makes it a haven for athletes of non-rev sports through no particular achievement of the AD, while it’s football has been the most underachieving in the nation for 10 years, and it’s previous 2 coaching hires were of coaches that NOBODY IN THE REST OF THE COUNTRY WOULD’VE HIRED OR WOULD HIRE AFTERWARD.
last 2 coaches?
i think most solid footbal programs would have washed their hands of donahue and his cronies as well long ago. and many on here were the biggest backers of bringing neuheisel back to westwood (even admonishing those who suggested that his prior tenures had left those programs… decimated). i don’t want to beat a dead horse, but i always thought neu was full of it. but we’re here, and i’m gonna support the guys after a good win. it will be interesting to see where we go after getting back on the coaching carousel…
That doesn't sound accurate
If I had to gauge the sentiment around the KD firing on BN, I believe Leach or Petersen would have been the top choices. Petersen was rumored to not be interested and Leach was supposedly demanding too much money for Morgan Center’s tastes and so our list shrank.
I distinctly recall an outreach to fans of the teams from Rick’s two previous stops if they had any football related insight into why he shouldn’t be our coach, but unfortunately, what we got back was a lot of the same Slick Rick garbage that some of our posters took the time to actually research and debunk. The biggest football related red flag that came out of that was Rick’s supposed infatuation for recruiting the skill positions, leaving his rosters unbalanced and his lines weak. It appeared he was on his way to addressing that issue through his first few classes, but as we all know, the development there has still been lacking, especially on the defensive side.
Answers
“You want to dump the chancellor because football is not his highest priority at a time that budgets are being decimated (and I use the word correctly), tuition is skyrocketing, and he’s struggling to keep the university a national leader (tied with UVA, behind Berkeley, but narrowly, at #25 in the US N&WR rankings, the top three state universities in the country).” Yes. He’s ignoring an immense source of wealth generation.
“You want to dump the AD because of football, despite the fact that UCLA is competitive in nearly every sport and has two or three teams with good shots at national championships this fall.” Yes. Ask Coach Howland which of the two major sports drives the bus.
“Do you honestly think any coach will look positively on a head coaching job at a university whose fan base has dumped its last two football coaches (and threatened to do the same to its highly successful basketball coach after one bad season)?” Yes. A coach who would be dissuaded by the criticism directed at our last two coaches is not a coach I would want. Neither Mike Leach nor Urban Meyer nor any other viable candidate would equate themselves with the last two coaches we’ve had.
“[M]aybe you should have gone to Florida or LSU or Oklahoma, gotten a big football fix, and then looked to see where the degree got you.” I did go to a school where I got a big football fix. We were competitive all the time. Occasionally we laid an egg. We lost some we should have won, but we looked at every single game as one we could win. And we had some great wins. We were disappointed with losses, but we were not surprised with wins, as has been the case at UCLA for about 15 years.
Don’t forget – UCLA was once on that same list as LSU and the others. And we did it wthout compromising academics.
I want grapes as much as the next Fox. Unlike that other one, I think I can get the grapes if I assemble the right staff of grape getters. That starts with the AD, and goes directly to the footbal coach.
?
Let me get this straight. So I should treat all my clients equally although one particular client equals 80% (pick a number) of my business? That makes a lot of sense. Still waiting for the water polo, golf, etc. team to generate revenue to support an entire athletic department. The problem with Donut Dan is that he fails to recognize that FB is the cashcow and you MUST support it in order to be able to support the entire athletic department. UCLA has been living off it’s name for way too long. That is why we lose coaches like Nikki Caldwell when it was obvious to anyone that was paying attention that she has the potential to be one of the best coaches in women’s bball.
The Zooker got fired after a winning season. That sure didn’t deter Urban Meyer from taking that job. Coaches don’t avoid jobs because so and so got fired after a winning record. Coaches avoid jobs becuase of a lack of support for the program. Florida will always be attractive because they support their program. The expectations don’t scare coaches. If it was solely based on expectations and “unreasonable/crazy fan base”, nobody would take jobs at Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, etc.
To use the term "Donahue-esque"
to describe our current head coach along with the previous head coach is an insult to “Donahue-esque”.
While I usually find myself nodding in agreement
with everything gbruin writes, I am not quite so at home with his unrelenting desire to dump Rick. In my own mind, last year didn’t happen (because of the devasting loss of so many key players to injury, etc.), so this is really year three of the Neuheisel Era. Even then, his record is not so hot, and that loss to Zona rankles plenty. But I have to state the obvious: whatever the opinion of the great majority of BN contributors may be, the coach has not lost the team. They came back, they played with spirit and, improbably, given all the events of the fourth quarter, they won. I see actual growth and real improvement. Of course, it could all be an illusion and vanish in an instant if we don’t show up and beat Utah. Or it could be real, and the past was only prologue.
Year one didn't happen either
He was saddled with another coach’s recruits. Year two didn’t happen because of some other arbitrary excuse, and the first 7 games of this year didn’t happen because we weren’t ready yet and we need a do-over. So actually, in my mind, we’re 2-0 and Rick is the greatest coach UCLA has ever had.
Dorrellian Year
To me, this year reeks of Dorrell’s year prior to his last (the 13-9 year). Horrible defense, incompetent playcalling, and outright embarrassing showings followed by winning most of the right games. I feel like Neuheisel will get the tank this year, but if we beat $C this year, will he be given a ‘get out of jail free’ card?
playcalling
was actually pretty good, at least this game.. boring to run it every down, but effective – and keeping the ball on the ground keeps Prince from throwing too many picks. Granted, it didn’t stop Franklin from coughing it up – but that’s why we need to stick with Coleman. Only playcall I didn’t like was that 2 point play. Looked like they’d never practiced that one and a fade is really low percentage given who we’ve got playing QB. If you must pass, flood one side of the endzone at various depths with a WR, TE, and both RB and roll out to that side- gives you 4 options + the option to run it in, text book 2 point play.
Totally agree about the defense though, atrocious. ASU stopped themselves with mistakes.
And yeah, I don’t want to be scared to beat $uC – but I feel like a win would surely give Neu more time.
Not trying to alter the discussion about Neu's firing
but it appears some of what has been written here on BN is being addressed. The kids are playing with more energy, some of the youngsters are getting playing time, and in reading the House of Sparky article, I was amazed to see the phrases “play action” and “pump fake” in the same sentence to describe the TD pass to Resario.
Not trying to be all sunshine and lollipops, but they seem to be getting some results, however late they may be. I was glad I spent more time watching the Bruins than the Bama-LSU game last night.
This is fair assessment
A team can only play one game at a time. Things we’ve been missing have shown up the last two weeks. Two weeks doesn’t make one season, let alone four years, but I give credit to the team and coaches for change.
This will be a good point...
if we finish the whole season in this manner. Two games is nowhere near enough to be some kind of turn around. Right now, these two games are the anomaly (sad!).
Utah
Anybody else want to see us crush Chow? I am pleasantly surprised that the remaining games on UCLA’s schedule have front stories (i.e. playing for the division title) as well as back stories (Norm Chow at Utah, Neuheisel’s former team in Colorado, and the SC rivalry game). I have read gbruin’s stance on cognitive dissonance and no longer have any. I want to see this team win, and I want change. There is nothing wrong with that. Let’s give this group of players and UCLA fans everywhere a season to remember.
by Strathmore&Gayley on Nov 6, 2011 8:46 AM PDT reply actions
Utah is no pushover
We have played in Utah once in the regime of the current head coach. It was his second game as head coach. Things did not go well.
I want us to beat Utah but not because of Chow
He’s so far been classy about his departure and I think he had ample opportunity to criticize Rick or UCLA, but he hasn’t done so. God knows, we deserve criticism though..
Walt Harris
got pushed out as Pitt’s head coach after a relatively successful term, and it happened right after he led Pitt to their first-ever BCS game (Fiesta Bowl vs Utah in ‘04 or ’05 or whatever it was). So beating U$C or winning a bowl game, or even going to the Rose Bowl shouldn’t give Rick a free pass, you have to consider their whole body of work, and Harris had a much better career than Neuheisel has had. Ralph Friedgen, a Maryland guy, was also pushed out from his alma mater after going 8-4 and winning a bowl game, he was also a fairly successful coach at Maryland.
so it happens. However it may be worth noting that neither school made a great hire after this.
Excellent post...
…I was at the game yesterday and it was hard not to feel great for the players, coaches, and the fans. The last seven minutes of the game was as exciting as anything I have seen (and I attended Michigan-ND this year). So I definitely needed a night to mull this game over in my head.
G, I think you hit the nail on the head. Is it satisfactory or acceptable to underachieve and then succeed “against the odds”? It’s like the C student that pulls an A on the midterm; once you get over the surprise and excitement of the result, you start to wonder why you hadn’t seen it the rest of the time. Reminds me of another coach that had a team of pros and would “surprise” with a Sweet 16 run every year….
Oh, and way to take “cognitive dissonace” and run with it. Well played my friend. :)
by uclaike on Nov 6, 2011 9:08 AM PST via mobile reply actions
Guerrero really gets under my skin.
When he published this cherry-picked letter from a "fan" on his blog last week, I nearly blew a gasket.
(Ask Dan Question Of The Week) (scroll to bottom)
http://www.uclabruins.com/genrel/102611aab.html
Why does our administration keep forgetting that a university is first and foremost for the students?
Watching students go crazy at a college sporting event is part of the experience.
If you are the type who prefers to watch a basketball game at which people sit rooted to their seats, hands folded neatly in their laps, then simply call 1-800-CLIPPERS. Good seats are still available.
by mcbruin on Nov 6, 2011 9:27 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Dissonance
… I don’t think I had any between my ears, or rather let dissonance not overwhelm the melody, but there was a strange defensiveness/anger among Bruins supporters on several sites last night. In general there’s a straw man created by “Neubs”… I can’t find more than one or two posts saying these two wins mean Neu should stay. There is a rare broadly held agreement; it’s all too late to change the reality that Neu and Guerrero need to be replaced. My own thoughts: I want to win out in Pac 12 and win the first championship game and go to the Rose Bowl and beat Michigan State. That would attract recruits and make us relevant nationally…. and (again for me) would still not alter the balance sheet of the last four years. Arizona was the nadir and (like men without legs, we cannot grow new ones) was a point of no return. So winning out isn’t enough. Winning out in a way that is impressive, resolves my doubts, well, could make a difference. And the RealPolitik of the big college world probably save RN… but even that won’t make me indifferent to winning now. And when Stravinsky changed the human ear in 1914 with the premiere of Rite of Spring… dissonance can be beautiful if you listen in new ways.
Harry, you had me right up until Stravinsky.
But then I thought of things a new way. I wanted to go watch a Mozart piece (with totally beautiful, perfect structure ), with maybe a little Puccini thrown in (something modern but beautifully lyrical, like a flea-flicker or a halfback pass), and they when things were set up, go to my new favorite, Jean Baptiste Lully, for something really old-fashioned, like Derrick Coleman up the middle or planting Vontaze Perfect. Instead, what I got is Stravinsky. Everyone plays whatever they want, the conductor waves his arms wildly while looking at his playbook, and one fan says “This isn’t the way I remember football. How long until they get it right?” and his friend says “Oh, about next Spring”, which gave its name “Right of Spring.”
Ahh, the benefits of the university education.
It's not Cognitive Dissonance I'm worried about. It's schizophrenia.
Loved last night’s game. Screamed my guts out. Great win. Prince was almost perfect. Rosario actually, really played well. (How long have we been calling for passes to our tall wideouts when they are covered one on one? But I digress. ). Coleman would not lose and why the Hell is he not the featured back? Wade Yandall and the O line were fantastic. Young guys on D, who should have played long ago, made plays all over the field. The team overcame horrific, stupid calls by the refs at the most critical moments of the game. If the team played like this the whole year, well, if, if, if …. Why didn’t they? Mmmmmm.
But I’m a Bruin first, last and always, so if we crush Utah, and Colorado and SUC, of which we know we are now capable at least, and then we beat Stanford in a rematch after scoring on our first drive after first and goal on the six, and we beat Wisconsin or Penn State in The Rose Bowl to go 9-4 because we finally have swagger and know how to fricking win and not play to lose, well, if, if, if …. Would Hollywood even buy this movie if it happened? Where is the verisimilitude even if it really happened. Football fans would have to say it was faked, just like the landing on the moon, right? Stranger things have happened, right? Uh, no.
Can we win the rest of our games scoring 28-29 points at most in each? Can we win them all by punting like we did twice inside their 40 where it worked once and failed the other? Can we win the rest with one brilliant 76 yard pass and one desperation, clutch play on 3rd and 29 and just run the ball on first and second the test of the game? Can we win the rest pounding DC in the fourth quarter? Maybe.
Do I pray we have actually turned the corner? Absolutely. Could I live with another year of CRN if the miracle plays out. Of course. Could I live with DG claiming vindication for his incompetence. No. I maybe schizo, but I’m not that crazy!
Remember, Bruins, last time we thought we were decent, ahem, 2007, we went to play a mediocre Utah team and were savaged 44-6. And no, it was not that close. We have some head-knocking to do. I think this team can do it.
One week at a time, baby. We all want this season to end right. We are Bruins. The rest will take care of itself.
GO BRUINS! Beat Utah!
Haha
just had to interject that Rosario was not even one on one on the TD but one on NONE.
End cheezey joke…
You nailed it G
The wins seem to come so tough that when they are attained it spurs an upwelling of hope. With Neu’s history and pride in the program many leave the door ajar after each win, but yourself and the others continue the ship on course. I was forever an optomist and one to support those with good intentions, but as everyone can attest mediocrity and insignficance has festered far too long. We will all continue to root for the team and more wins in hand, but positive change must be forthcoming.
Fantastic post!
For me, last night was one of the most complete efforts I have seen since Tennessee. Texas was different because it seemed we just broke their spirit. Here we had to fight the whole game, and I am proud of our guys. We actually forced a few punts (though several were just ASU miscues), and generally looked better in the process of playing hard the whole game.
That said, I still won’t be happy to see Rick on staff in January unless we win out. We just should win against Colorado, period. Utah looks to have a little swagger, but I thought before the season began that they were not going to survive a whole PAC 12 season looking like they did in the past. We should win, even in the dreaded state of Utah. Then we just need to take down $c*. If we don’t win out the regular season and represent well in the championship and bowl game (read win or be in the game till the last second) then I just won’t have any confidence that this coaching regime actually has figured anything out.
Real question -
Justin TV disappeared at he end of the game, and I didn’t get any good descriptions of what happened and why there is a universal agreement that the SPTRs lived up to their names. Just what happened?
Did you see the offensive PI on Fauria?
If not, on our game winning drive Fauria caught a first down and got flagged for a very debatable pass interference call. Obviously, we converted anyway so that one didn’t hurt us. Hester also got called for another questionable bullshit PI call that moved them into field goal range on the last drive.
But the biggest SPTR moment was when an ASU player (don’t remember who) pretty much chucked the ball out of bounds while getting tackled to try and save time. Only problem is he threw it forwards. So they flagged him for an illegal forward pass. ASU argued the call and Erikson called a time out so that the officials would review it. After a long review, they declared that he was down before he threw it, but they also gave ASU their timeout back. So basically ASU got a free timeout, and a terrible call their way.
by bucknellbruin on Nov 6, 2011 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
To be clear, we're all happy about the win because of the players
as I noted in a previous post, my fear is that Guerrero will use any remaining victories in the season as an excuse to keep Rick (and avoid getting fired himself). If we had lost out every game for the rest of the season, then it would have been much easier and more obvious to get rid of Rick, as well as DG.
btw, are we going to see a basketball preview and/or game thread today?
I know it’s only exhibition, but there’s of course many questions surrounding the team.
Irony...
A tone “DEAF” administration riding the coat tails of a Running back who really actually is hearing impaired.
A shout out to Wade Yandall. He is a beast. It is no accident that UCLA’s fortunes picked up when he was inserted on the O-line.
+5
+1 for teaching us non-psych majors something interesting.
+1 for your example of cognitive dissonance in being conflicted over Nestor’s praise of Ethical Pat and Lame.
+1 for using the word “obviate” in a sentence.
+2 for creating another terrific post that was a pleasure to read.
Depression Cure?
GB any thoughts on how a Bruin win like last night can revive the spirits of an ex-marine going through tough times. My bro was a different man after the game.
He has a 4 yr losing record
Never beat SC. Best he can do is 6 and 6 reg season. Anywhere else but here, he’d be history already.
Theoretically
9 and 4 could happen. I could also turn into a flying monkey.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Believe it or not, actually 10-4 could happen
We’re 5-4 now. 3 regular season games left, Pac 10 championship game as the South division champ and a bowl game. Potentially 5 games left.
And yes, monkeys would be flying for that to happen…
Love the post.
I actually used a really similar analogy when our team had a closed door meeting with our athletic director last year.
A good finish does not negate the previous 4 seasons. It is never okay to make decisions about the future based on 20% of a career as opposed to what has happened over the entirety of a career.
I said it in the post-game thread. Even if CRN wins out somehow, his record over 4 years at UCLA will be 25-26. An acceptance of mediocrity in one program will funnel into other programs.
Hope for the best in the present, and hope for the best future.
"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen
just a weird reaction last night
which consisted of people trying to preemptively downplay the win, to counter a huge hoard of people who think this game means Rick should stay and who DON’T EXIST.
Schizophrenia runs AMOK on BN
There are those who are firmly for firing CRN, those who want to fire CRN and DG, and those who want to fire CRN, DG and GBlock.
Then there are those who want to fire GBlock and then those who only want to enlighten the chancellor on the importance of Ucla’s Football program and fire DG. Then there are those who want to fire DG and CRN.
On the other hand, there are those who feel CRN’s coaching record for his full term is the deciding factor and there are those who feel the first 1-2-3 years fell on the previous coach whose recruiting left the cupboard bare and who see a turnaround and momentum shift pivoting on the last two victories, as feeble as they may have seemed.
Then there are the dreamers, the visionaries or those who see the glass half full and who see light at the end of the tunnel. They believe that recruiting has given the program some vital life blood and hope for the future with Hundley, the return of the LDS guard (whose name is escaping me right now) who is on his mission, all the current injured players who will return next year as well the addition of this years’ new recruits, who give full credit to CRN and want to continue with him and his current staff.
Then there are those who want to replace CRN with a coach who could teach the X’s and O’s better, etc. If you are still with me, I think you have gotten my drift.
Now, how about some perspective?
From most of the posts of late, there is a general calling for CHANGE of least 2 of the 3 named above, with variations as wide as the planet.
For those of you calling for the firing of the existing coaches and hiring of a new, to be named “phenomenal” new head coach that could take the existing material and build it into a national powerhouse or even top 10-25 BCS competitor in a year or two, I only have one question for you. Where in the budget within the UC system and in particular in UCLA’s budget do you see the millions it will take to hire such a person? Which gives rise to another key question and that is "Who in their right mind would make a gift/donation annually to the University knowing what the existing policy is towards conditional gifts and the possibility of directing them for specific uses, i.e. hiring a new football coach? Which gives rise to another key question, "What prospective coach would be motivated to walk into such a hornets nest?
IMHO, we all need to sit back take a deep breath and come to the realization that there will be no regime change, if any, until the end of 2012. During the ASU game I thought I heard one of the commentators quote AD DG as saying CRN’s position is secure through the end of his contract which includes next season. Please correct me if I am wrong about this.
As much as many of you want to assert your views on the administration and the coaching staff, you are all lacking Authority and or Power to bring about such changes and in reality have little more than some Influence on these issues.
As for me, I am going to sit back and cheer like hell for our Bruins, the players and the coaches, keep my fingers crossed and pray they run the table and finish 10-4 including beating the Northern Division Champion and the selected Bowl game to follow, as unlikely as that may be.
Go Bruins and take no prisoners!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Forever an optimist—-
'CaptainJack65'
Jack Metcalf
Same thing they said about Karl and Lavin
I also love how you get on your high horse and use the inertia and ineptitude of our athletic department to pretend like you have influence in keeping things mediocre and boring. The same way we need to get rid of the idiots in the athletic department, we need to get rid of fans like you: Risk averse pansies who are afraid of change. Spineless peasants too afraid to upset the apple cart and risk the ire of the establishment, who just wait for their table scraps from overpaid incompetent fat cats like Danny Boy.
And to answer your question about money: They expanded our conference for a reason. This isn’t the Pac 8 anymore. Time for you to join the rest of us in the 21st century, and turn on that shiny picture box and keep up with the times.
Please don't tell me that you are basing an opinion on what two blowhards said just to fill some dead air time
" I heard one of the commentators quote AD DG as saying CRN’s position is secure through the end of his contract ." Don’t you remember telling your mom that the reason you did something was because Robert told you to (it was always “Robert,” by the way), and then your dad would say “Well, if Robert told you to jump off a cliff, I supposed you would do it.”
Please, Captain Jack, believe me. If these blowhards, whose names I had never heard of until I saw them on the screen (which had no sound) and whose names I can’t recall now, were indeed experts they would not be doing a nondescript football game on some obscure cable channel. Why on earth would you believe anything these idiots have to say? They know no more about what’s going on at UCLA than they know about what’s going on in the Captain Jack 65 household.
I’ll happly respect and fervently disagree with your opinions based on your own observations and what you discern from those observations. But not when you cite itinerant broadcasters and color men. Why not see what the National Inquirer things?
With all due respect, Captain, how can you ask where the money is coming from?
New Pac-10 Commissioner. Conference expansion. New TV contract. Additional $20 million in revenue for next year. This has been discussed once or twice, or maybe more.
The key is to get an AD who has a vision of a successful football program that competes in 2012 and going forward. That’s who uses the money to hire the top level coach to get the most out of this team.
Like you, I also am going to cheer like hell for our Bruins, players, and coaches. But unlike you, I am not going to sit back passively with your fingers crossed and pray while the current admin fiddles.
You are not an optimist. You are a pessimist. You accept the status quo and do not see the opportunity for improvement, or choose to make any effort to better our situation. If you were an optimist, you would do what you could to make this football program realize its potential.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
It was a great game
That’s all it was, but for last night that was enough.
I went with my son. He loved the game. He was happy for the players. He was impressed with KP’s sportsmanship. The game was exciting and the result was exhilirating.
You say cognitive disonance, I say living in the moment. Sometimes when you’re stuck out in it and it’s coming down so hard that you’ve got to wear a hat, you forget to enjoy the few moments of pleasure that pass your way. Taking in those few moments of pleasure doesn’t mean that you’re denying reality, it means that you are refusing to yield everything to it.
But that’s life. The birth of your son may not cure all the ills in your life, but it’s a moment to be enjoyed nonetheless. You enjoy it and you soldier on. Just because everything looks like and most things may in fact be crap, it doesn’t mean everything is.
The moment is gone son
Enjoy the win, but prepare for the program’s future. UCLA Football is a used car dealership right now.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Ain't your son and point missed, chief
There’s always someone to take the joy out of living.
by saudiboy on Nov 6, 2011 7:19 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Typo
That was supposed to say “so”, not son.
Take the joy out of living? Yikes. Taking this a bit serious eh? Well, if you must know, I spent the afternoon playing with my 2 year old daughter and very much enjoyed living. And I didn’t miss watching the game, even though we won.
Cry me a friggin’ river.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Saudiboy, no one is trying to rob you of your enjoyment of the game.
What we’re trying to do, or at least what I’m trying to do, is to give you “good old days” like my “good old days.” I feel like I have failed somehow, I really do. It was so much fun when I was a student and a young alum. We had great times, and we really, truly, felt we would win ever time. I cannot believe that this set of students and young alums is not pleasantly surprised at any win or even a good play. It has fallen apart that much.
I know that you would like to have the same absolute expectation of winning that my friends and I had. You will never get it under this administration. And the sad thing is that you (this is the missing word in the English Language, it’s the collective you, aka y’all) have now come to accept it as normal. It is NOT normal. Students relegated to the endlines in Pauley is not normal. Having to pay a lot of money for a student ticket is neither normal nor right. Many of us have no direct interest. The likelihood that I will ever be in Los Angeles again is very remote, and I’ll certainly never be a student at UCLA again. But what is right is right and what’s wrong is wrong, and what’s happening now in UCLA athletics is just wrong. Things will never change as long as the status quo is just accepted. I suppose I’ll get the message eventually that the new edition of Bruins just don’t care, and when I realize this, I guess I’ll stop caring, too.
(And while we’re on the subject of sons, my son informs me that labor will be induced on 11-8 if my FIRST GRANDCHILD does not arrive sooner.)
by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2011 8:59 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Names Fox's son could use
for a boy that would get Fox to disown him immediately: Karl, Rick, Bob, Pete, Lame….
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Great write up
Nice perspectives, and I think it ultimately did bring BN closer together.
Last night’s discussion was getting pretty heated, and hostile. I think this morning after write up is just what BN needed after a night’s sleep.
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.
