Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Eden Hazard In London For Medical, According To Reports

A Different Criterion for Judging Our UCLA Football Team


The criteria most people seem to be using to judge our UCLA football program are some combination of the following: our final overall record for this season, the overall performance level for this season in terms of how we have looked in all of our games, and our overall record over the last four years.  These are all reasonable measures but in my opinion are not the best measure.  Let me relate how I have arrived at the perspective I now have.

After the Arizona game I was completely deflated.  That was a completely unacceptable, inexcusable, and embarrassing performance in every way.  As someone here aptly put it, it wasn't fair to the term embarrassing to refer to it as that.  As a season ticket holder I was even ambivalent about whether I should attend the remaining games, since the season seemed all but lost.  I decided to go to the Cal game which to me felt almost like going to a funeral.  I fully expected Cal to beat us as they have the last three years, and that would be the final nail in the coffin for the season.  However much to my surprise our team played very well on both sides of the ball.  I had already given up on our defense which hadn't played well in even one game this season, but much to my surprise they held a decent Cal team to 14 points which came only from two turnovers that gave them the ball deep in our territory.  And the offense looked really good with the new dimension of Kevin Prince making beautiful fakes and rushing for 163 yards (and not getting injured).  After Cal held Utah to 13 yards rushing the week before I feared that Cal would stuff our offense.  But we played by far our best game of the year and not only won the game but beat them by 17 points and had 263 yards rushing.  I was very surprised and at least cautiously optimistic, but I feared what would happen next against a much better Arizona St. team.  Some people I know were saying that they thought we would be competitive against them, but people said the same thing before the Texas game, and we all know how that turned out.  And we have performed particularly badly against really good passing teams this year, and my worst fear was that this might be a repeat of the Arizona game.

However again to my surprise we played a really good overall game against a significantly better opponent than last week.  The offense moved the ball consistently with a consistent rushing attack and a couple of huge passing plays that were the difference in the game.  The defense played well overall holding an explosive Arizona St. offense to 28 pt. which was good enough to win.  And we overcame two terrible fumbles as well as penalties that nullified 3 or 4 of our biggest offensive plays of the game.  And the team played with real heart throughout the game and especially in that last game winning drive.

Star-divide

What I see is a team that beat a decent Cal team by 17 pt. and now just beat the #18 ranked team in the country.  We beat an Arizona St. team that has a dynamic offense and a good defense who had beaten a currently nationally ranked USC team by 21 points and who played very respectably on the road against a top 10 Oregon team, and who was ranked #18 nationally pretty deep into the season.  The UCLA team that I am seeing does not look like the same team I was watching up to the Cal game.  And it doesn't look like any UCLA team I have seen here over the last few years. The UCLA team over the last two games looks to me like a top 25 team, and the win tonight over a ranked team validates that with some measure of objectivity.  I also see a team which is much improved on offense.  In CRN's first two years here we had no offense.  Last year we could run reasonably well but couldn't pass and were one dimensional and ultimately easy to defend.  Now our offense is more balanced and much more efficient.  Also important is that we now have a quarterback who is playing very competently and who has turned into a real team leader.  And the defense which up to the Cal game was horrendous and had definitely regressed from last year has played well the last two games and doesn't look like the same defense. And this team is also making really big plays when the game is on the line even when the odds are against us.

In my opinion the best measure of our team going into the future is what kind of football they are playing by the end of the season, because to me that is the best indicator of how they will play next year and beyond.  Most of this team will come back next year.  If they continue to play like a top 25 team from now until the end of the season that to me is the best indicator of how they will play next year as well as the overall trajectory of the program.  Are these two games enough to determine this?  No they're not, and we have to see if this team continues to play at this level through the rest of the season. To make a criterion such as that they have to win the Rose Bowl Game is in effect saying that it wouldn't be enough to get to the Rose Bowl by beating a top 5 Stanford team.  In order to beat Stanford (highly unlikely) we would have to be playing like a top 5 team at the end of the season. I certainly don't expect this, but to me it would be more than enough.  My criterion is that if our team is playing like a top 25 team consistently for the rest of the season then I think it would be a mistake to make a coaching change.  If they are playing that way consistently through their last five games then they have really jelled as a team, and that would be much more important than how they played in their first seven games.

To me it's not the body of work but where this team is now and at the end of the season. If they go back to playing like they did prior to the Cal game then let's make a coaching change.  If they are playing like they have the last two games then I think that would be a mistake.  I don't care anymore that Kevin Prince threw three interceptions in the first quarter against Texas.  I only care how he is playing now.  How he played in the last two weeks and the great improvement he has shown is a far better indicator of how he is going to play moving forward than how he played in the Texas game.  And that is how I look at the team as a whole.  If they continue to play like they are now playing and only if they continue to play like that then I really don't care anymore about the Texas game.  It wouldn't be any more significant than the victory in the Texas game was last year when by the end of the season we had at best a mediocre losing team.  And if this team continues to play at this level for the remainder of the season i don't care about the Arizona game either but would see it as an absolute low point that somehow served as a catalyst that turned this team around. 

One more point I would like to make is what I see as this idea of the holy grail of getting a new coach as if presto we get a new coach and we would soon be a top 10 team and a national contender.  Sure it's happened before such as with Jim Harbaugh at Stanford, but this is really the exception.  If you want a good example of how difficult this is to attain in reality just look at the team we beat tonight.  Five years ago they hired Dennis Erickson who had a pretty sterling resume.  He coached a national championship team at Miami, and at Oregon St. he had a team that was better than any team the capable Mike Riley has ever fielded.  His Oregon St. team was ranked in the top 5 and won a BCS bowl game 41-9.  So how has that worked out for Arizona St?  I think he's done a credible job, but this his fifth year was his first breakout year where he has a nationally ranked team seriously competing for a league championship.  And that team just lost tonight, to us.  I seriously doubt that they will still be nationally ranked as of tomorrow. Is there any coach we can get with as good a resume as Dennis Erickson had?  Mike Leach never had a team as good as Erickson's Oregon St. team let alone his Miami team.  Sure if we could get Urban Meyer then that would be different, but I don't think that is going to happen.  If our team continues to play at this level with the present coach and this positive trajectory continues I'll take that reality over the fantasy of a new coach coming in and magically turning us into a national contender.  Again much to my surprise the UCLA team that I have seen the last two weeks sitting in the Rose Bowl looks qualitatively different than this team has looked not only this season but over the last few years.  Maybe this will turn out to be a mirage.  I hope not but we'll see. 

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

Comment 40 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Throw out the first seven games!

They don’t mean anything! Well, except in the record books, but lets see if we can’t find a hypothetical scenario, no matter how unlikely, to justify keeping the coach!

Okay, so we’ve beaten two teams in a row at home, which is clearly already cause for celebration. Of course, one of those teams is bad no matter where they play, and the other matches our own team’s ineptitude on the road, but who cares cause it’s a twooooooooooooo game winning streak. So what would really impress people? Maybe if we string together a “big” win against 2-4 in the conference Utah? Surely that would be enough to keep Rick around. Then we get another chance to really prove our worth against 1-9 and winless in the conference CU. And of course we’re going to have to give extra credit for beating a trogan team under sanctions which Rick hasn’t beaten in three tries despite not being at the form they were even when Karl was the coach. Yup, a five game win streak which contains only two decent teams should be enough! Then we can get blown out in the conference championship game and ride off happily into the sunset, because obviously expecting this team to overachieve for one game to counteract the seven awful games they played to start out the season is unfair.

/Idiot Neub thought process

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 7:28 AM PDT reply actions  

So ignore the last two games

because they hurt your must fire Neu gameplan.

Guess what? The best thing for UCLA is that these last 2 games are the foundation for Neu and this team to build on for the future. NOTHING would be better than NEU turning it around and making UCLA the football powerhouse it should be. 2 weeks ago I too wanted Neu’s head, but he and this team have given me pause. I am a FAN, I live by my hopes and my dreams and my heart.

After last night I actually have hope for this team and dream that they can finish with 5 straight wins and play in the Championship game. Is it logical, no, but I am a FAN and I will hope.

Is it logical that suddenly Neu has become a much better coach and could be the one to lead us to National contention in the future, no, but I am a FAN and I will dream.

Is it logical for me to go from fire Neu, to maybe he could have turned it around, then back to fire the bum if they lose to Utah, no but I am a FAN and I will react with my heart.

I will be cheering my ass off next week during the Utah game because after the last 2 weeks, this team has EARNED it.

Next week, who knows. But this beats the hell out of the week after the Arizona game!

by Broncinaz on Nov 6, 2011 9:21 AM PST up reply actions  

You already admit to being irrational and emotional

Looks like I don’t even need to rebut this, because you’ll be back on the other side of the fence after the next loss. I do have to wonder if you ever get whiplash though.

And you can stop randomly capitalizing words. It looks stupid.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 9:28 AM PST up reply actions  

So I get

that you don’t like the way I use the keyboard to put inflection into my words. I also get that you think that admitting my human foibles is proof to you that I can be dismissed out of hand.

What I don’t get is if you would rather have UCLA win out and go to the Championship game with the cost being that Neu keeps his job, or UCLA reverting back to their play earlier in the year, miss a bowl game and get Neu fired. If these were you’re two choices, which would you pick?

by Broncinaz on Nov 6, 2011 9:56 AM PST up reply actions  

Perhaps you missed the frontpage post this morning

I don’t have to fall into or even address your false dichotomy. And by the way, “win(ning) out” is not getting to the championship game and losing. Winning out is winning the Rose Bowl by virtue of winning the conference championship game and securing our conference’s BCS bid and winning that game too. Should he actually “win out” and not this fake bullshit win-the-next-three-games-then-lose scenario, then I’ll entertain the notion of Rick being our coach next year. Call me when that happens.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 10:11 AM PST up reply actions  

Disagree, Ty

We win three more, then the conference championship, then the Bowl game. That makes us 25-26 in four years. If I am hired to replace Guerrerror, I think and dismiss the Coach. 25-26 is unacceptable. It is much worse than his predecessor. Ending with a nice winning streak does not change the body of work from unacceptable to acceptable.

I invite all those to think the Coach to be retained to grab your arguments and meet me in another thread and let’s duke it out. (Oh, I shouldn’t have used the word Duke, because that’s what we’ve become.) Well, you know what I mean. Try and convert those of us who think that the Coach has overstayed his welcome.

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2011 10:50 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm on this bandwagon.

Cannot accept mediocrity.

"I have one word for you...Be careful."
-Jose Guillen

by IE Angel on Nov 6, 2011 12:36 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't think we really disagree

I’m trying to cut off this “win out” line at the knees. There are a bunch of people here trying to push the notion that winning out means 3 more wins, and they are attaching that to the condition of Rick keeping his job. This is deceptive at best and dishonest at worst, because truly winning out means much more than 3 wins over two bad teams. It means being conference and Rose Bowl champions. I know the numbers, and I know that despite all of that, Rick would have an overall losing record.

At this point, it’s not even a realistic possibility worth exploring, so I don’t see much value in going down that rabbit hole. If we get there, I’ll deal with it then, which is what I mean by call me when it happens. Until then, we deal with the reality on the ground: another underachieving season to date and a coach who is coaching his last games for us.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 12:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Well getting to the Rose Bowl, and/or winning it with style would change my mind about CRN.

DG would still need to go. Can’t accept mediocrity, but that would be an impressive trick to pull out of a hat. Do I think it will happen, no.

by Bruin'96 on Nov 6, 2011 12:59 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm prepared to compromise with the "win out and he stays" crowd

If we win out, and if his body of work somehow becomes 30-16 (which is basically what he was at his two prior stops), then I’ll reconsider.

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2011 7:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Say what?

Are you telling me that being considered a top 25 team is allowing the opponent to get into position for a game-winning FG and hoping the kicker misses, all in less than 50 seconds? I’d have to disagree.

by UCLA4Life on Nov 6, 2011 9:01 AM PST reply actions  

And the Lavin team that beat Stanford did not look like the Lavin team that lost to EA Sports All-Stars

Only a UCLA fan could take balance a sample size of 2 games against overrated competition at home against the previous 45.

This is why being a Bruin fan has caused me much more grief then joy. I swear I’m on the verve of losing it forever, if the mentality of the Lavinista mires our football into yet another 3 years of crap by not making a substantial change at the end of this season.

by bluebland on Nov 6, 2011 10:25 AM PST reply actions  

Lot of UCLA "fans"

Have no sense of perspective. This is a classic case.

by Nestor on Nov 6, 2011 10:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Same here

For people that hold UCLA to such a high standard, when it comes to FB, mediocre is acceptable. A win once a decade against suc is acceptable.

It boggles my mind. Morgan Center knows this and will continue to exploit this.

by BlueReign on Nov 6, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

If RodgerT is right

Then we end up at 7-5, and play in a bowl game. Don’t get your hopes up that we win out and go to the Rose Bowl though. If this happens, I don’t see CRN going anywhere, and although I’m not quite as decided as many on here, I’m not sure that is good enough…we’ll see.

How many quality wins does this team end up with? Say we have two now (Cal, ASU). Utah on the road would probably count if we do it…what about USC? or a potential bowl game opponent?

We may (or may not) be improved…the next 3-4 games will tell a lot more. Some important factors relevant to this team:

1) KP’s resurgence. He’s playing more like the KP we saw flashes of two years ago, like in the Eaglebank Bowl two years ago (is that the one?). He’s been efficient passing, run the ball well, and been making pretty good decisions.

2) Losses to Stan., Houston, Texas. Ugly losses, but all to genuinely good teams. Houston is now undefeated and ranked 14, Texas is around 20, and Stanford 4. Only Stanford really destroyed us on both sides of the ball. Texas’ coach even talked about how our offense was pretty good, and how we’re gonna score some points. The outcome at Houston most definitely could have been different. And Stanford is, well, Stanford. I think they deserve to play in the title game, honestly. They’re GGGRRREEAAATT! as Tony the Tiger used to say.

3) Loss to UA. Not sure what to say about that, bizarre game in its entirety with the streaker, the fight, the firing…not an excuse, but definitely weird.

4) The defense. Who are they, are they any good at all? We’ll see…big question.

5) Quarterback play. It’s so important. If KP can play at this level consistently, and just keep steadily improving then he’ll be a good quarterback next year. Another big question.

6) The highlights look pretty good from that game. Long plays on offense, some real sticks on defense. Tackling and 3rd down still seems to be a big problem…

7) Turnovers. We need to start winning the turnover battle more often. If we don’t have either of those fumbles, we aren’t talking about how many chances ASU missed last night. That missed 36 yarder really hurt them…if we are -2 in turnover margin at Utah then it’s going to be real hard. Big question.

by selby4000 on Nov 6, 2011 10:41 AM PST reply actions  

Cal is not a quality win

Nor will Utah be. SUC is the last quality team on the schedule. And if 7-5 and a Toilet Bowl berth is good enough for Rick to stick around, then I am done with this football program.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 10:49 AM PST up reply actions  

Same here.

And let me add, that one reason we suck so bad as a program is that somebody — Terry Donahue I guess — convinced a large contingent of our fanbase that in football only 3-4 games a year matter and the rest can be forgotten. That championships are therefore irrelevant. Win a few in November, beat SC now and then, and who cares.

Astonishing that people can even talk about “forgetting” debacles like Arizona or SJSU or Texas. We are a gymnastics school.

by bluebland on Nov 6, 2011 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree that there is a culture of mediocrity, but I don't think it can be attributed to Donahue, who left a long, long time ago.

I would be interested in reading why you (or why the moderators) want to pin this on a guy who’s long gone. Why not blame it on Billy Barnes? He was much more mediocre than Donahue.

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2011 7:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Because all of his cronies still infest and define the football program

Bob Field is our “football czar” in the AD. Dorrel and Neuheisal are Donahue clones, and they were hired because of it. And the reign of shittiness they have established has made Donahue’s 20 years of mediocrity the standard of reference for UCLA “success.”

by bluebland on Nov 7, 2011 4:01 AM PST up reply actions  

Bob Field is still there?

Then I take it back. Field has to go. All of the bureaucrats have to go.

by Fox 71 on Nov 7, 2011 10:11 AM PST up reply actions  

I think I have found the biggest difference in our thoughts

I think if we go “7-5 and a Toilet Bowl berth” that this administration will feel they have enough cover to not do anything as far as changing AD or coaching. You on the other hand seem to hold out some hope that there is a possibility of change.

Oh, you optimist you.

by Broncinaz on Nov 6, 2011 11:23 AM PST up reply actions  

Quality Win? I Don't Think So.

Have our standards fallen so low that any win is a “quality win”?

When I think quality football, I don’t think of wins — I think of great games played by teams using their full potential playing smart schemes, all out while minimizing their mistakes. LSU v. Alabama — a quality game.

If all we aspire to is to win games — we still don’t have the right coach, because even if he wins out he will have won less than half his games.

If we aspire to play quality football, we have not in the last two weeks, or for many moments under this regime. The same problems plague us, win or lose:

We don’t play an effective, quality defensive scheme. Our D is a joke, and it was a joke, yesterday. We make stupid mistakes and play undisciplined football; I would love to know how many big yardage plays, in the last two years, have been called back because of Corey Harkey penalties. I’ll bet it is well over 200 yards of gains. And, how many quality programs have to call time outs because they have the wrong players on the field, or get multiple illegal substitution penalties because the defensive coach either does not understand the rules or can’t get the right personnel on the field.

The bottom line is that we played poorly. I cannot believe that people are claiming that we have turned the corner because the ASU kicker missed three field goals — really something for which we cannot take credit. Would this have been a great game had we lost by one point?

I don’t think so. We do not play quality football and have not under the last two coaches. We remain irrelevant to the national discussion. By happenstance, we claim relevance in a very local discussion because, by sheer luck, we are playing in a weak conference division. And, even at that, we got blown out by a weak team.

I was going to write a random thoughts that looked at the stat’s and analyzed the game. But, those who have been watching the data don’t need it. And, those who have been drinking the Kool Aid, won’t care.

I screamed and hollered when we won. I am thrilled for our players; I am thrilled for RN; I am thrilled that they can finally enjoy a Saturday of celebration. I want RN to go out with his head held high. But, he still has to go.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Nov 6, 2011 11:45 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I'm with you Roger

Let’s play out the season, then make decisions. I also agree it’s important how we’re playing now. You see this in the NFL all the time – teams improve as the season goes on. Just look at the Packers last year. Unfortunately you can’t “peak at the right time” in college and still win a championship, but you can still be a good team.

Oh, and great point that if we’re gonna throw out last year’s Texas game, we can throw out this year’s.

by the blur 98 on Nov 6, 2011 12:21 PM PST reply actions  

If by great point you mean stupid point, then you're spot on

Are you actually comparing this team to the Packers? For one thing, making a run through the NFL playoffs is a far cry from beating a bad Cal team and a medicore at best on the road ASU team in the Rose Bowl. Suddenly we’ve won consecutive games and we’re “playing well” despite winning thanks to ASU’s 3 missed field goals and Maynard’s 4 picks. “How we’re playing now” is not exactly the feather in your cap you think it is because it is not exactly a positive. Look no further than the ASU box score for evidence of that.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 12:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Did I compare the Bruins to the Packers?

Nope. I illustrated a point. And a legitimate one – that teams do get better as a season goes on.

I respect your opinion to fire Neuheisel. I respect that you’re not impressed with our last two wins. I respect that you don’t agree with me. I comment respectfully here. I don’t respect being talked to like I’m a punk.

by the blur 98 on Nov 6, 2011 12:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Which is a stupid point to bring up because all it does is illustrate how bad we started out

So if it’s a legitimate point, it certainly doesn’t support either you or Roger. It’s good that you respect my point. You should, because it makes logical sense. I don’t respect yours or Roger’s because it lacks context.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 1:04 PM PST up reply actions  

What is the context that is lacking?

Can you be more specific? We’re discussing UCLA’s current play in the current season, are we not?

by the blur 98 on Nov 6, 2011 3:00 PM PST up reply actions  

The context is that you're using improvement in isolation as a positive thing

And even though that’s disputable, you fail to acknowledge that you must improve from something, and any time you go into that discussion, it is a reminder of why Rick needs to be fired: the horrendous way his team bumbled and stumbled through over half of the season which even now is only showing marginal improvement at best.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 3:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Blur, look at the overall stats (posted elsewhere by KS Bruin

We are in the top 25 in exactly one statistic – interceptions thrown (we’re number 5). We are not in the top 25 in anything else, and there are a lot of categories. We are 95 in total defense, 107 in tackles for loss, 108 in red zone defense, 109 in sacks, 111 in Kickoff returns, 114 in punt returns, and 116 in red zone defense. In my opinion, those stats cannot be reconciled with good coaching by those involved in those aspects of the game. (Look at the stats that reflect the offensive line, a perennial weak link until this year, although still ot n the top 25 in anything).

Those stats do not show us peaking, especially on the defensive side of the ball.

If ASU had caught one little break on their last kick, I don’t think there would be any talk of “peaking” and “winning out.”

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2011 7:21 PM PST up reply actions  

PS By bringing the Packers into the discussion

Talking about their improvement at the end of last season, and then talking about how we’re supposedly improving, you are indeed making that comparison. Just because I showed that the comparison is irrelevant and invalid isn’t license for you to back out and claim you didn’t say that.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 1:07 PM PST up reply actions  

excuse me while I go vomit repeatedly...

do you happen to work for the UCLA athletic department?

Aren’t you a little concerned that it took 4 YEARS for us to get to this point? This team should have “turned the corner” a very long time ago. It took SUSPENSIONS and injuries to get the coaching staff to make adjustments that led to these two wins. We’re not even ranked for god’s sake!! How low are your standards??

Troy is burning

by bruinbasketball on Nov 6, 2011 12:23 PM PST reply actions  

To pile on

What is “this point” exactly? Celebrating consecutive wins? That’s all it takes now? Holy shit the reaction of the Neubs to this win has been completely and utterly pathetic to say the least.

These are the people who kept KD in place after we got demolished by a mediocre FSU team in the Nut bowl, and who wanted Lavin to stay because he brought us a bunch of Steve 16s. And they’ll fight like hell to maintain comfortable mediocrity with Rick.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 12:40 PM PST up reply actions  

it would be easier to enjoy this win

If some people weren’t so delusional. Imagine if UCLA fans had the mindset of Alabama or LSU fans. It’s not that hard to figure out that Rick is not a very good coach.

Troy is burning

by bruinbasketball on Nov 6, 2011 12:47 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed

I’d love to be able to purely and honestly enjoy victories, but because I know we’re going to hear the Neubs trot out every myopic bullshit delusional fantasy after every win, it becomes really difficult. It’s as if they truly believe that reducing the sample size of something gives you a better idea of the overall picture. Just mind numbing stupidity.

by Tydides on Nov 6, 2011 12:52 PM PST up reply actions  

Totally understand your gut reaction

The problem is not the fans who after not 4 but 9 years, after happy with last night’s win. As for “turning the corner”, I feel all we have done is slowed the free fall into the abyss.

Unfortunately, the UCLA athletic department will use this as cover. I fear that now that 6 wins and a bowl bid are all that assured, they will continue to try to blow smoke up our asses and keep Neu. He didn’t get the nickname Slick Rick for nothing.

But, all that said, it was enjoyable to watch a UCLA football team play hard and compete. It is sad that the program has fallen so low, but it has.

by Broncinaz on Nov 6, 2011 1:11 PM PST up reply actions  

For those of you thinking this team turned the corner let me ask you this...

How confident are you that the team will be well prepared and “up” for next weeks game at Utah? I, for one, am not confident at all. Like everyone else, I wanted dearly for CRN to be the right choice when he was hired. However, even if this team wins the next 3 games, and I have my doubts, that will only lead to further frustration. If CRN is still in the same role next season, he has given me no reason to go into a season, or even a single game, with the confidence that the team will show up ready to play up to their capability. After four years I believe that a truly good coach will have his troops ready to go week in and week out, regardless of the opponent. I just have never felt that CRN has accomplished that. Despite the last two victories I still see a coach that isn’t getting the most out of his gifted team of athletes and I am afraid that this will be exposed very soon.

by 84 on Nov 6, 2011 1:32 PM PST reply actions  

I think I get it

1. It appears BN is being patient and no longer is calling for the immediate remvoval of CRN. This position helps to remove some of the dissonance out there.
2. The Bruins win out, including the Rose Bowl, and BN reconsiders it’s CRN position and would support CRN for his final year of the contract, and
3. BN publishes it’s 2012 expectation by which we can measure the success of the team, and rather we should support a new contract for CRN.

The odds are not good for a win out, but we were not supposed to beat CAL and Asu. So who knows maybe the miracle will happen. I won’t be in Vegas until new years but if I were there next week I would put some money on the Bruins.

By the way BN is working against a prevailing view that six wins saves CRN for 2012.

by BornBruin on Nov 6, 2011 2:00 PM PST reply actions  

You don't get it at least as far as I am concerned, Born

1. My patience is at an end. I don’t presume to speak for everyone in the BN and I know the moderators don’t speak for me on many points. I am calling for the immediate removal of Coach Neuheisel. I have called for it every day for the past year or so, since the last humiliation by just$c*. I can’t make it any clearer than that. I think Coach Neuheisel should be terminated this very instant, and the next, and the next ….

2. If the Bruins win all their remaining games this season, I will be extremely pleased, and I will wish Coach Neuheisel good fortune in his next job, because I still want him terminated immediately after the last game of the season, if we must wait that long. Winning out will mean that Coach Neuheisel is the wost coach since World War II, and much worse than any of his two predecessors, both of whom were fired. I don’t know what others in the BN think about this point, and I don’t know what the moderators think. As far as I know, the Bruins Nation is not a monolithic blob with one and only one opinion. In my opinion, Coach Neuheisel’s body of work justifies his immediate termination, if for no other reason than that he waited for forty-four crappy games before deciding to turn things up a notch.

3. I don’t understand your point 3. The BN might publish a expectation by the moderators, and there might be a consensus there, but the expectation of the BN staff does not mean it’s my expectation. My expectation for the 2012 season is that we have a coach we can expect to have the team prepared to play every time. No gigantic dog turds like Arizona or BYU or Stanford or Texas.

Last but not least, this portion of the BN has an expectation that 5 wins does not save the coach’s job. Neither does 6, 7, 8 or 9.

I don’t speak for the BN or for the moderators. I speak for me. I think it’s likely that there are some who agree with my views, but I don’t presume to speak for them.

Not to put too fine a point on it, when I started at UCLA, my expectation was to win every game, whether it was at the Crapaseum or somewhere else. Many times my expectations did not come to pass. Nonetheless, I never, ever looked at a game as one that we could not win. Against just$c*, when they had the best players money could buy, I leaned on the fact that we had beaten them with a second string QB named Norm Dow, and that we had beaten them the year before on the X-post-H after a successful on-sides kick. We could and did beat anyone, any time, and we expected to do so. For the last five years, no matter who we play (even WSU) I figure we will lose, and am surprised when we win. So what does that say for the state of Bruin football? When is the last game that you weren’t a little surprised that we won?

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2011 7:37 PM PST up reply actions  

I assumed

1. That you would know I meant BN mods and not BN land
2. That no one would ever think I could or would speak for the Great Fox. You are highly regarded here as far as I can tell and even though it might take me a while to read through your posts it is always entertaining and stimulating.

I hope I understand the BN position correctly. I do rely on their excellent posts to help me keep things in perspective.

by BornBruin on Nov 6, 2011 9:51 PM PST up reply actions  

I get our terrible, inexcusable losses over the last few years mixed up all the time.

The numbers run hrough my head like a nightmare mocking my loyalty to a long lost program: 59-0, 66-12, 35-0, 44-6, 49-12, or is it 42-7 at the half? Was that KD or CRN? Did we lose at home to the worst Notre Dame team in history? Must have been a bad dream. Somebody pinch me. Wake me up,please!

I gave up on CRN after we caved 35-0 at home to Stanford. When we we lost that same year to a mediocre SUC team at the Crapiseum, after playing not to lose the entire rivalry game. Of course, occasionally CRN’s all too conservative game plan wins when the other team shoots itself in the foot with turnovers or bonehead mistakes, as I witnessed in road victories at both UTs, but normally that is a prescription for failure with today’s high powered offenses.

But I digress. Given the truly horrific record of the last four years, unless the 180 degree turnaround continues until we at least beat Stanford in a championship game rematch, all I would say to CRN is thanks for the memories. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me four times, shame on me.

As a fan, I will always pray we win the Rose Bowl this year. So I guess at least unless we are mathematically eliminated CRN still has a chance, even with me, just like the million to one chance in Dumb and Dumber.

GO BRUINS!

by uclahy on Nov 6, 2011 10:43 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bruins Nation, an unofficial daily online scrap book covering the greatest collegiate athletic program in the nation. Established June 16, 2005. GO BRUINS.

Managers

Uclabear1_small Nestor

Arron_afflalo1_small Tydides

Brad_pitt_as_achilles_small Achilles

377011_2642084725867_1068030137_32302525_1166539782_n_small Ryan Rosenblatt

Telemachus_small Telemachus

Licenseplate_small gbruin

2761_small tasser10

Blue_bellerophon_small Bellerophon

Img_0052_2_small Patroclus

Small DCBruins

Of Counsels

094_small Ajax

Menelaus2_small Menelaus

Small Meriones

Small Odysseus

Associates

Eee_small freesia39

Uclabruins_small AHMB