Post-Spring Breakdown: Examining the Special Teams' Depth Chart
After walking through both the offensive and defensive units, we finally wrap this post-spring breakdown with a look at how our Bruins' special teams' depth chart has shaken out following spring practices. During the last decade of UCLA football mediocrity, we've had at times, offensive firepower coupled with defensive problems or a solid defense saddled with an inept offense.
We've seen the offense clicking (mostly due to MJD, Drew O., and Marcedes) but we've also seen an offense that make the Little Sister of Poor look like an offensive juggernaut (read: the Law Firm at QB). We've had swarming, attacking defenses anchored by NFL talents (guys like Dave Ball, Brian Price, Bruce Davis, Spencer Havner, and of course, Rahim Moore), but we've also had soft, bend-and-break defenses run by lame "defensive coordinators" without a clue (read: Chucky B.).
The one constant throughout, however, was our special teams play. We've generally always had dependable legs on the roster (Chris Kluwe, Aaron Perez, Justin Medlock, Jeff Locke, and of course, Kai Forbath), a very dependable long snapper (Christian Yount immediately comes to mind), and decent, if unspectacular return men (with the exception of the past few seasons). This year, special teams is in flux. Here's how it looks following spring:
| PLACE KICKER | PUNTER | KICKOFFS | LONG SNAPPER | HOLDER |
| Jeff Locke or Kip Smith | Jeff Locke | Jeff Locke | Kevin McDermott | Jeff Locke |
| Kip Smith | Kip Smith | Alex Mascarenas |
| KICKOFF RETURN | PUNT RETURN |
| Josh Smith or Taylor Embree or Jordon James | Taylor Embree |
| Josh Smith or Jordon James |
Let's take one last leap over the jump for post-spring analysis.
In terms of kicking field goals, it's going to be next-to-impossible to replace Kai Forbath. Kai was automatic, even from distance, which one suspects made Neuheisel more conservative and willing to go for 3 points rather than playing to win by going for it on fourth down situations in enemy territory. Right now, the fact that Kip Smith hasn't out-right won the job he was recruited for is a bit concerning. Locke is the punter and, if you look at when we went after a kicker, it's clear Smith was meant to be Kai's replacement. He'll need to step up his game and claim the top FG spot as his own. All-in-all, losing Kai is a major blow for UCLA, which is compounded by the fact that offense already struggles to put any kind of points on the scoreboard.
Jeff Locke returns as the punter: a very solid, dependable punter with good distance and height. The Bruins, once again, look strong here. Although, given the number of times our offense stalled this last season, I'm sure Locke has gotten plenty of reps in for punting. Likewise, Locke will return next fall as the team's kickoff specialist, a role he excelled in as a high school stand-out. It'll be critical for him to deliver the ball deep in enemy territory (and/or force an increased number of touchbacks) to give the defense as much field to defend as possible.
Moving on to the return duties, although the depth chart has Josh Smith and Taylor Embree listed as the starting kickoff and punt returners, don't expect both of them to hold on to the job by the end of the season. Since kickoffs weren't practiced during spring, it's still a position in flux, with Jordon James figuring to challenger Smith for the job. As to punt returns, practice reports indicate that the coaching staff rotated Smith, Embree, and James on an even basis. For now, the staff has Embree penciled in as starting, but since he's pretty much only good to fair catch, Neuheisel will need to inject some energy back there: that's why Jordon "the Joystick" James is likely to get some of the punt return action, especially given his running ability and excellent hands. Simply put, Rick has to make a change at punt returner. He can't gamble on playing it safe this year: either he puts up results or he'll likely be on the fast track out of Westwood.
With that, we've wrapped up our post-spring practices analysis of the official depth chart. Fire away with your depth chart thoughts.
GO BRUINS
18 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
2 things.
I have absolute confidence in Kip Smith. Kid has an excellent pedigree and is an excellent kicker. He just may need some time.
Second, it’s embarassing that we continue to have Embree return punts because nobody else has won the job. Put in Thigpen, or James. The rewards will outweigh the risks.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
Punt returning is more than speed and shiftyness. You have to secure the ball first, and it’s not that easy. If Thigpen and James can’t field the ball, what’s the use of having them back there? I don’t know if that is the case or not, but Embree has been winning the position by default.
I really hope that somebody that can make a few people miss wins the job. I though Smith would be the guy, but something hasn’t clicked.
by AllHailMightyBruins on May 26, 2011 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions
I know it's not that easy
but it’s not that hard. Its a basic football skill that any player smaller than a tight end should know. I know it’s scary with big huge players barrelling down at you, but quite frankly, you’re playing football, so get used to it. We need to stop taking the easy route and start putting players in positions to be effective and win games. Embree is not it.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
by OswegoBruin on May 26, 2011 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree that Embree isn't the answer, but there is a reason he's been back there.
He catches the ball. I guarantee that if someone else could do a better job, they would be playing. The coaches aren’t out there to sabotage themselves. The burners need to show that they can make the plays, and they will see the field.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the skill required to field punts. I will say that it is something that needs to be groomed by the staff better. It would be better to have Thigpen/James return 5 punts a game than play 5 offensive snaps, so if they’re close, practice time should be allotted accordingly.
by AllHailMightyBruins on May 26, 2011 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions
I guess we do agree to disagree
I think that, whether or not someone can catch punts as well as Embree, they can certainly advance field position better. I prefer this, as the risks of fumbling are most likely minimal, and would be with continued reps, but the benefits are high in terms of additional field position.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
by OswegoBruin on May 26, 2011 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Even difficult skills can be mastered
I think that there are a number of factors here. Embree may have had the best hands on the team last season – but many WR’s & RB’s should have the skill set to learn to catch punts. I betcha with the new staff they are checking their options.
by KnudsenRockne on May 26, 2011 7:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Whenever there is
a risky scenario, it seems like we take the easy way out. Neuheisel better not play it safe this year. I absolutely hate seeing the ball in the “safe” player’s hands.
We cannot extrapolate from last season to next
Our coaching staff has had a major shake up so we have to see how the new coordinators run things. I am really hoping that conservative or not we’re better prepared for each game.
BTW: last season I made some comment after a game saying that we should just go for it and take big risks if we’re going to lose anyway. Someone wrote a thoughtful response explaining that taking risks just to be bold can come across as desperate and panicky … and affect our players and all future opponents.
by KnudsenRockne on May 27, 2011 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions
After what we have seen from this coaching staff, I am amazed at your
confidence in saying “if someone else could do a better job, they would be playing”. Anyone who saw Prince’s performance at CAL or Hester’s performance throughout the year could hardly share your confidence. This is not a knock on the kids but on the so called adults/coaches…
Um. Didn't a couple o' dem adults/coaches leave?
Who knows. Maybe the new coaching staff will take Oswego’s advice and go for it.
by KnudsenRockne on May 26, 2011 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Quarterback =/= Punt Returning
Making a change at quarterback is a BIG decision. There are a lot of factors that go into making that move. I always supported playing the QB that practiced, but I completely understand the team dynamic and can see why the staff didn’t want to make the change. It was the wrong choice, IMO, but an understandable one.
Changing the punt returner is straightforward. You weigh the potential positive plays vs. the risk of negative plays. I agree with Oswego that the staff weighed the risk of negative plays too heavily, but if someone had stepped up and showed that they were clearly better than Embree, there is no doubt that they would have gotten the spot.
by AllHailMightyBruins on May 27, 2011 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Not so straightforward.
It’s not just about risk vs. reward, it’s also about degree of swing. The major issue with our program right now is inconsistency. Our guys either make circus plays – or they kill us. Sure, it makes for an exciting game (in both highs and lows), but football is a deliberate sport – it’s not jungle ball on the intramural field and it’s not Madden ‘11. Coaches will always go with the guy who’s work product they can anticipate and plan around. At least with Embree, they know he won’t try a catch-and-run with unblocked defenders 2 yards away and ready to knock the ball loose.
Right. Maybe I was unclear, but that is what I meant by risk of negative plays.
Embree has been returning because coaches know that he isn’t going to screw it up. He reliably calls for fair catch and catches the ball. He’s a known quantity. On the other hand, we have some explosive athletes that have more potential to make big plays, but also potential to turn the ball over.
by AllHailMightyBruins on May 27, 2011 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Excellent point about weighting decisions
Some people make their decisions motivated by obtaining rewards and others are motivated by avoiding ‘punishment’ (sometimes the same person switches back and forth depending on the situation). I think that most BN’ers who complained about conservative play calling were, in fact, referring to the tendency to call low risk plays. I certainly meant that.
I am optimistic that this new coaching staff will be less risk averse and win or lose will better represent UCLA. I hope I am not wrong about them.
by KnudsenRockne on May 27, 2011 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Funny...
If it were you’re money they were playing with – e.g. in an investment portfolio – you’d probably want them to be as risk adverse as possible. But since it’s they’re money they’re playing with – i.e. losses are by far the #1 reason for loosing your job as a coach – then you want them to be less risk adverse. Seems a little odd to me that one’s perspective on risk changes depending on who’s doing the risking. And let’s face it, there’s less risk of getting fired as a boring 9 win coach, than as an exciting 10 win one season, 2 win next season coach.
Note: Please understand that by ‘you’, I speak purely in the indefinite – I don’t know what you’re personal preferences are and make no assumptions thereto.
Wow. Good point about risk!
And to add to your point – it isn’t just losing that can cost a coach his job, it is how he loses. If he calls conservative plays that fail then it’s the players who did not execute. If he calls high risk plays which go bad then he’s a bad coach… and loses his job.
What was the book about NFL statistics which mentioned that more coaches should go for it on 4th and short – that stats are in their favor. However, if they don’t make it and hand over the ball enough times it’ll cost them their job.
by KnudsenRockne on May 30, 2011 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
dont know if it was mentioned before...
but the ncaa denied the appeal of the nebraska-omaha kicker we offered a scholie to transfer for an extra year of eligibility.
additionally, personally i don’t see how embree can be returning punts or kicks. he’s been consistently underwhelming. if james is stuck behind some guys at the rb spot this year it is a great place to put him to make some plays. he can catch! more importantly, he can run. josh smith did pretty well catching punts at colorado,same deal… it’s always up to the coaches but if there is no change there i really have to wonder what the deal is. mjd on punts won us a few games in dorrell’s year of glory. but to be honest if he had anyone else back there we probably would’ve won 4 games that year too. we need someone dynamic back there, not a fair catcher…
Across The Face
Embree
I think if they just put someone else in and got him some reps, whoever it is would get over catching the ball and be much more effective.
Reminds me of when I was in high school and played linebacker, but wanted to play running back, too, because I was the fastest kid in the school. Coach put me in against our toughest opponent all year (we were a lower division) with a patchwork line and no exchange reps. Their D Line was hitting me at the exact same time as the exchange, and so I fumbled. Twice. And was never given another rep in game or practice. If the coach gives someone reps, they will get the hang of it. You can’t take a kid who shows such promise (which I can’t say I necessarily did, that was just for illustration) out of the running for the spot without giving him some reps.
I want James, or Thigpen, or Smith to go to Locke and ask to catch some punts. If they get in the reps outside of practice they will get it down, and be much more effective. Now if the return team could become beastly blockers, then even Embree would have time to catch and take a step, reducing the frequency of fair catches as well.





















