The Morning After, Part 4: Oregon State
by gbruin on Sep 25, 2011 5:01 AM PDT
in Football
Email
PrintThe only world I know is the world I cling to
It's a world I'd want to save,
Optimist or pessimist, what am I supposed to be?
- Optimist or Pessimist, Nevermore, 1996
Well, we beat Oregon State. Yay. I'm happy. Sort of, I guess.
Bruins Nation is a bit bipolar today, and I'm afraid I might be, too.
Fox's lyrics thread had me thinking this week. In this case, it's a good thing, because I love music. More than anything else, music is my inspiration, my solace, my escape, my joy, my narrative. So this song came to mind more than a few times while watching our Bruins in Corvallis yesterday. You can click on the link above to hear it. It's awesome, especially if you like progressive metal, which you would if you are any kind of cool. \m/
Anyway, back on topic. While following the first half and second half and post game threads, there appeared to be two distinct schools of thought on yesterday's game. There are many who are satisfied to get a Pac-12 win on the road. Those wins are always hard to come by, and especially for our team and for Rick Neuheisel, so we should be happy to have one at all. Cal and Arizona and Utah would love to have one. And no one win counts for more than another. The Pac-12 is just going to count total wins at the end of the year, and the team from the North with the most wins will play the team from the South with the most wins, and the winner of that game gets the Pac-12 title. Unless that team from the South is *$c, in which case they won't play for anything, daaaaaaahahahahahaha.
On the other hand, there are many who just can't get excited with how we struggled against a pretty bad team, especially in the second half. When we were up 21-3 and it looked like our team was on the verge of blowing out the Beavers, we let off the gas and let the Beavers off the deck. And like week 2, we started the 4th quarter in a very tight game with a team that, on paper, we shouldn't have been in any type of game with at all. For many, the quality of the win matters because it is indicative of the true character of the team and the program, and right now, that measure is almost more important than the W or the L from this weekend's game.
I guess it depends on how you look at it. Are you a passion bucket half-full type, or a passion bucket half-empty?
I work in health care, and our industry is overflowing with rules and oversight and regulations and benchmarks, nearly all of which are made by people in cubicles who have spent exactly zero hours working in a clinical setting and providing any form of patient care. Filling out forms is more important than spending time with families. Adhering to to predetermined guidelines outweighs clinical judgement or following the latest scientific evidence. Marketing and productivity trump quality of care. CEO's and CFO's outrank MD's and RN's and PA's, and patients.
I see two schools of thought on the management of health care. And I debate this with co-workers all the time.
There are those who that don't mind the pains and annoyances of the piles of regulations and endless hoops. They chirp that things are really pretty good and that our job is just fine. And at the very least, we should always be grateful that we have a job at all. These people never complain or make waves or strive to improve our setting. These people are always positive, regardless of the issue. These people call themselves optimists.
The "optimists" will look at yesterday's game and celebrate a win. They will feel good that we saw more of our young players on the field. They can point to us playing perhaps our smartest game, with very few penalties and zero turnovers. They can see character in winning a game on the road. They will laud a 100 yard rusher and a good manager of the game at QB.
On the other hand, I am tortured by the annoyances and obstacles in my job and I just can't help myself. I find it impossible to shut up. I rail (professionally, usually) against things that deter us from doing what we are ultimately tasked to do, which is provide care to patients. I am constantly suggesting better ways to do things, or suggesting the benefit of not doing things the way we are required. I can certainly be negative at times. So I get called a pessimist.
As a "pessimist", I will note we squeaked by a bad team that besides losing to us also lost to Sacramento State, and we should have won much more convincingly. I will ask why our QB threw only 11 times against the worst pass defense in the Pac-12 with 3 inexperienced DB's, and say we should have opened up the passing game. I will note we still saw a dumb personal foul, and some sloppy tackling, and an inability to get plays in, and horribly conservative play calling in the third quarter - after the play calling in the first half got us 21 points and a big lead, and say we can play with a lot more maturity and fundamentals and proficiency and aggressiveness. I will point out that our TE had zero passes thrown to him and say we should get our weapons more involved. I will see that the OSU freshman QB in his first ever start racked up almost 300 yds passing and say that we have to pressure the QB and cover tighter in the secondary. I know that our special teams have to be better. I know that our defense still needs to tackle better. I will say that my eye is on the long term health of this program, and that our performance yesterday was good enough against OSU, but it won't be good enough against Stanford or Arizona or Utah or ASU or *$c, and it'll be close against Colorado or WSU, and that should never be an acceptable position for U.C.L.A. football.
I think the performance yesterday left an awful lot to be desired. I think our team can be so much better than what we are. I think our team can play with Stanford. I think our team can do great things.
You see, in truth, the labels are backward. I am not the pessimist. I am the optimist. I am not just complaining. I am looking for something more than second best or just good enough. I am not ungrateful. I am striving for Coach's definition of success.
So I'll pat our guys on the head for the good things they did yesterday, and then I'll look at all the areas where we fell short, and there a lot of them, and identify our failings and get to work on fixing them. Because I am an optimist. And I know that this team can do better. This team can play smarter. They can pass better. They can run better. They can block better. They can tackle better. They can pass rush better. They can cover better. They can kick better. They can coach and scheme and prepare and inspire better.
I'll never believe that yesterday is the best this team is capable of. I'll never believe we have no shot of beating Stanford next week. I'll never believe this team can't be a winner. That's a pessimist's view. That's a loser's view.
The optimist understands why the world's gone down the drain.
The pessimist never bends, constricting thoughts in vain.
From the pessimist's point of view, there's nothing we can do.
As I paint this picture gray and taste the pain
I'll play the optimist again.
Go Bruins!
p.s. I won't be able to see next week's game live. I'll be seeing one of my all-time favorite bands, Journey.
Don't stop believing. Hold on to that feeling!
54 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Realist
Super post, GB.
I think most here are realists and can enjoy the fact that we won yet understand that we really did not meet Coach’s definition of success.
We are not the team we can and should be. And, the question remains: “Why not?”
I do not think the answer is elusive. We are very poorly coached in all aspects of the game. To see this victory as any kind of sign is to “paint over rust”. It makes things look good for a moment but the problems linger and will show up, soon enough.
I am pleased for the players — they are not the problem and they deserve to enjoy the win. But, I am not pleased for the program. There is no message of systemic improvement, here. In fact, there is evidence of new rust breaking through the surface (special teams? — The fact that we may not have a “real” special teams coach does not excuse what happened, it simply calls into question the CEO’s decision to forgo one.)
Cancer patients have great days. They are to be enjoyed. But, that does not mean the cancer is gone. One can be an optimist, believe in getting better and enjoy the day. But, only a fool would deny that the cancer is still there. (Spoken by an optimistic survivor who had some great days during treatment but was realistic enough to never doubt for a moment that there was work to be done before a cure.)
sjh
There wasn't really a passing game..
Throwing the ball 11 times, regardless of the results cannot suffice.
The belligerent optimist in me
thinks that Neu is saving those passing plays for an all out arial attack next week against Stanford.
My concern
is that CRN isn’t saving anything. If he “unleashes” and aerial attack at Stanford it will only be out of desperation. And, that would mean the game would be out of reach.
CRN is quoted in the newspaper by Jon Gold saying that “our gameplan every week has been to pound it. That’s the identity we’ve chosen by going to this brand of offense”.
11 passing attempts may have been acceptable two years ago with an inexperienced QB and a makeship O line. But, not against one of the worst PAC 12 teams we will play, not in a game that was still in doubt in the 4th quarter, not against at team that lost to Sacramento State.
Class of 66 nailed it. We are poorly coached in every aspect of the game. And, our gameplan every week only makes it worse.
by kkucla on Sep 25, 2011 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Enjoy Journey
Seeing them onn Oct. 7th…also one of my favorite bands of all time.
During yesterday’s joke of a 2nd half I kept thinking this: We are now on par with Sacramento State.
Sacramento State came into Reser Stadium, built an early lead and then hung on to hold off the Beavers.
Just.
Like.
UCLA.
I’ll be the optimist today and take the W. But honestly…I’m dreading the butt-kicking we are destined for next Saturday.
Excellent Post
A road win is a road win. I really hope this game was a turning point for our defense. As an optimistic Bruin we will compete well against Stanford. As a realist and imho opinion is we still have a long ways to go. Sigh.. That OSU team we beat is just awful. DC is the man and should start. Seeing some new faces on offense was refreshing. Not hooking up with Randall Carroll was disappointing after reading practice reports. Lots of work to do this week!
DGB
by westwood12003 on Sep 25, 2011 7:30 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Awesome post, spot on
I feel the exact same way, g. I consider myself an optimist, but many times I can be painted as a pessimist because I see all the potential and ways in which we can be BETTER. I work in finance, and your post could have referenced that industry without missing a beat. We are swimming in regulation while the people who caused all these problems cough diplomats, shady CEOs cough skate on by. /sigh
+1, same with education.
I’m a teacher, and we have to wade through all of the BS as well. I spent 3 hours yesterday reworking my lesson plans so that they fit the format that the principal desires, even though it doesn’t inform my teaching one bit.
But in regards to Bruin football, I too am an optimist (often viewed as a pessimist). But my optimist nature is to view things and not just look at how great we are, but how we can do things better. That is why I was and continue to be so up in arms about the whole BRehaut/baseball thing. That is why most of my posts point out whats wrong. I’m not complaining just for the sake of complaining. I want UCLA football to be better, to be the best it can be. We’ll get there…eventually. It just might take longer than we thought.
formerly Westwood78
by PhoenixBruin on Sep 25, 2011 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions
At one point in the 2nd half we found ourselves at 3rd and 1
And I thought, “I wonder how we’ll f*ck this up?”
We ran it up the middle and were tackled for a loss. You really can’t blame the players for that. It’s the play-calling. As others have mentioned, I’m not sure why The Rick won’t let RB air it out. At the very least, the passing game should balance out the run game.
So, am I happy we won? Of course. Am I blind to what is going on? No.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Well, I am way too old
to fall for any system of classification — optimist, pessimist — the results will be determined elsewhere. But let me say this: If we are passing a lot against Stanford, it will be because we are way too far behind. Neuheisel has spoken. We are a power running team. Maybe the fact that Embree’s TD was made in spite of a bad decision by Brehaut tempered Neuheisel’s enthusiasm for the passing attack. Just sayin’, not criticizing. A TD is a TD. And we are going to have to pass more, or the running game will just get stopped, but don’t expect an aerial circus. More to the point, don’t hope for it, because it will mean we are in big trouble.
MexiBruin, as to, "We ran it up the middle . . ." Can't Brehaut audible a new play.
Especially if Brehaut sees a defensive formation favoring a fake run up the middle and then throwing a pass. Would Brehaut end up in RN’s doghouse if an audibile was made? I don’t quite know what rules RN gives the quarterback about audibles. Really, does anyone know how much freedom the QB has to call audibles?
I don't know either.
And, to be fair, I’m not saying calling a run play on 3rd and 1 is the wrong call. A strong run game should always be able to pick up a yard when needed.
But when you put up 12 pass attempts against 49 carries, it’s not hard for the defense to guess what’s next and therefore stop an important 3rd down.
I guess I’m a pessimist, (But I prefer bewildermist HT to GogetemBruins) because some believe we will open up the playbook next week against Stanford, and they won’t know what hit them. I just don’t see it. I cannot conceive of The Rick possessing that much strategic ability.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
I agree so much with your last paragraph.
Especially about RN not possessing strategic ability. RN seems like he just doesn’t have the key for unlocking that strategic door. RN just does not seem to have it. I have been trying to figure it out. In my case, being an ancient senior citizen I have met a few of my old friends and family with dementia. I don’t mean to insult RN in that regard. But could it be possible he could be suffering some early stage of dementia or Alzheimers? The repeated calling of the same running play, lack of creativity in play calling, not inserting other players on offense, sticking with the same pass receivers when their production is poor, sticking with the same bad quarterback as if he doesn’t recall how poorly he has played, slow to make a decision on which QB to start, 12 men on the field, slow decision making and ends up using 2 consecutive time outs, etc. I keep asking myself what is going on. What is the answer?
Who Is Making These Decisions?
Is CRN calling the plays, or is Johnson. Or is Johnson calling them with CRN vetoing?
And, who is deciding who plays and who does not? Last year, the position coaches were making those decisions and it was a disaster. My understanding was that CRN was going to get more involved, whatever that means.
In the end, as the CEO, he is responsible for everything and everyone on the field and in the coaches box. I think this may be too great a task for him — especially when he has some weak subordinates whose judgment is in question (is that a nice way of saying Tresey?)
sjh
by Class of 66 on Sep 25, 2011 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm as disappointed with our defense as anybody
But, I’m not sure Tresey is the problem.
We are hearing that our guys don’t actually wrap up and tackle in practice, hence the poor tackling fundamentals. That sounds to me like a command decision from somewhere on high. Somebody decided we would have less injuries if we took it easy in practice. That may not bhave been Tresey’s decision.
We lament the huge cushion we are giving opposing WRs; but we’ve been saying it since before Tresey arrived here. It was true of Bullough and it was true during the Dorrell era. Is this a Donahueism that has been handed down? The bend don’t break philosophy?
During the DeWayne Walker era the one time I can remember an aggressive attacking defense was during 13-9.
Nick Alioti came to UCLA after establishing the Gang Green defense at Oregon and failed miserably. Toledo used him as a scape goat and rail roaded him out of town. Is it possible he too had his hands tied while working here?
I know I sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist, but there is a point when coincidence stretches the imagination to the breaking point. It cannot be mere coincidence that we routinely put out soft cover defenses.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Optimist??? Pessimist???? let me see...
“Bewildermist” if you will, on why this charade has been allowed to continue for over a decade. I am supremely dissapointed by lack of vision by this institution of higher learning. It is inexcusable!!!
As for yesterdays game it was a sloppy win by a team that is still desperately searching for continuity. It’s was like a jigsaw puzzle with some pieces missing. Tantalizingly close yet….
Rewatching the game, Brehaut to Carroll could be a happening thing if Brehaut decides to quit underthrowing receivers. I don’t want to sidetrack by nitpicking aspects of the OSU game however.
Listening to Richard Brehaut getting interviewed after the game yesterday I was struck and reminded that these really are just young kids trying their hardest and busting their butts…and it is in this that I am an eternal optimist.
I respect and admire these kids immensely…they deserve better foundations from administrations and coaches.
It is the latters responsibility to insure these players have that opportunity. In RN’s 4th year it hasn’t happened…and after over a decade of flops it is abundantly clear NO ONE in the administration cares.
Enjoy Journey gbruin!!! (If you call a Steve Perry less journey…JOURNEY
I'm your kind of optimist
It also strikes me that while all of the usual pathologies were on display, we did see some bright spots we have not seen before. Going for it on 4th. Stopping them on 4th. Brehaut starting. Coleman and others getting to play. A power ground game. Brehaut throwing long in that fist pass in the three-play touchdown drive. A length-of-the-field touchdown in three plays!!!!
There were some great moments.
Heuheisel has recruited some great players. Trouble is, he doesn’t know how to coach them. And he doesn’t know how to pick coaches who can. I get the feeling that the biggest obstacle to victory the Bruins faced so far wasn’t Texas, it was the coaching staff.
I have never seen a coaching staff in any sport on any level do less with more.
The optimist thinks that the present is the best of all possible worlds
The pessimist is afraid that the optimist is right.
You write the most thought-provoking and entertaining posts, g, encompassing learned helplessness, healthcare, and the state of our fb program. They are a pleasure to read. Thanks for both your reasoned analysis and your passion.
Glad for the the Win, Sad for how we got it
again, it seems like RN (does he really deserve the C if he isn’t coaching?) is okay with getting by rather than getting ahead. we had a straw man to use as a punching bag, this is where the guys could loosen up, and build some team spirit. instead, he micro managed into an ‘iffy’ game. Bruin Nation should be in the clouds; We won and $c lost.
the fact that people are not entirely happy means we have a long way to go. we shouldn’t be ironing out mistakes and penalties when the season has already began. i don’t care that this was the first conference game, the first game of the season was Houston. we have too much talent to be such a mediocre team.
pleased (surprised) at Pac-12 road win but not optimistic for season
There were so many coaching oddities in yesterday’s game, but they won, so I’m automatically happy about that – road wins in the pac-12 are tough. I’m still hoping Rick pulls it off, actually rooting for him. I think maybe that puts me in the minority here, but, while I acknowledge his clock has probably ticked down on him, I can’t help hanging on to my optimism for a UCLA alum and Rose Bowl hero to pull off one more 4th quarter rally and somehow turn UCLA’s, and his, fortunes around. Stanford on the road couldn’t be coming at a worse time… or better, I suppose, if they pull off the miracle.
Dump the pistol offense!
Run, run, pass is not going to get it done. Richard b is not a running qb he needs to be given the chance to air it out conservative play calling on offense will not work come on Rick figure it out!!!!!
by joebluedog on Sep 25, 2011 10:07 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
FWIW, I don't think the Pistol is the problem. It's the guy wielding it.
If you saw that Nevada vs Boise State game at the end of last year, it is clear the Pistol is a deadly weapon in the right hands. I like the Pistol for making the defense choose wrong every time. But, The Rick seems to put handcuffs on everything he touches.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
I too am so pulling for CRN
but what I have seen so far this year tells me that this year is going to be no different from past years. We barely beat SJS and OSU, we will probably beat WSU and Colorado, but we will get absolutely hammered by Stanford and ASU. Whether or not Rick and the staff returns all depends on how he does in the other games. We probably lose at Ariz, could beat Cal at home, more than likely lose to Utah on the road. So, it will probably come down to the $C game for Rick’s future.
kkucla, you are right the team is ". . . no different from past years."
So the criteria for keeping RN is not a 6-6 record or beating USC, but is or should be how well the team was coached. In that regard RN’s coaching is no different from past years. I just don’t have that optomistic view RN’s coaching is improving. Thus, as Donald Trump would say, “Your fired!” Remember Dorrell was fired in his last year and had a 6-6 record.
A 6-6 record or beating USC shouldn't be the criteria for keeping CRN
but, I am afraid it will be. I am afraid that we will find ourselves in the exact same position we had during the Dorrel era. If we beat $C, we keep the coach, if we lose, he more than likely gets fired and we start over. It puts those of us who desire steady improvement, long-term improvement in the no win situation of NEVER, NEVER accepting a loss to $C but knowing that if we pull out a win, we are destined to more of the same mediocre football for at least one more season.
Backbencher comments
Plenty of ugliness persists, to be sure . . . one of the negative hallmarks of the post Toledo era has been mental awareness lapses in the closing moments of the first half, and yesterday’s effort included a spectacularly bad example of such – punt coverage which may have stayed in its lanes, but way overpursued the ball, and let a team on life support get up off the gurney. At least Skippy took responsibility for that by “admitting” post game that he failed to communicate his desire to punt out of bounds – even if Slimers sez (this morning) that his original half-time comment made it sound like Skippy was posturing to blame his players for hearing but not obeying . . . Yes, OSU is a struggling team which came in winless, including a marquee loss to a D-2 team, and riding a 6 game losing streak . . .but,
There was really only one stupid penalty (a significant reduction over last week);
There was no turnover palooza (like last week’s dismal showing);
This was a Pac 12 road win – This was a conference opener win (both of which have proved elusive in the Neuheisel era);
There was no running game to speak of for the opposition, and,
Despite a lot of yards racked up – throwing mostly safe passes with yards after the catch accounting for much of the numbers – for a change the Defense didn’t make a young opposing QB look like the second coming of Joe Montana (another sad hallmark of the Post-Toledo era). Think McCoy last week, or Tuell (WAZZU last year) or Keenum’s replacement last year for just a coupla examples)
Just a few positives to build on. Tackling, wrapping up, and taking down still needs serious attention. The way this team will have any chance against Stanford is to score early and often. Stanford’s style this year is as a closer – big stretch runs to close out/knock out opponents after slow starts.
Happy for a win, happy for some signs of progress. Now build on it, Coach.
Not too much to ask for – is it?
The Mad Bruin
Great post
Question: With the huge pool of HS talent in SoCal and SC severely limited on schollies, why haven’t more players ended up at UCLA? I think it has to be because recruits think CRN will be gone and why go to a school that could continue to struggle for the next few years.
Look at how many local players end up in AZ or UO.
It’s sad and we need a change in culture that starts right at the AD level.
I may work with the Waves, but I'm still a Bruin!
(Formerly "HoozierDaddy")
We have strong talent
and have our share of good recruits.
I think the problem is that there is little evidence that they will improve and grow under CRN’s regime.
We certainly have better talent than OSU and SJSU, probably better than Houston although I do not mean to denigrate a team that beat us.
We have more talent not touching the ball on O than many schools have with starters — can you say Fauria?
Brehaut was a prize recruit at QB. Jones was the best HS player in the country.
CRN has recruited well — that’s about the best thing he has done. However, he is not getting the most out of his talent. I think the problem is in the training and schemes — or, said another way, we have good talent that is not being coached well.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Sep 25, 2011 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
I think you could be right...
though, I still think too many good local recruits have fled to the desert.
Then the blame must fall at CRN’s feet. A coach must prepare the team for every opponent and figure out a way to get the most out of his players. Clearly, that hasn’t been the case.
To quote Ronald Reagan, ’Are we better off now than four years ago? "
I may work with the Waves, but I'm still a Bruin!
(Formerly "HoozierDaddy")
Houston...
A sixth year QB was the difference.
by GogetemBruins on Sep 25, 2011 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions
They've ended up at UCLA...
they just don’t end up on the field.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
The Defensive "Scheme" Lost the Houston Game
Playing too far off the receivers allowed the QB to get rid of the ball so quickly that our D line size and strength advantage was nullified. The lack of adjustment guaranteed the loss.
That same defensive philosophy has made EVERY QB we’ve played look good and have good passing numbers, including the OSU freshman and the SJSU QB.
Case Keenum’s numbers were not better than Brehaut’s. I’ve said before that Brehaut played a better game because he had to receivers who were actually being covered.
sjh
Or a missed FG and a blocked extra point...
there are a ton of reasons. UCLA is a freshman QB’s dream opponent for sure.
by GogetemBruins on Sep 25, 2011 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Those 4 pointsThat's on the offense...
not defense. Doesn’t negate what you said…just adding on.
by GogetemBruins on Sep 25, 2011 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions
btw...
welcome back to California. I just got my 4 tickets to the Stanford Game.
by GogetemBruins on Sep 25, 2011 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm thinking of going, too
I haven’t been to a Palo Alto game since I went as a kid — my junior year. Do Bruins tall gate or get together before the game?
sjh
Wow you haven't been to the new stadium yet then.
The new stadium is small but nice. Not a bad seat and you are right on top of the action.
Don’t know of any official bruin get togethers, though I am sure their are.
by GogetemBruins on Sep 25, 2011 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions
There will be a Bruin Bash before the game
Not sure if tickets for the bash are still available, otherwise I imagine there will be some Bruin tailgates throughout the parking lot.
formerly bruinhoo
Optimist, Pessimist, OR...
Realist. Optimists see things through rose colored glasses, often rationalizing too much.
Pessimists see all darkness and create bad by self fulfilling ideas. They never see any good.
I fall somewhere in the middle. I see a woefully underachieving team with boatloads of talent. I see an unfocused HC in games losing control like the punt miscue that let them change momentum. Time out, give the order, done. Or hand signal to the punter for an OOB kick. I see PF penalties every game giving adv to the other guys. I see us barely winning vs a team that is at the bottom when soon we face the top. Realism. Now is the only time that counts, and now is worrisome. Now is mediocre coaching and playing.
Realistic view? W vs WSU, CAL, CO. Poss W vs UT. L vs SC, ASU, Stanford. Likely 6 W and a 3rd tier bowl.
Pessimistic Optimist
First of all, great post.
Throughout my life, I’ve tried to live optimistically. You know, glass half full, finding the silver lining, you learn from all your negative experiences and become stronger from it, blah blah blah.
This team, however, has drained me of my optimism. We SHOULD be beating OSU by more. We SHOULD be a better team. We show good signs every game, but for every good thing we show there are two or three instances where we make some critical, boneheaded mistake that makes it impossible to be optimistic about this team.
I want to be optimistic. But until this team actually shows us something on the field CONSISTENTLY, then I can’t pretend that I am.
Great Post... but how about a balanced place between??
As in Realist? And some of the analogy to “goddam over-regulation” is popular these days (Tea Party strangle the government to death) but simplicistic eseentialism. Regulations: Haiti – no regulation, earthquake, buildings destroyed, lost of death. Chile – lots of building codes, bigger earthquake, buildings stand, little death. It’s not a question of being “optimistic” about medical industry spreadsheet checkers and nasty principals who ask for lesson plans… it’s about leadership, inspiration, capacity-building, and teamwork. All of which may require rules any individual doesn’t like. Coach Wooden had rules. Now to the point: Neuheisel may or may not have rules,protocols, but the result ib the field has been disappointing. It’s the realist viewpoint that Neu may need MORE rules (don’t let the players celebrate after giving up 8 yards) but they need to be imposed frothe position of Leadership. That is… Coaching.
I loved that we won yesterday. I am totally aware of all the things that are disturbing (special teams failures – otherwise it’s 31-12, defense schemes with too much space – DB’s backing off, the D line with no pressure, linebackers slow to react, offense too conservative – we have a QB who has not thrown an int this year… let him throw, But I saw a bunch that can REALISTICALLY be called improvements.
Realism: We’ve performed in the last few years with this coach worse than the last coach. We’ve become a second level football program. This coach has recruited extremely well and we have talent. We started this year looking better and in games two and three we looked worse. We just won a Pac 12 game on the road where some of our younger players, talented players, got into the game. But for special teams mistakes we would have won 31-13. I saw engough to believe it’s entirely possible we can beay Stanford. I am aware that oddsmakers will make us a 20 point underdog. It’s not ignorant optimism to like those odds.
Good post
I am not inclined to pile on RN. That’s too easy. Not to make excuses, but let’s not forget the injury issues he has dealt with the past thee years. Give him credit for Brehaut’s improvement. I had a telling conversation, yesterday, with a PAc12 official who had the week off, and returns to running the replay booth next week. He has officiated in the conference for 25 years.
“What’s wrong with my Bruins?” I asked. Is it the coach?
“No, he’s a good coach,” said the ref, who I will not identify because it would compromise his position. “Other teams have bigger, faster players.”
“I thought we had good recruiting classes.”
“Others have better,” he said, and cited USC in particular.
In summary, I think there is a lot more going on here than the ‘failings’ of a coach who we practically anointed a few years ago. I would like to see RN get his full five years. Patience is a virtue.
That's only true for a few teams
Oregon is faster. Stanford is bigger. U$C some of both but not much depth. Rick has recruited well enough the last 3 years that this comment is not valid.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
40000re, you wrote, " I would like to see RN get his full five years."
What do you mean by that ? I didn’t think Rick N. was signed for 5 years.
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.
