Spaulding Roundup: Mike Johnson Talks Conservative Offense, Barr Down And Jerry Rice Earns a Scholarship
Reports pegged yesterday's practice as a 'typical' but well-tempoed session. While Richard Brehaut is officially the starter this week, Kevin Prince did get some reps, and threw a few good passes. Brehaut was also said to be more comfortable leading the team - at least as much as someone can tell from practice. On Brehaut, Ted Miller wrote a piece for the ESPN LA blog arguing that Richard's development over the next several weeks will tell whether Coach Neuheisel survives past this season in Westwood. Even Ted knows that Brehaut is the Bruins (and Neuheisel's) best hope for 2011.
Mike Johnson talked to the beat writers after practice, with the reporters focusing their questions on a conservative offense that has failed to display much of the aggressiveness that he had promised before the season began. Part of his justification for the game plans has been the uncertainty among his personnel, particularly the Brehaut/Prince situation but also on the OLine.
"You have to understand the offensive line and who they are. You got to understand if you put them in too many situations, what’s going to happen. You have to understand the growth of your quarterback and flip-flopping the quarterbacks early and not giving one guy all the reps, and that situation. It’s a culmination of all of that. If you drop back and throw it 30, 40 times, how many sacks are you going to give up?
"We have a defense that’s trying to find its way. It’s important that we don’t extend their reps. For me it’s a process of putting all that together and trying to make sure you put the offense and the team in the best situation to win."
During the press session, he discussed specifically the Oregon State game and what led to the wildly unballanced and conservative playcalling in Corvallis.
"If you look at that first half, we had three opportunities where we had guys running down the middle of the field wide open and we couldn't get it off. We had protection issues, guys pushed back in the quarterback's face. That changes the whole game. Had a play with 42 seconds to go, fastest guy matched up against a linebacker, and we couldn't get it off. If you make those plays, you're talking about a 250-yard passing game and a 220-yard running game, and you have proper balance.
Going to Covallis, I thought it was important we stayed in 3rd-and-6 or less - if you look at our third downs, we were better on third down and we had four or five 3rd-and-ones. After the Texas game, when we came out and threw it early, I thought it was important we didn't put our team in that situation.
We were in control of that game for the most part, and when we had to battle back - that touchdown when we got out ahead again, they were throws. There's a time when you have to open it up. From our standpoint of growth of confidence, I think it's important you put them in situations for them to be successful."
So essentially, his explanation is that the offensive line was struggling to contain the Beavers D-line in the 1st half, which apparently led to him abandoning the passing game. With the struggles of the Bruin offense in the second half, after the passing attack was left behind, someone might have figured out that throwing the ball - or at least the credible threat of airing it out - had led to some success earlier in the contest. Regardless of the aggressiveness - or lack of - of the playcalling, he believes that execution is the key to this team scoring points. Excuse me for any flashbacks to KD's failed implementation of the west coast offense in Westwood - execution is important of course, but even the best run offense is going to have a difficult time gaining yards when the defense knows exactly what is coming.
"It takes all 10 guys and the quarterback throwing it to execute and get that touchdown. It came up exactly how we drew it up and we didn’t get it off. Every team we’ve played, if we executed, we scored, whether it’s Texas, San Jose State, Houston or Oregon State. That’s what I’m putting the emphasis on. It doesn’t matter what play we call. It’s about executing that play."
Coach Johnson's focus on 3rd-and-6 (or less) is interesting. While that is certainly more favorable than 3rd-and-10, off the cuff it does not seem like it leads to a particularly high rate of conversions (someone will soon chime in to prove me wrong, most likely ;P). Particularly with the return of the run-run-pass theme of playcalling, setting a gain of 4 yards on 1st and 2nd down as a target really does not make much sense. If the offense were throwing the ball more in early downs, I could see that due to the risk of incomplete passes, but when so much of the offense is based on running the ball, with a basic play that (as detailed before the season by 03rd9) is designed to reliably pick up 3 yard gains, one would think that the focus would be getting in shorter yardage situations on 3rd down.
As freesia noted in yesterday's roundup, a number of Bruins are dealing with injuries. Anthony Barr was one of those guys, and Wednesday saw a bit more clarity as to his predicament. An MRI performed late Tuesday found a meniscus tear in his knee. Peter Yoon reminded ESPNLA readers that both Brett Hundley and Jamie Graham have had this surgery in 2011, with physical recovery times of 4-6 weeks. If surgery is required, Barr would likely be able to return for the final couple of games of the season (but would the coaches actually utilize him?). In other injury news, Andrew Abbott and Jamie Graham were fully participating in practice; Jamie is expected to be available to play on Saturday, and Tony Dye told Jon Gold that he will also be able to play this week.
And to close with some happy news, the program announced that Jerry Rice Jr has been awarded a football scholarship, taking effect in the Winter Quarter.Jerry hasn't made it into a game yet, but like his dad has put in the long hours on the practice field. As he said after practice yesterday:
"I’m happy to know that my hard work is paying off, but it’s not over yet," Rice said. "I’m never satisfied. I’m working to get on the field."
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Disappointing.
Makes it sound like we should never pass because we can’t execute.
Maybe we should just throw the ball to Derrick Coleman. He executes big time.
GO BRUINS! BEAT STANFORD!
I hear ya Hy If OSU pushes back the O-line...
might as well set up turnstiles this week up in Palo Alto. Have we overanalyzed the situation in westwood? You have trench struggles…your whole team struggles.Could it be just that simple???
No.
After 4 years, this is not acceptable against a bottom ranked team. Looking at the second half, they had the ability to dominate their defensive line. Why did it take the so long to figure out they were bigger and stronger. Not sure why, but on game day the results are almost counter intuitive, mostly in the opponents favor.
Coach Mike Johnson's points are correct, but they also show the mindset of the coaching staff.
Yes, bad things can happen if you pass. Protection can break down, reads can be missed, and interceptions can be thrown.
Big plays can happen as well. I didn’t get to the watch the OSU game, but I do recall a couple of big plays through the passing game. We may have missed on a couple protection assignments, but we converted on others.
I like our running game, but our coaches shouldn’t be afraid to put our players in position to make plays. Even errant deep shots will open up running lanes.
Formerly AllHailMightyBruins
Yeah,
focusing on the missed attempts to carroll but ignoring the completions to Josh Smith and Embree is weird. Acknowledge the mistakes but ignore the accomplishments?
+1
Moreover, the missed attempts to Carroll revealed, to me, a gold mine of opportunity much more than an estimate of necessary repairs. I remember at least one play where Carroll showed his world-class speed; he was yards ahead of anybody, but Brehaut’s pass was badly under-thrown. Bad, not because of the pass itself or a break-down in protection, but because RB, himself, hasn’t adjusted to Carroll’s unbelievable speed. Little wonder, since the pair have had so little practice.
Yeah, you can look at those plays and see the breakdown in pass protection and say we need to protect better. Or, you can look at those plays and say, “My God, if we can get the timing down, we can reach the end zone in one play.” It’s all in how you look at it.
by Bruinut on Sep 29, 2011 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Same reason we can’t name RB as the permanent starter…. It might be construed as “overconfidence”
by BC_Bruin on Sep 29, 2011 3:26 PM PDT via iPhone app up reply actions
Why either-or?
I don’t understand why he’s talking about the two halves as though we either pass or we run. Isn’t the idea to MIX the plays in a creative way in order to keep the defense guessing on every down? Choosing to focus primarily on the pass for a half and then adjusting it to run for the next half is inappropriate, inadequate strategy for both halves. Am I missing something here?
Yes. The idea is to mix the plays in a creative way.
No. Our coaches don’t know how to do it.
by BrendonBruin on Sep 29, 2011 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Gawd, we've been hearing the "exectution" angle for years now
Across different coaching staffs. Granted during the waning years or KD and the begining or RN’s there was not much talent as we have today. What has not change is the sorry ass excuse. When is the current coaching staff ever going to admit that they have failed miserably in their primariy responsiblity of developing and maximing player performance. Geez, I’ll even take “oops my bad” from them. I’m not even going to bring in the AD in this, he’s too contenct with his raise and stellar accomplishments.
by Angelitos on Sep 29, 2011 7:51 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Conservative mindset limited to UCLA or to football in general?
I don’t know about anyone else, but thinking like this is pretty unsat…
When you play a team like Stanford, you have to score points. You have to take those chances. You can’t be as conservative against Stanford as Oregon State. -Coach Mike Johnson
http://insidesocal.com/ucla/2011/09/quick-qa-with-mike-johnson-on.html
Basically a confession of playing not to lose
Against Stanford, they know we have no chance of winning without scoring big, but they thought they could just run out the clock on OSU. Pretty pathetic.
Again, why not exploit the edges when there's pressure with a screen pass?
Get’s the ball out of Brehaut’s hands and into the hands of a playmaker (James, Carroll, Smith, perhaps?) Am I missing very obvious? This play has been missing from our playbook for the entire Neuheisel era. As has the slant.
I agree with you!
Why don’t the bruins run a screen or a slant, heck a reverse once a game!!!!!
congrats to jerry jr.
I’m sure he earned it through hard work, still i wonder why use up a scholie on a kid who can clearly pay his way?
Wrt, CMJ’s comments, I guess I don’t take as much issue with it, I don’t read much excuse mongering like others have read into it what I hear is the qb “competition” and the O-line musical chairs has had detrimental effects on execution and coach’s confidence to pull the trigger more often. still why only throw deep go’s to carroll et al, how about a couple of dump offs over the middle and let him loose, hell it’s worked against us. It will probably work great against a stanford team that’s without it’s best inebacker and defensive player for the year.
Across The Face
As I read Coach Johnson's analysis
First, I appreciate his candor. No flackery there.
Second, the upshot of his comments—we are bereft of sufficient talent to roundly dominate a winless OSU team. Although I refuse to give up, unless the Sanford game is a big turnaround or is the catalyst for one, I expect to be one of about 20,000 people, with nothing else to do, standing around in the Rose Bowl for our last home game against Colorado on November 19. With the preponderance of the crowd rooting for Colorado.
Third, here’s to turning it all around in Palo Alto.
WRT to Barr's injury . . .
. . . I am recovering from a torn medial meniscus right now. 16 days from surgery and I can walk fine. I hurt it back in March and continued to play soccer on it on a weekly basis for almost 4 months before having to shut it down due to the pain (not while playing but 2-3 days after). The doc. said I could play soccer again 6 weeks after surgery. The problem is avoiding cutting and twisting motions.
Now, obviously, playing recreational soccer once a week for 4 months and living and breathing college football on a daily basis for the next two months are like night and day.
But, the option does exist that he can continue to play on it and elect to have surgery in the offseason.
If he elects surgery now, I would guess that we would not see him until the U$C* game . . .
Anthony Barr
if he sits out the rest of the year would he be eligible for a medical redshirt?
Across The Face
The rule
I think he cannot have played in more than 20% of regular season games to be eligible for a medical redshirt.. I think he’s eligible, but I think I’ve only seen him action against OSU & maybe SJSU?
I thought I read
it was that if you have played in more than 3 games you cannot take a medical redshirt. He’s played in four games at this point which would mean he can’t take the medical redshirt. However, depending on the severity and his body’s ability to heal, he could be back within 4-6 weeks.
makes sense
I didn’t know he had played in all 4 games. Probably just didn’t see his number called that often.. But yeah, 3+ games would be over 20% of regular season & ineligible for a hardship redshirt
Yep, that is the rule as I understand it
I believe the rule is that the injury has to occur before the team has played 30% of its scheduled games. In football, that threshold comes at 3 games.
formerly bruinhoo
30% is right...
but, according to the rules, the player may participate in no more than 4 games. 30% of 12 scheduled games is 3.6, but that fraction is rounded up to 4 games. Additionally, the injury must come in the first half of the season.
See rule 14.2.4 in the NCAA Division I Manual:
http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4180-2010-2011-ncaa-division-i-manual.aspx
by truebluebruin on Sep 29, 2011 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions
I just want to say, for all the people wondering why we don't run bubble screens, or slants. . .
We DON’T DO THAT!
This is UCLA! Why would we ever do that? If we were going to do that, where would it all end? If we did that, the fans would grow emboldened to demand we run on teams that can’t stop the run. Attack weak secondaries with out passing game. End debate on which QB is our starter? Can you see the slippery slope you’re standing on? If we started doing any of this stuff it wouldn’t be long before our fans demand we win and compete for Pac 12 championships. The humanity!
/endofsarcasm
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Garlick Joe couldn't have said it better.
by BrendonBruin on Sep 29, 2011 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Look NO screens!
Go to any of the UCLA football coaching staff residences and you’ll see, they’ve removed any/all screens from the playbook, their patio doors, windows, the kitchen drain, even replaced flat screen TVs with passive displays. Be careful it could become a lateral pass.
wanting to be able we certainly wished,
... but being allowed to try we didn`t dare
























