The "Eye Test": Bruins’ GPA After The Loss Against Houston
I want to expand a little more on "the Eye Test" which freesia39 did a great job grading out in her first rapid fire post game post. While I have been reading all the post game quotes and notes popping up after yet another tough Bruin loss on the road, I have been trying to organize all of them under the six factors we laid out during the off season.
So I will try to organize them into this post and then give out specific grades for each factor coming up with an overall GPA for this game. We can keep doing this after every game and as we go on, it will give us another metrics upon which we can judge the progress (or lack thereof) in our football program. This will be my effort to look into our football team purely based on numbers, facts and extricating emotion from it [because it is brutal to be completely emotionally invested, even though I cannot help it in our program. :-) Hey, why I have a smiley face here?!]
All right let's get to some analysis and grades after the jump.
1) Is our defense prepared for each and every team we play?
I trust my eyes here and they are in agreement with the observations offered up by freesia39, DC Bruins, and gbruin. It seems like defensive captain Tony Dye would agree with us as well. In the official post-game video Dye mentioned that our defense was not prepared for Houston's scheme to dink and dunk us with short screen passes. Apparently they didn't anticipate it. Similar comments from Dye also showed up in Yoon's post game report:
"All week we were working to protect the seams because that's usually what they like to hit," safety Tony Dye said. "They changed their things up to where they were hitting the underneath routes on us while we were carrying. So they schemed us up a little bit. We adjusted, but it was mostly on us, the players."
Remember Dye is the captain of our team. Our players also looked unprepared when it came to being crisp in defensive fundamentals.
Emotionally, I guess lot of Bruin alums are more than inclined to give an F in this category. I can understand that. But I also have to give some credit to Case Keenum, who is essentially a pro caliber QB playing in his sixth season in college. He was masterful and let's give him some credit for that. So my grade for this category is D: 1.0.
2) Do we call offensive plays to catch our opponents off guard?
I was pleased with what I saw in offense most of the game. I do think our coaches game plan was pretty well balanced generating over 300 yards in the air and 232 yards on the ground. Richard Brehaut was a gamer and he shattered any notion that he has issues with being a mobile QB, racking up 87 yards in 13 carries. I also liked how Brehaut was able to develop solid chemistry with Joseph Fauria, who experienced a breakout day as a Bruin.
Houston defense was back-peddling most of the day and were unsure what the Bruins would come up with on key fourth down conversions. 8 different receivers caught the ball 20 times for 322 yards. I'd say that showed an offense that was pretty multi-dimensional.
So for this category I am going to go with a B+: 3.3.
3) Do our players look like they know what they should be doing at all times?
Here are some of the numbers/facts relevant to this category:
- Bruins were penalized 10 times yesterday for 80 yards, a number of them were drive killers as detailed by DC Bruins in his post game post. KnudsenRockne has a very interesting breakdown though showing most of our offensive penalties didn't matter as we scored TDs. However, the penalty in our 3 and out series in Q4 when we got within 3 points really cost us.
- There were two specific miscues from our senior center were particularly costly.
- We had a crucial turnover in first half which helped Houston seize the momentum with disastrous results for our defense.
- Note the Dye comment listed in category number 1 about the defense being unprepared for short passing attack from Houston Cougars.
- There was also communication issues late in Q4 in our offense. Even Coach Neuheisel in his post comments mentioned that "there were a couple miscommunications when we got to the 20 that we need to fix," adding that Brehaut "didn't get the right signal" from the sidelines.
Now, I am sympathetic to the notion that a team often looks unpolished in its first game. It's not unique to UCLA. I saw it all over college football yesterday as I took in games all day. You just had to look at Pac-12 games all over West to see how sloppy teams were.
Still, I think there needs to be a sense of urgency around program given what has transpired around Westwood last 10+ yards. There has to be sharper focus on details. It's more than reasonable to argue that details cost us yesterday. So the grade for this category is a C-: 1.7.
4) Do our players play for 60 G-D minutes every game?
Well our team did not quit. I had the sinking feeling of the BYU/Oregon games from last few years when Houston ended the second half in a flurry. I thought it was going to get ugly. I give our offense enormous credit for the way it opened the second half with a statement drive (as noted by the Joel Klat from the announcing booth). I also give them credit for then taking advantage of the turnover.
That said though, our guys did not seem focused on both end of the football in their first drives. There was also defensive letdowns as have been mentioned multiple times here at the end of first half that cost us dearly. So, I will give credit for the way the team fought but can't overlook how there were clear moments in the game where there were lapses of focus and concentration. My grade for this category is a C: 2.0.
5) Do our players execute?
In some ways we have answered the questions many ways in preceding questions based on numbers, quotes from Coach Rick Neuheisel and his players themselves. On the offensive side, there were lot of encouraging signs but there were issues when game was on the line. From Brehaut himself:
"We had a lot of stuff that we were shooting ourselves in the foot," Brehaut said. "I don’t think Houston did a lot to stop us."
There were massive letdowns on defense.I don't need to slash my wrists this am going over details on that front.
The special teams is also of serious concern. Our kickoff team did not look organized at times. Of course there is the issue about not placing players with speed and athleticism for punt coverage duties. Moreover, there were clear lack of execution problems on in our kicking game. So the grade for this category is a C:2.0 as well.
6) Do we have leaders on the field?
On the offensive sides we did see leadership from Johnathan Franklin, Richard Brehaut and Joseph Fauria. All of them stepped up in a big way. It is going to be very interesting to see how the QB situation develops from hereon out. But I'd like to think Richard Brehaut has earned the shot to start against San Jose State and hold on to it at the current snap shot of time. It may be a moot issue because of concussion related protocols Kevin Prince may not be ready to do full practice by middle of this week.
On the defensive side it gets hazy. I didn't see the kind of leadership we are accustomed to seeing from guys like Rahim Moore, ATV, and Reggie Carter over the years. I really like how Dye owned up to the defensive problems after the game. However, right now we badly need leaders to step up after the game. I was really hoping Dantone Jones would have an explosive debut against Houston but was surprised to see that didn't materialize. Well there is time. Hopefully the guys can get it together against San Jose State and then really come through against Texas. But for now though have to say the lack of leadership on the field was disappointing from the defensive side.
My grade for this category is a C+: 2.3.
Final Grade Card for Houston Cougars
Based on the discussion here is how it shapes up:
1) Is our defense prepared for each and every team we play? [D: 1.0]
2) Do we call offensive plays to catch our opponents off guard? [B+: 3.3]
3) Do our players look like they know what they should be doing at all times? [C-: 1.7]
4) Do our players play for 60 G-D minutes every game? [C: 2.0]
5) Do our players execute? [C: 2.0]
6) Do we have leaders on the field? [C+: 2.3]
Houston GPA: 2.05
I will not offer any more commentary at this point. I am going to wait to see how the numbers look in next few games, game by game. At that point I think for better or rose the numbers will speak for themselves.
GO BRUINS.
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thanks for the write-up, Nestor
I like Tony Dye’s leadership in owning up to what happened out there. I hope, and think, they will fix it.
Saw a lot of good stuff on the offense. I’m looking forward to next week.
Dreaming of Westwood while in permanent exile in Virginia
UCLA Offensive Statistics
We can’t lose sight of the fact that last year, Houston ranked 103rd in Total Defense (114th in Rush D; 73rd in Pass D). I don’t know what offseason action they’ve had with personnel, but the fact of the matter is we ran and passed against a D that is among the worst as we’re likely to see all year, save WSU and SJSU. So, while I’m happy to see that we were effective and balanced for a change, I have a hard time believing we’re going to be able to get similar results against Pac-12 caliber defenses. Especially since they all seem to have our schemes figured out by the beginning of Pac-12 play. So I remain measured in my response to our Offense.
Our Defense….well, we’re likely to see great Pac-12 QB play throughout the season. Andrew Luck, Matt Barkley, Foles, Osweiler, Tuel(?) are good/excellent QB’s I can think of off the top of my head. Our inability to react to their ‘dink & dunk’ game plan is what drives me nuts. With as many plays as they ran in the first quarter, you’d think you have quite a bit to work with as a D coordinator and be able to come up with some sort of stopgap measure. And while the tackling was atrocious, the simple fact is their receivers often caught the ball wide open, allowing for what seemed like mid-single digit yards after catch on most receptions.
I can’t say I didn’t see improvement; that would be disingenuous. However, Houston is still a mid-major conference team to whom a loss should be the exception; not something as likely to happen as not. Heck, if I was a mid-major team looking to make a name, I’d schedule us; we seem to make someone a highlight reel day every game (epitomized by the 3 punt return TD’s by Antonion Perkins in 2003….yeah, lets show we’re not scared and KEEP punting to him!!…but I digress).
I’m extremely interested in the personnel changes next week, if any. I’ll be disappointed if I see the exact same starting line-up, considering some of the poor, poor play we saw (at least on defense). All those accountability posters in the locker room…..will mean nothing if some changes aren’t made (and changes due to injury don’t count!)
I’d like Neuheisel to turn it around, but I’m already gagging at his 23rd version on how to say “We’re going to put this loss behind us. We need to play better next week….” Seriously, the 23rd time I’ve heard some variant the same post-game comments.
I agree with you re. Houston's defense
Made the same point here. Probably should have included that point in my scorecards above. While I didn’t mention it directly I certainly had it in mind. Good thoughts Scot.
The defense had fundamental problems tackling
That breakaway touchdown at the end of the first half? How many tackles did that guy break? Over and over, I saw us make contact in the backfield but fail to bring the runner down. Just. Like. Last. Year.
That fundamental failing is what I find disheartening. They can scheme all they want and be better prepared to handle dinks and dunks, but the fact of the matter is that if our tackling had been fundamentally sound, we would have won that game going away.
I won't itemize my grades but
The Defense got either no-pass or low-pass in the applicable criteria but the Offense got a low-pass to medium-pass (B). My overall grade: low-pass … (I guess like everyone else)
i think u got it just about right Nestor
Although I a little surprised you didn’t give the defense an F!
Good grades N
I think the lack of pass rush from Datone has to do with how quickly Keenum got the ball out of his hands for all of those dink & dunk passes. He was hit several times (maybe not by Datone tho), but he was so skilled in that his timing was picture perfect. He knew exactly how much time he had in the pocket and delivered it before we got to him. The coverage needs to be adjusted to give the line that extra split second to get to the QB. Playing as far off the ball only makes Keenum’s job easier. A comment from another thread mentioned that if we played up on the receivers, Keenum would have beat us over the top. But, if that would have happened, routes would have taken that much longer, making Case hold it longer, and we get to him enough to keep him off balance.
formerly Westwood78
Even the game announcers
mentioned that our defenders were giving too much of a cushion to the receivers and on top of that we added poor tackling to the mix. If my memory is right I dont remember seeing Keemum complete many long passes.
I am just amazed how average joe’s like myself can pick up on this kind of scheme yet the coaches who are experienced and experts can’t.
N????? A smiley face?
Are you loosing your edge?? Excellent non emotional look at the day.
My two cents on our defense
I agree with all Nestor’s analyses. I like to point out that the reason we couldn’t defense Houston’s “dinks and dunks” was because our linebackers were completely ineffective. We were too slow, not to mention we can’t tackle to save our lives.
I'm suprised there's no mention of Kip Smith under #5 Execution.
We were worried about him all summer and in his first opportunity, he fails to execute. Not that I have a say in anything but I wouldn’t trust this guy after that performance.
Student athletes
That sentence spoke for itself and I am not going to quit on a UCLA student after one game. We will also not tolerate TJ Simers like classless attacks on our student athletes on this blog. Consider it a warning. Thanks.
Would have have not trusted Kai Forbath & Justin Medlock?
They both missed their first college FG attempts. Also, it was windy (did you notice the place kickers had to have a holder?)
I’m glad our coaches aren’t as reactionary as our fans are.
by KnudsenRockne on Sep 5, 2011 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
A little different
During camp we heard from many sources the trouble we were having with our kicking game. CRN even commented on the issue. I went to the scrimmage and it looked shaky at best. I guess it got so bad that Locke was practicing field goals and doing a pretty good job. So when he missed an extra point and field goal no one was surprised. We were shocked CRN did not have Locke handle the kicks.
Yah. I went to a number of the practices as well as the scrimmage.
If you had seen any of Smith’s great kicks (like that one in the Fall scrimmage) you would understand why CRN wants him to rise to the occasion rather than wear out Locke’s leg.
Clearly the issue is confidence. Smith seems to psyche himself out. He spoke about a conversation with Medlock who gave him words of encouragement and told him that he & Kai missed their first College FG’s. When you look at the team – they are trying to encourage Smith, too. (that great kick in the scrimmage had the whole team pouring out onto the field as if he won a game for them. When his missed the FG on Sat, a couple of players were trying to keep him from getting down on himself).
When you have a guy with really great athletic potential – like Smith – you don’t want to breaking his self-confidence. I think Nestor commented that it may be better if CRN just tells Smith, “You’re our guy – we’re not planning on putting Locke or Roberts: We’re trusting you!”
by KnudsenRockne on Sep 6, 2011 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
"Houston, we have a problem."
The offense passed the eye test; the defense failed, period.
Whether it was CJT or CRN does not matter. CRN is the boss. He is responsible. This is strike one, not because it was a loss, but because fails like this are simply unacceptable.
The good news? We can still have an amazing season, especially since Houston will most likely come close to running the table and the loss may look decent at the end of the season.
So let’s move forward. The future is what matters. Let’s hope CRN fixes the problems, rights the ship, and makes us all proud. No more fails, please, coaches.
GO BRUINS!
Defensive line issues
I saw Marsh play very well and Espenesa play ok. Usually Marsh would beat his guy by a little more than Espenesa would loss. I watched the D line a lot as it was obvious that the passing offense was built upon late releasing half backs or WRs coming across the middle, usually after a small stutter step. The line backers appeared to by going too deep; I was not looking to see if they were playing man or zone—-but it looked more man than zone. As the DLs could not break free and attack the QB the linebackers looked real bad. I think the two DTs need to learn how to shed their blocker more. I did not see any Houston offense attacking the DEs—-so my guess is that they played really good containment but where hesitant to do any real rushing. Summary I think we lost because 1) primarily DL just did not do it (but I think that is a short lived issue) and 2) the linebackers did not swith back and forth between man and zone enough.
I understand the concept behind the "Eye Test"
but shouldn’t there be a category for improvement as well? The metrics above are absolute and necessary for any football team to succeed, which is obviously what we want. And maybe if we are grading last year as an overall “F”, then anything above that is an improvement, but I’d like to see some kind of score for improvement, maybe broken down by O, D, Special Teams, etc. No question that #4 is critical after a year when it seems that much of the team didn’t bother to show up for large portions of the game, and maybe that is what is coloring my perception that this team is much improved, at least on offense. Just a thought – I don’t have the knowledge to get into the X and O’s of the game like some of the BN’ers. And I realize that even though our stats were pretty good compared to Houston, we failed in the one stat that matters, namely points. This is by no means a criticism of the Eye Test, just a suggestion.
I think the idea is the minimum improvement
will yield passing grades according to the eye test.
by KnudsenRockne on Sep 5, 2011 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Game Management should also be a category
And that earned D- for our penultimate drive IMO. CRN’s excuse to the media for why we were so slow was the very definition of “playing not to lose”: he basically said he didn’t want to score twice too fast so Houston didn’t have a chance to win at the end. So instead of enabling our defense to stop them in a few first downs, and MAXIMIZING possessions when down two scores, he was playing to force a 3-and-out?
Are you kidding me? To be afraid of scoring TOO fast to come back from 10 down so the other team doesn’t have time to beat you?
You are more than welcome to keep your gradecards blue
We set this up during off-season. If there were suggestions then I would have incorporated it in it. But going to go with this for now. Thanks.
Of course, that could also be a part of the "leaders" category
The coach after all is the ultimate leader, and he’s on the field and dictates the pace of play.
Fair points
I will incorporate that into next post then. Thanks bb.
by Nestor on Sep 5, 2011 2:08 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Sure...also to elaborate on leadership and game management on Sat.
It obviously doesn’t just apply to the 4th quarter. There are those turning points several times throughout a game, where you have a chance to either take hold of a game (by being aggressive) or just let it passively play out, or in much rarer cases (and never at UCLA) bungle it up by being foolishly aggressive. Usually it has to do with 4th downs. But decisions on offensive tempo also count.
Looking around CFB (and even the NFL), I see a lot of teams that go no-huddle at various points in a game to trample the defense when on their heels. The obvious time for that on Saturday was when we got the ball down 31-28 and had that penalty. We followed with two runs setting up a 3rd and 8. After that penalty, I would’ve unleashed a pass-heavy no-huddle attack. They had no way of matching up with our receivers. There was very little chance we would fail to get 15 yards in 3 pass plays. In fact, I bet there was no series of three pass plays that earned fewer than 15 yards throughout the game.
And as our 40 second no-huddle TD drive proved, there was very little chance they could stop us if we were going full-speed, when they have no chance to sub. It’s usually like that. Even more so when you’re bigger and faster by a long shot.
That’s one point where we could’ve taken the LEAD — both literally and figuratively, both of the game and of ourselves as a team and program. Another, more debatable point was 4th and 2 on our very first drive, when I think some more aggressive field-leaders would’ve made a statement by going for it against the overmatched D for a first down en route to a score.
That 3 and out after getting within 3 points was brutal
4th and 2 on our very first drive was an iffy call to go for. I guess if a head coach has the stature of Bill Billchek he has the luxury to make those calls.
Certainly iffy
But…supported by the risk-reward statistics, and even more so when the D is way overmatched and you’re a running team with many easy ways to convert 2 yards. Leach would’ve done it (he’s done much riskier), as would’ve others playing against a weak small D. It’s the type of play that establishes identity, leadership, and confidence and can turn a loss into a win.
I didn’t expect CRN to go from punting on the opp. 35 to being aggressive on his own 30…but it’s one of those points where there was an opportunity, which is why I pointed it out. Certainly not a no-brainer though.
Risk and rewards stastics
That would be a really cool post bb. If there is a way you can share all the relevant data in one post, I think it will be helpful to all of us.
by Nestor on Sep 6, 2011 5:03 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
There was a great rundown somewhere
After Bilicheck went for it on that 4th and 2 from the 28 at the end of the game a few years ago. Need to find that and when I do I’ll post it.
Can someone please confirm what I remember-
Brett Hundley did not play on Saturday? Brent Sobleski of BSPNLA is reporting (in their rumors section) that he did. I can’t find any mention of it in the box score.
“Prince and the team’s backup quarterback Richard Brehaut battled to start well into the practice week against Houston. If Prince cannot play, Brehaut may get a chance to reverse the Bruins’ fortunes. Brett Hundley, who also played in the loss, may receive the opportunity as well.
- Brent Sobleski"
And they get paid for this...
How would you like to sit at home, watch another game, then do a writeup on Penn State? We’ll even pay you for it. Yes? Welcome to ESPN!
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I played, too. I was the guy holding the ball on kickoffs.
Nestor got 4 plays at F back, and tasser was in on special teams.
Just ask Sobleski. He’s already writing about a game he never saw.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Houston game
I attended the game. Had to sit among Cougar fans, most of which were pleasant, but one or two who wanted to rip my UCLA shirt off or rip my blue earring out. No big deal, especially compared to Arizona Wildcat fans. I was surprised about all the points scored on our D in the first half. But I watched the game vid the next day and saw that our D was hitting them hard on every tackle. They even popped Keenum a few times! But the Cougars just seemed to run plays that confused our D and got the job done. I was disappointed when they scored with seconds to play in the first half. Did our D relax too much right then? I think this changed the game. But I was proud how the Bruins never gave up. However, being on the the 40 yard line, one thing was obvious to me……our players, especially receivers, were HUGE compared to the size of their players. And although we used the receiver advantage several times, I think we didn’t exploit this enough. Overall, the Houston players were smaller, but extremely motivated and well coached. But we should have won this game.

by 






















