UCLA Basketball Roundup: Cal Tops UCLA, Will The Bruins Even Make The NIT?
by DCBruins on Feb 12, 2012 5:41 AM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintOne thing was clear on Saturday's game against the Bruins, the Cal Golden Bears are the better team:
UCLA is clearly a notch below California. The Golden Bears are the only conference team that has easily dispatched UCLA and they have now done it twice this season. The Bruins have been within single digits in each of their other four conference losses and could easily be in the mix for the regular-season conference title, but they trailed Cal by as many as 24 in their 85-69 loss on Dec. 31 and were down by 17 in the second half Saturday.
The Bruins are eying the Pac-12 tournament as their best shot at an NCAA tournament berth, but they are more than likely headed toward the NIT, especially if they run into the Golden Bears at Staples Center in March.
The game was eerily similar to the first game. A reasonably close game until Cal went on a big second half run to destroy the Bruins. A slight difference is this time the Bruins made a run.
Just like in their first meeting, when Cal blasted UCLA, 85-69, the Golden Bears took control with a second-half surge. UCLA trailed, 32-26, at halftime Saturday, but the Bruins got only one defensive stop on Cal's first 12 possessions of the second half and had a 56-39 lead with 13:24 to play.
That run seemed to suck all the life out of the Bruins, who seemed resigned to defeat over the next five minutes as Cal maintained its lead. Coach Ben Howland wouldn't have any of it. During a timeout, he chastised the team for giving up and implored them to keep fighting.
The Bruins responded, cutting the Cal lead to 66-59 with 3:15 to play, but could not get any closer.
"I was kind of disappointed the way were kind of hanging our head when we had the big deficit and I really got on them and we really fought back at that point," Howland said. "You never hang your head, you never quit, you never give up, you keep fighting always. Hopefully that's a lesson learned from today. You can't ever display that."
That run was led by the player of the game for the Bruins:
UCLA STAR OF THE GAME:Jerime Anderson scored 16 points on 6-of-10 shooting for the Bruins, who shot only 39.7 percent for the game. Anderson's 3-pointer just before halftime helped UCLA stay close at 32-26 when it looked as if Cal might take a double-digit halftime lead.
Anderson also brought the Bruins back from oblivion when he scored nine points during a 12-2 run that closed a 64-47 deficit to 66-59 with 3:13 to play. Anderson's 3-pointer ended that run.
But Anderson has limitations. Anderson is good at taking what is given him. Anderson is not good at doing too much which he tried to do effectively ending the run:
This time around, the Bruins showed a little moxie in clawing their way back. After falling behind by as many as 17 points midway through the half, UCLA went on a run to make it a seven-point game with 3:15 left.
But just as the Bruins had to hurry to catch up, it was that speed that cut their comeback short. Anderson had two crucial turnovers down the stretch and Cal responded to every one of UCLA's late charges.
The Bears were patient and efficient, shooting 51.9 percent from the field to sweep the Bruins in the regular season for the first time since 1993-94. Justin Cobbs scored 18 points, Allen Crabbe 14 and Jorge Gutierrez 13.
The numbers on the other side were equally telling. UCLA shot 39.7 percent and had a season-low seven assists, none in the first half.
"We had bunch of open jump shots that we missed," Coach Ben Howland said. "We had had some inside shots, layups, that we missed. The first half, both their big guys were in foul trouble. They were playing two backups and we couldn't exploit that."
Cal defense seemed geared to let the Wears shoot and a lot of those missed shots were by the Wears. It worked.
"It was just a tough night," said Wear, who had 10 points but made only 4 of 13 shots.
"I missed some chippie shots around the hoop. Those are shots we normally make and should make by being aggressive, not worrying about contact but going up there and finishing."
And as Howland said:
Ben Howland pointed out that Cal's Harper Kamp held such diligent position that David Wear got only one rebound for UCLA.
Anthony Stover was hurt and CBH asked Smith to step up and play a season high in minutes. Cal did a good job double teaming him and limiting him. Smith was candid in his problems not just this game but for the season:
He's sorry he hasn't cared more about his weight. He's sorry he hasn't worked harder on his stamina. He's sorry that basketball hasn't been important enough to him to make it a priority. He knows now how his lifestyle can affect not just his future, but the future of a basketball team that this season has been crushed by his girth.
"My whole career, I've never been in great shape," says the sophomore, shaking his head, looking down at his 6-foot-10, 300-plus-pound frame. "I can only imagine what would happen if I was."
. . . Smith is such a presence in the middle, the Golden Bears constantly double-team him. But he manages only seven shots because he is often too winded to get down the court with everyone else, sometimes not even making it to the three-point line.
"He was tired and he was spent," Howland says.
Now the Bruins chances of winning the Pac-12 regular season are officially spent. Cal is the more talented, better coached, and just better team.
Go Bruins.
59 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Those last quotes by Smith are really telling
I hope he can get things together, not just for his basketball team and future, but for his own health going forward. Sounds like there may be a bigger issue than a young man who has just not committed himself fully.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
I went to watch my longhorns defeat Kansas state yesterday here in Austin. A rule of thumb in our family has always been to cheer on the horns in football and the bruins in basketball. But as much as a I like CBH, I’m sick of watching those losers. I really think he’s just recruited the wrong type of players. Character and heart matter and that’s where our problems are. They are just don’t want to work. I don’t blame CBH for that, I blame the players.. But I know he’s about to get screwed by his players and lose his job. Kids these days..
by Big Bully on Feb 12, 2012 6:05 AM PST via mobile reply actions
The subject and object in the next to last sentence seem to be reversed
It is the players who have been screwed, not the other way around. Do you think the all-transfer team screwed Howland by leaving, or did Howland screw them by giving the minutes to no-talents like Dragovich and letting them sit on the bench? Do you think the players screwed Howland by not playing well in his pre-ordained defensive scheme, or did Howland screw them by not playing a scheme which would allow them to succeed, given their talents? Just asking.
At some point
We have to stop blaming the kids and wonder why they are not being inspired and led. AA got sick of playing for Howland. As did LRMAM, PAA and number of other great kids.
by Nestor on Feb 12, 2012 7:06 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Is Howland Throwing the Kids Under the Bus?
The tone of his comments seem disturbing. “We had bunch of open jump shots that we missed…They were playing two backups and we couldn’t exploit that.”
We want honesty, instead of “strap it on” nonsense from our coaches and staff. So maybe this was just telling it like it is.
But it seems like not being able to exploit playing against back-ups also falls on the coaches, and I don’t see any self-blame in the quotes. It also seems like the “open jump shots” comment could be read as I put in a great offense, but the players didn’t execute.
There is enough wrong with the Howland era in its last 4 year incarnation, to show him the door. So if he is not throwing kids under the bus, he still has to go. But if he is throwing kids under the bus, then any non-action is another huge mark against Guerrero.
Interesting take
I took the quotes as just being honest. In the first half when they had Bak Bak in the game we had to take advantage. We did not.
On the self blame, I take it both ways. The Wears should not have a green light for a shot just inside the three point line. That is a bad shot. (I am okay with them taking a wide open three.) That is on Howland green lighting them for those shots. On the missed lay ups, that is on the Wears.
Then again, maybe that is on Howland. Coach Montgomery was willing to go deep to Bak Bak in the first half. Although the Wears and Smith were totally gassed, CBH would not go to Brendan Lane. Bak Bak and Lane are not nearly as good as the players in front of them. But there are spots (foul trouble, some minutes in the first half) when they should play. So maybe the missed layups were in part because they were tired.
I took the quotes about the missed shots as meaning we got bad bounces.
It would have been different if he had criticized players for taking the shots.
I’m not a Howler, but I do feel a bit sorry for him. He was counting on Smith to care enough to get in shape. And can anyone imagine where we’d be if Smith had come back to school in better shape than he was in the spring instead of in worse shape? How many players get worse from their freshman to sophomore years?
And he was counting on players not choking their free throws. It seems like the team regressed on that, too.
I agree with the moderators on all of their criticisms of Howland. But damn, he’s sure been unlucky too.
by Seth Chandler on Feb 12, 2012 10:02 AM PST up reply actions
NIT? Really? Embarassing.....
Nothing less than the NCAA tourney is acceptable for UCLA. Turn down the invites (if we get one).
Time for CBH to be assessed and likely replaced. DG has to go first and this is what alumni/boosters should be focused on.
Its not the players. They may not fit the system but they have talent. CBH recruitment doesnt fit the system he plays.
Now known as "Tazizona"
I am probably alone in this take but
I think the players should decide on the NIT. I understand the optics are bad but they have worked hard all year and if they want to keep playing they should. That is my take.
The problems this year is not on these kids. They are doing their best. Again, this is not a Bruins Nation take, just my own opinion that I realize is probably the minority.
I think you make a really good point DC
I personally think UCLA has no business being in the NIT. However, as BlueMe made the point in comment thread last night we don’t have the standing right now to think of ourselves as an elite program. Honestly I am not sure where I fall on this. The bottom line is that it is unaccpetable that we are in this situation for the 2nd time in 3 years and its another datapoint on why we need regime change at UCLA AD.
by Nestor on Feb 12, 2012 7:58 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
+1 depending
I like the idea of the players deciding. After all, they are the ones juggling their schedules and “strapping it on” for real.
However, if they choose to go, it has to be for the right reasons- the seniors aren’t ready to say goodbye to UCLA basketball, the players want more time to be on the court with their teammates, etc.
It can’t be because they are proud to make the NIT, they are in the postseason, etc. The last thing this program needs is tweets bragging about making the NIT.
I don’t know how you can figure out the motivation for a “yes” vote. But if it is for the right reasons, then I agree that letting the players decide makes sense.
By the way, I would not give Howland a vote.
FWIW: North Carolina has gone twice in the last 10 years
in 2002-03 which they followed with a NC two years later and in 2009-10 one year after winning the NC in 2008-09. I don’t know if their fans hate the fact that they would stoop to such lows, but they have gone.
I would rather go to the NIT than to not even be invited. I remember in Lavin’s last year on of the big ‘last straws’ (after all there were many) was the fact that having missed the tournament he did not even get the team into the NIT.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
+1
Like Nestor, I don’t think we have any business in the NIT, CBI, or whatever. I hope that the seniors want one last chance to play with their guys and don the four letters. As much as I hope that is the case, I personally I’m always in favor of them going to the NiT or Emerald Bowl etc.. but for different reasons whether it be football or basketball. I think the extra practice time is pretty big.
Especially with somebody like Josh, if your still practicing and playing he will be sure to continue to get in better shape which can only help for next year. And although slightly OT, in football coaches always talk about those 15 extra practices as being huge for development and just becoming a better football player. I have to imagine the players still practicing and being the in the gym can only benefit them
by themichael21 on Feb 12, 2012 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
In my opinion
If the NIT asks the Bruins to pay, they should go without hesitation. I thought the NIT run in the 80’s was fun to watch. Too much arrogance would be displayed in this era if we said no. Look at UNC, they were an NIT Team in ’10.
It's always nice to be playing...
…for 69th place. LOL.
by Bellerophon on Feb 12, 2012 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
You guys are taking crazy pills again
Even SUC made the NCAA tourney last year! If we can’t field a squad that can crack the top 68 in the country, why would we “reward” failure with a trip to the NIT? The NIT is for teams like Washington State to be placated with a few extra games after a tough season in which they may have exceeded expectations . . . it should never be considered by a team that would only accept the bid as a last resort in a horrendous season. NO WAY
I dont know why, it wasn't my intention today
but I feel like an NIT apologist. I can see the points about the NIT being beneath us, but I offer that no other school in the country would turn down an NIT bid, including UNC, Duke, or UK. Why should we? If one really believes NIT teams (conference regular season champs who lose in conf. tourneys and teams who lost out on the NCAA bubble) are unwatchable or that the NIT champ is really the 69th best team that surprises me. I will repeat the same thing I did when folks were talking about not watching the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl… What else are you going to watch if we play in an NIT game? Andy Griffith reruns? I am in agreement that the last four years have been a disaster and should be enough for a coaching change but most likely will not be. By the way, this is such a great site. Well run, informative, and quite humorous at times as well.
What else would I watch?
If we were in an NCAA game – or if we had a team striving toward Coach’s standards of teamwork and maximum effort – I’d hang out with my kid, DVR the game, and miss sleep to watch it.
Anthing in the NIT – or pretty much any late game this season (especially as I’m 2 hours ahead of Pacific time) – Dreamland wins.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
I was waffling on the issue of accepting an NIT invitation (assuming we get one) until I read Charnaw's post.
I agree with Charnaw 100%. The object of the basketball season is to win your conference, then win the NCAA championship. It’s not to suck in your conference, and then play in a tournament whose top seed is number 69 in the nation.
Remember long ago there were two games after the final four? The semi-finals determined who would play for the championship, and that game was preceded by a game for third place. The NFL also had a “Playoff Bowl” between the second place teams in the Eastern and Western Divisions, but that disappeared.
There is talk of a playoff system to replace the BSC boondoggle, but there is no talk of having the losing teams keep playing in a loser’s bracket to see who should be the real third place team. Basically, there is no interest in a “Loser’s Bowl.”
I am as hard core as anyone else, but I don’t care if we win the NIT, and if I don’t care if we win that tournament, then I doubly don’t care if we play in it. We aren’t the 69th best team in the country anyway. (One exception – if we won the NCAA and then were invited to the NIT and won that. Wyoming, I think, is the only team to have won the NCAA and the NIT in the same year.)
But this team? Nope. No NIT.
Honestly
I’d rather have a third place game precede the Super Bowl than the trash that currently comes before it. More time to kick back, expand our waistlines, and chill with friends and family. I saw an article about how the day after the Super Bowl – Hangover Monday – should be a national holiday. It made some very convincing points. We sure as hell do not live up to our billing as the most productive per capita workforce in the world on that particular day, I’ll tell you that much for sure.
No, No, 1000 times No to the NIT
(I don’t what what Kentucky, UNC, Duke, or Kansas do. We have, tongue in cheek, more titles). Laughable? Sure. But still true. Go Bruins!
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins! Go Lakers! Go Dodgers! Go Angels!
Ben Howland empties my passion bucket for UCLA Basketball, and I resent it.
opps... care. I don't care what KY et al do.
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins! Go Lakers! Go Dodgers! Go Angels!
Ben Howland empties my passion bucket for UCLA Basketball, and I resent it.
We saw the loss coming
Cal is a veteran team, so what can you say about the loss? What we should be more concerned about are the easy losses to Oregon State, Stanford, and UW.
Get rid of Adidas and switch to Nike
Screw Dan Gurrerror
by Bruin1396 on Feb 12, 2012 8:40 AM PST via mobile reply actions
Yeah, but this is a very mediocre Cal team...
…which is sadly the best team in an extremely pathetic Pac-12. The fact that they dominated us, an allegedly “name-brand elite” program with a “top-tier” coach is disturbing.
But yes, the Cal loss would be a blip on the radar if we had played strong throughout the season and closed out those wins.
by Bellerophon on Feb 12, 2012 10:26 AM PST up reply actions
Like the post DC
However, UCLA doesn’t deserve to be in the NIT. Let alone who wants to be in the NIT or even watch it? Its a tournament for losers, it should be the NCAA tournament or nothing for UCLA.
by Trojanswearskirts on Feb 12, 2012 8:41 AM PST reply actions
I would agree but
it smacks of the kind of hubris we hate in USC.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Yep
I also find it humorous all the posts about “NCAA tournament or nothing” as if being a 13th seed in a 69 team tournament is so much better than the NIT.
As far as I’m concerned, this season, and the last 3 preceding it, have been unacceptable and completely disappointing. Play the remaining games with pride and humility, then focus on the future with new leadership.
Being the play-in game in the NCAA Tournament > Being the NIT Champ
Just as being a Commissioned Officer beats being the most senior level non-commissioned officer.
Just as being in the back seat of First Class beats being in the First Chair of Coach Class.
Just as being admitted as the Last Freshman Accepted to UCLA is better than being the #1 Student at Cal State YouNameIt.
Anywhere in the tournament means you have a shot at getting to the Final Four.
I don’t understand why this is so hard to understand.
If our play doesn’t earn a spot in the NCAA Tourney… get ready for next season.
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins! Go Lakers! Go Dodgers! Go Angels!
Ben Howland empties my passion bucket for UCLA Basketball, and I resent it.
Umm, okay
Here’s a simple formula easy to understand:
Last 4 teams in the NCAA tournament = Crappy teams that have no business vying for a national title and have no realistic shot and don’t deserve one.
First 4 teams out of the NCAA tournament = Crappy teams that have no business vying for a national title and have no shot and don’t deserve one.
I don’t see much of a difference there, do you?
VCU
was one of the last four in. It was pretty amazing last year and made it to the Final Four.
Should VCU really have been one of the last 4 in?
Isn’t there a big difference from a VCU slotted as a 12 seed than a UCLA?
Just as being a Commissioned Officer beats being the most senior level non-commissioned officer.
Veteran sergeants and petty officers are the absolute backbone of the United States Armed Forces. 22-year-old second lieutenants and ensigns are a dime a dozen, and can only do their jobs because they are able to rely on dedicated, highly professional, career non-commissioned officers — men and women who take great pride in being non-commissioned officers, and have no interest in becoming commissioned officers, thank you very much.
CGB: The Strangest Blog
goddamn man
Losing to Cal has become a UCLA tradition. I’m sorry Howlers, you don’t have a leg to Howl on. Howland is not a winner. He couldn’t win a NC with 2 NBA all stars on his team, he won’t win one without any viable NBA material on his team. This is a disgrace. His tenure must be ended. We need a new coach.
by Strathmore&Gayley on Feb 12, 2012 10:14 AM PST reply actions
In hindsight...
…when you look at the rosters of those UCLA Final Four squads and the teams they lost to, you really have to wonder why we didn’t get at least one title in three tries.
by Bellerophon on Feb 12, 2012 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
Joakim Noah and Al Horford vs. Ryan Hollins/ Lorenzo Mata and Luc
also didn’t help. But I would trade Ben for Billy Donovan in a heart beat
by themichael21 on Feb 12, 2012 11:02 AM PST up reply actions
I'm not sure
Those Florida teams were rolling over everybody, but I agree Howland should have come away with at least one title out of three trips to the final four.
Article on Bleacher Report
Talking about mediocrity on UCLA’s team this year. Honestly, I know its been discussed on this site but Ben should lose his job when you look at the talented number of guys who have left our team and are now thriving at other programs. Ben just does not connect with the players and he refuses to budge an inch.
More opinions
#1. We need to rep0lace, retire, out-source, fire our AD – first in a series of changes.
#2. The new, qualified AD must look for and hire a new basketball coach and spend the $ to get a good one-no more hiring on the cheap.
#3. run an off-season strength and conditioning program designed to get everyone in shape.
#4. If invited go to the NIT-extra practice, more exposure as compared to not going, ans remember due to the 38 automatic qualifiers the winner of the NIT is not really only the 69th ranked team in America.
#5. Scout the Club and Summer AAU teams-we have a qualified coach to handle this and should do so.
Lot of talk about letting go of Howland
I agree it looks like his time to go, I’m sure there is a thread about this that was already written about but who would people like to see replace him?
I know Mark Few gets thrown around a bit but I thought he wasn’t interested?
As mentioned before...
…we need to focus on getting rid of Chianti Dan before discussing Howland’s replacement. The reasons were laid out here.
No NIT
We need to finish up regular season with the “it is what it is” attitude, play our 1 or 2 games in the PAC 12 tourney and close up shop. Howland has to realize he needs an offense that is very much a quick passing, motion offense. He also has to learn to be more flexible and adjust or his future with UCLA is not going to happen. Our focus right now is all about adding 2 particular recruits. Howland’s future is safe for now as long as we are all drinking Chianti.
I know recruits are important
But a great coach at a stellar program should not have to depend on the whims of a17 year old to decide to play for one year before bolting to the NBA. I mean its riddiculous that a millionaire coach like Ben has to worry about whether some kid will play for him.
How about learning to coach with the talent you have? Don’t play favorites? Don’t be so stubborn that a veritable All American team of transfers forms because of you? Maybe give Josh Smith a call over the summer to see if he actually touched a basketball?
I am so sick of people wringing their hands over landing shabazz muhammad, good lord its one player we are talking about! I’m sure he is great, I’m sure he will be a top NBA pick a year from now. But do you think Kentucky will be any less talented if they don’t land him? Same with Duke? Kansas?
We can get Shabazz, maybe Parker
Go to the Elite Eight with no realistic chance of winning it all while whitewashing the real reasons for our failure, and be subjected to another 3-4 years of this gross mismanagement because of sheer talent for one year. That’s what I fear.
I think we can land him
But my point is that I think it speaks volumes about Howlands coaching that so much weight is given to whether Shabazz signs with UCLA. As if he is make or break for Ben. This team should be good year in and year out. UNC missed the tournament a couple years ago because they were coming off a NC and lost almost every starter to the NBA. Last time I checked we haven’t won a NC so Ben does not have that as an excuse.
Coaches get it done with far less than what Ben has to work with, and this is in arguably the worst conference in the country.
Shabazz
It’ about going out and getting talented players with a strong work ethic. High character players that have quickness and skill at their position. Of course Shabazz is important to get for many reasons. UCLA should always be in the position to go after the top players in the country. It’s not make it or break it with one player or some ridiculous “expert” analysis of a recruiting class as we have seen with the Bobo/Lee/Anderson/Holiday class….Ultimately, whether we have the top 4 players in the U.S. or not it comes down to utilizing what you have to give you the best chance at success. I saw Lorenzo Mata at the Cal game yesterday and he is an example of a guy that played to his strenghs and was very successsful. Wish we had a boatload of Lorenzos…………
The successful Howland...
….had the right blend of super-elite talent that left for the NBA early (KL, RW), solid talent that left for the NBA early (although not super early) (JF, AA, LRMAM), and solid role players that were at UCLA until graduation (JS, LMR, AA2, JK, MR).
That formula has been abandoned, or so it seems.
You mean, like, he just said eff it...
that formula is pretty good, but I’ll try to invent a new one?
Of course, that assumes he recognized he was working with a formula.
By the way, doesn’t DC fit in there somewhere.
(if this a copy, forgive…I just had a glitch posting. BN seemed to freeze after I hit the ‘post’ button)
He didn't say eff it
He said “crap, I can’t even win with KL, RW, LRMAM, DC”, guys who work hard and play tough defense. “I’d better go and get me some hot shot blue chips who can score so I can keep up with the Floridas and Memphis of the world”. Except he went after those guys (class of 2008) and tried to turn them into Ben Ballers. Except for Malcom Lee, they were as far from Ben Ball as Lavin was from basketball.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Ben Howland is at a cross-roads in his career, and with his personal philosophy.
I feel for the man. Seriously.
Ben rose through the coaching ranks in one era.
But the landscape of NCAA Men’s Basketball has forever changed (and not for the better). Does Ben have the chest to adjust with the times? His collegues do (Coach K, Calipari, Williams, Self, Izzo, Patino). Those men may bemoan and lament the one-and-done world. They struggle with the abrupt changes with the times. Yet, to a man, they have the chest that says “I’m gonna win, no matter what I gotta do” (not cheating). Ben is committed to Ben Style Ball. There’s nothing anybody can do about that, except Ben.
We are still UCLA. We’ve got to keep it moving and get competitive now. If between now, and the crowning of the next NCAA Champion, Ben Howland gives some kind of pubic indication that he’s committed to updating his own style, his approach, his game, in the interest of UCLA… i’d stick with him another season. But if he thinks that he’s fine – it’s the players that must adjust to him… then… so long, Chief.
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins! Go Lakers! Go Dodgers! Go Angels!
Ben Howland empties my passion bucket for UCLA Basketball, and I resent it.
Are we living in upside down world?
Unless you’re playing for an NCAA championship, your season should be over at the end of the regular year, including the Pac 12 tournament, which gives Howland his second shot at the apple.
No later than at the end of the regular season, it’s accountability time. Howland recruits the players. He hires the assistants. He coaches the players. He should be able to form a cohesive hard-working team with the players he recruits and the coaches on his staff.
Stover seems like the kind of kid who used to thrive under BenBall. He rarely plays.
Josh Smith seems like the type of lazy, entitled, out of condition player Howland would’ve rejected when he was an effective coach. Yet he is the centerpiece of Howland’s team. If he’s got some personal issues to deal with, Howland must remove him from the team to deal with those issues. He should not own one of our precious scholarships if he’s not willing/able to commit to his team/coach/fellow players.
So has it really come down to whether we should be happy to take an NIT bid? I don’t want any part of what I’m hearing or seeing now. We deserve better.
We SHOULD play in the NIT or CBI!
Just think how cool it would be to get more home games in the postseason! You know, at the awesome Sports Arena!
Cal is way better than us.
What a sobering thought. A mediocre team in a shitty league is better than us. There’s no question now, we can let go of the pipedream of going to the tourney via any avenue.
CBH goes with a a three guard line-up, and at least two osf them suck badly or are not positioned correctly, plus the two Wears, who are should be role players on an elite team. Of course this is losing propostion.
That mirage of a good team never existed. Nelson was nuts ( recent troubles probably due to the introduction of the Wears into the lilneup IMO), and Smith disappointed. CBH new these things—didn’t say anything candidly until recently.
Howlandnista's are getting like a broken record.
I find the dedication many UCLA fans have to Ben Howland almost embarassing. WHen you look at Ben’s record other than the three Final 4’s it is LESS than Lavinesque.
UCLA has had three losing seasons since 1949, Ben Howland is responsible for two of them. The other seasons of second or first round NCAA losses of teams that were slightly above average were nothing to write home about. One has to wonder how much longer he can ride those three FInal 4’s?
ALso, I get tired of hearing how many guys Ben has “gotten to the NBA.” While that is nice, all that tells me is that he underachieved at UCLA when he had them. Look at the Kevin Love team. He had two NBA all stars, Luc who is an NBA starter, Collison who is close to being an NBA all star. Only Ben could keep the Kevin Love team from a national title. As for the other two FInal 4’s, yes Florida was better than UCLA but a great coach would have made those games at least competitive. Les us not forget the second time that an Oregon team that we were clearly better than took them to the final minute in the elite 8.
The game Saturday was the epitome of what is wrong with Ben Ball. Ben is in love with guys who he thinks can play his defense that can’t shoot the ball. Was he blind to think Tyler Lamb was better than Alan Crabbe? Why is Deonte Burton playing at Nevada when UCLA was in such desperate need of a point guard? Burton is headed for the NBA and we still have no point guard.
It is easy to say all of those kids who left had “bad attitudes.” or were “cancers.” Tell me, why aren’t they cancers at their new schools? When I look at Mike Moser’s numbers it makes me sick. He WAS the player to replace Luc and Ben let him get away.
No other UCLA coach saince Wooden has gotten the kind of slack that Bruin fans have given Ben. Had Jim Harrick, or Steve Lavin, had ONE season like the one tweo years ago, or this one for that matter, the same fans would be demanding their heads.
I am all for giving Ben one more season to right this with a new arena and if he can land a couple more big recruits. That said, he is on a very short rope in my book.
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.
