10-0

by Nestor on Sep 20, 2005 5:44 AM PDT in Football

We are no 25! And we are celebrating like we are in the top-10. Apparently Dorrell is still celebrating Saturday's win over the hapless Sooners, which got us into the top-25 for the first time in more than three years. Here is Dohn on the euphoria over a no. 25 ranking in Westwood:

UCLA is basking in the glow of Saturday's 41-24 whipping of then-No. 21 Oklahoma, and the euphoria hasn't fully subsided from the Bruins' biggest win in five years.

UCLA is 3-0 for the first time since 2001, when the Bruins opened with six straight wins, and third-year coach Karl Dorrell said everyone within the program is ready for more.

"It feels great," Dorrell said during his Monday news conference. "I know our players are geeked about it, and we've worked hard to get to this point. Now that we've got the door open, we want to get through the door."

The win against the Sooners catapulted UCLA into the Associated Press Top 25 for the first time since late in the 2002 season, and now the task is staying there. The Bruins, who are No. 25, lost the past six times they played as a ranked team.

You'd think for a program, which has a tradition of being a perennial Rose Bowl contender, garnered tons of top-10 finishes, huge bowl wins, the coaching staff would be a little more composed and low key about Saturday's win over a pathetic opponent. No instead they are celebrating like those clueless teenagers who used to rush the court after every single one of Steve Lavin's "big win," totally losing perspective on the overall status of the program.

Again, we are encouraged by the way we have started 3-0 this season, but then again we were also encouraged back in 01 when we started 6-0, before pissing the entire season away reading our gaudy (Bill Plaschke's idiotic) press clips. So coaches ... PLEASE FOCUS on Washington, and think about how you are going to use that game as set up/preparation for the first real challenge of the season, coming via Tedford's bunch the following week.

Because right now it is pretty obvious from the talent in our team and our cream puff schedule there should be no reasonable excuse for not being 10-0 going into the SC game. And it looks like Dorrell's supporters (i.e. former Bruin QB/TV "analyst") like Matt Stevens agree with those expectations of going 10-0 (emphasis mine):

"During the season, it really adds a lot of excitement when both teams are good," said Matt Stevens, the former Bruins quarterback (1983-86) from Fountain Valley who is a member of UCLA's radio broadcast team. "Now all over town, Bruins are calling Trojans and telling them we can hardly wait until Dec. 3. I've already made all those phone calls this morning, as a matter of fact.

"I'm just telling my USC friends, 'I hope you're still undefeated by then, because we will be.'"

[...]

In Westwood, especially, they can hardly contain their joy this week after enduring the first two difficult years of the Karl Dorrell era. To be 3-0 now and coming off that poll-rattling, 41-24 victory against Oklahoma makes them think they might actually run the table the rest of the way, or at least until that Dec. 3 match up with No.1 USC.

"I think we can do it," Stevens said. "Have you seen our schedule? It's the easiest we've had in years."

Like I said above lets see it happen for real. We have heard this talk before, but our expectations are to see actual results, before we can deduce there has been discernable progress under the current 15-13 coach who is still 1-10 against team with winning records. Before the season started we expected 9 regular season wins, but now that the opponents on our schedule are turning out to be even more pathetic than we expected them to be, we can now reasonably expect this UCLA team to go 10-0.

In other (some unfortunate) news Lonnie White reports Junior is officially out for the season

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

You've got to be kidding...

So what is it now boys - "Win 10 or you're out again?" Or if SC takes an unexpected loss before December, is it "Win 11 or go straight to heaven?" And if we end up in the Rose Bowl, is it "Win it all or take the fall?"

Sheesh.

by BlueBear on Sep 20, 2005 8:45 AM PDT reply actions

All the pieces are there ...

for this coach staff to produce a money season. And money season entails a double digit winning season. Given the talent on this team, and our easy schedule it is not unreasonable expect a 10 win regular season.

by Nestor on Sep 20, 2005 9:04 AM PDT reply actions

Think about what you're saying...

The reason you're raising expectations is because the team is performing better than initially expected. Won't you come out and say the reason the team is performing better than you expected is because the coaching staff is performing better than you expected?

To ascribe it all to great "talent" somehow accomplishing things in a vacuum is more than a little disingenuous. Truth be told, our talent (defined, I guess, as just great athletes who know how to play great football) is very good in some key positions, but in others (QB, DL, WR) it's middling at best.

In terms of the schedule, Cal and ASU were both projected ahead of us in conference, and are ranked ahead of us now. We get them both at home, but football (at times) is a near-run thing. To say, suddenly, that our schedule is "easy" isn't quite accurate; I'd say that given the teams we have to play, we have the best odds for success.

I agree we have a lot more to prove, and that 10 wins is possible. But to me raising expectations is more a matter of excitement over what suddenly appears possible, not an arbitrary bar that you seem to raise each time we win a game. Going into this season, looking at the team I thought we'd win 8-9 games and compete well in every game, regardless whether it was a win or loss. If we fell short of that, I'd question whether CKD was the right fit. All I'll say at this point is: so far, so good.

by BlueBear on Sep 20, 2005 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions

Expectations ...

For a program of our caliber, there is nothing unreasonable about slightly upgrading the pre-season expectations of winning 9 regular seasons to 10 wins. Nothing unreasonable considering how inept the Sooners and Stanford football program has turned out to be this season, which we expected to be "tough outs" (apologies to Steve Lavin). And, there is nothing unreasonable about expecting this team to go undefeated at home. Cal is good program but they are coming in with backup QB, who is still getting used to Tedford, and have not been overly impressive playing against horrible teams. ASU has a great offense, but that is about it. And considering how we had that same team on the ropes last season at their stadium, there is nothing unreasonable about expecting a W in that game on our home turf.

And, we are not getting what you mean by we are short on talent at QB, DL, and WR. We are short on talent at QB having high school AAs like DO and BO at our disposal? Come on. And as for our talent on DL, scroll down and read some of the roundups and you will find our own DC Larry Kerr saying how deep we are at DL with talents compared to other season. And kids like Everett, Breazell, Moya led by an ALL WORLD SUPERSTAR like Marcedes Lewis are not chopped liver. We probably have the second most talented receiver corps (figuring in the TEs) in the West, so this whole notion about not having talent WR is not going to wash either.

And yes ... as O wrote below, we have given coaching staff praise for have a better showing than expected in our first three games. We are 3-0, comfortably blowing out 3 horrible teams. That is great. Now it is up to the coaching staff to deliver upon the encouraging signs of this early season, optimize the talent by making a legitimate BCS run producing a double digit winning (regular) season. It is not much an upgrade at all from our pre-season expectation of 9 regular win season. This is UCFreakingLA, one of the most elite universities in the nation with a tradition in athletics which is unparalleled, and our football tradition also stands on its own as one of the top-20 programs of all time. And as proud alums of a school sporting those magical four letters, we just happened to have high expectations from our alma mater's hallmark sports program. If that doesn't suit you well ... tough. GO BRUINS.

by Nestor on Sep 20, 2005 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions

think about what you're saying

"The reason you're raising expectations is because the team is performing better than initially expected."

Yes, everyone is doing this, regardless of their position on Karl Dorrell before the season.

"Won't you come out and say the reason the team is performing better than you expected is because the coaching staff is performing better than you expected?"

I have stated this repeatedly.

"In terms of the schedule, Cal and ASU were both projected ahead of us in conference, and are ranked ahead of us now. We get them both at home, but football (at times) is a near-run thing. To say, suddenly, that our schedule is "easy" isn't quite accurate; I'd say that given the teams we have to play, we have the best odds for success."

You just denied the schedule was easy and then admitted that it was easy.

"I agree we have a lot more to prove, and that 10 wins is possible. But to me raising expectations is more a matter of excitement over what suddenly appears possible, not an arbitrary bar that you seem to raise each time we win a game."

You say that it is possible, but you call it an arbitrary bar.

You're not making any sense.

by Odysseus on Sep 20, 2005 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions

All I'm saying...

I appreciate your point of view and the time you put into this site - that's why I'm here, visiting & commenting (one of the few, it would appear.) But after a good win I suppose I want to enjoy the moment and not dwell in the gloom of the past. As Winston Churchill once said, "To celebrate success along the way is to refresh the spirit."

BTW, you know as well as I that to say Bob Stoops-coached OU is "horrible" is plain wrong. Watch them give the 'Horns all they can handle. After all, don't they have some of the best "talent" in the country?

But visiting here is my choice. This is your site and your POV, and I don't have to like it -- or read it. So I guess I won't for a few days now.

by BlueBear on Sep 20, 2005 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions

don't take it personally

I just don't understand your reasoning, and this is why I am giving you a hard time. From my perspective, OU is not "horrible," although they're definitely not good.

by Odysseus on Sep 20, 2005 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions

Stoops/Horns

"BTW, you know as well as I that to say Bob Stoops-coached OU is "horrible" is plain wrong. Watch them give the 'Horns all they can handle. After all, don't they have some of the best "talent" in the country?"

yes, and I am sure after the game if the Sooners lose, their fans will not be jumping in joy in celebrating their true moral victory. They will think about how they can win 10 games the following season.

We appreciate the vist on BN. And please come back and engage lot more. But we are not being gloomy. In fact we are fired about the prospects of having finally having a good season. But we are also realistic and pragmatic enough to know we have beaten up so far, and what UCLA really needs to do that it is ready to "rejoin" the elite powers of national football. When that moment arrives, Bruin Nation will be the first one to celebrate the euphoria.

by Nestor on Sep 20, 2005 2:26 PM PDT reply actions

This team isn't going undefeated into the USC game

The Bruins will lose at least once or twice before the game against USC. Maybe they have the talent to run the table until December 3, but I really doubt they will.

by Bruin Roar on Sep 20, 2005 3:24 PM PDT reply actions

Perhaps not

I don't see realistically considering our fine (Donahue) tradition of underachieving and choking winning next 7 straight games, but I don't think it is way too unreasonable for expecting this team to go 10-0 given the talent apparent on our roster. I do have to agree with O in that OU was "not horrible." They were not a good team but not a horrible one either.

by bluestreet on Sep 20, 2005 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions