More Neu Talk

by Nestor on Jan 17, 2007 10:17 AM PST in Football

Last Friday's post on Neu (based on an article in the Washington Post) generated a spirited discussion in the Bruins Nation. Well we have had some new developments since that last post. Ravens lost to the Colts in the playoffs. And thereafter Coach Billick promoted Neu from Quarterbacks Coach to Raven's offensive coordinator. Here were Billick's reasons to promote Neu to an NFL OC position:

"Rick's abilities are well-documented. He's a very established coach," Billick said. "He's got a great rapport with the players, he's very creative, and he's developed a great relationship with Steve and Kyle."

He worked well with Billick, too.

"Rick and I were able to communicate very readily with one another. It's a great working relationship," Billick said. "He deserves that mantle, and I have no doubt it can be a platform for Rick at some point to be a head coach again at some point."

Gee that sounds like a totally different scenario than some NFL "yes man" who is just there for the ride.

Anyways there also this article in the Trojan Times by Bill Dwyre, in which he writes how Neu is patiently waiting for his next opportunity while keeping in touch with his Bruin roots:

When the Ravens hired him in 2005, he was grateful and challenged. He remains so today.

But he also can't help but keep an eye on his roots. After UCLA stunned USC, he was quick to call his friend Karl Dorrell, with whom he played and coached, and congratulate him both on the win and on showing some fire along the sidelines.

And when the Arizona State job opened, it prompted a thought, even though Neuheisel wasn't applying. He called Pac-10 Commissioner Tom Hansen and asked, were he ever to get another shot in the conference, would he be welcome? He said Hansen said yes.

One of Neuheisel's best coaching memories is of a game at Washington against a first-year USC coach named Pete Carroll.

"We won, and I head out toward the middle of the field and I see Pete sprinting my way," Neuheisel said. "He shakes my hand, looks me right in the eye and says, 'We'll be back.' I remember going into the tunnel and thinking, 'OK, it's on.'

"The next year, he's really got it going and USC wins. I run out to the middle of the field, grab his hand, shake it and say, 'We'll be back.' You should have seen his big grin."

Expect more of those meetings in the years ahead.

I thought the note in that excerpt concerning whether or not Pac-10 officials have blackballed Neu was pretty interesting.

Anyways, once again this post is not an endorsement of Neu's possible return to Westwood as the next head football coach (should Dorrell fail to win the Pac in 07). However, I think it is worth to keep track of these stories. I think it is still debatable (with merits to both sides) on whether not Neu would turn out to be a good coach for Bruin football.

Dorrell and Toledo are prime examples how UCLA can put up 10 win seasons, pull out wins over Southern Cal (don't forget how KD should really be 2-2 against Pom Pom considering he mismanaged the game leading to that much celebrated moral victory two years ago) despite having a mediocre head coach. There is no question in my mind Neu is a better coach than KD. And I do think if he comes to UCLA he will get to work with one of the cleanest athletic departments in the country, which will ensure he is ensuring with all rules and regulations. He can be a recruiting juggernaut in South Land with his charisma, NFL background.

The question for me here is whether he has learned his lessons from his previous mistakes at Washington and at Colorado when he and his staff followed a recruiting philosophy based on going after the big names, instead of tending to fill the needs for the team (read gaping holes in Huskies and Buffaloes lines)? I am not sure yet. But I do know I am sick and tired of the mindset and excuses coming from the regime led by the current mediocre head coach (where 6 loss seasons are hailed as some kind of sign of progress).

In any event, we have poll up on BN. It should be interesting to see how we as a community we feel about having Neu back as the HC and reestablish his legacy by having a great career in Westwood. FWIW I am still voting in the category of "unsure."

GO BRUINS.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Much more than "unsure" about Neu...

Took over two prominent programs and started strong and then tapered off. Also, check out his bowl record with Washington. Yes, a Rose Bowl win, but two Holiday Bowl losses and a Sun Bowl loss, making him 1-3 in bowls with Washington. That, coupled with the past mistakes, makes me say, thanks but no thanks.

Fine to be sick and tired of the current mindset, but a possible probation with Rick puts him very low on the list of possible candidates I would like to see at UCLA.

And while our AD is very clean, given their handling of everything from the Pauley remodel, to the hiring of football coaches to the very basic marketing of our outstanding product, I simply don't trust them to be overseers for any possible transgressions by Rick, as I don't think they can do a competent job of doing so.

From Wikipedia:
Record
Year Team Overall Conference Standing Bowl Game Bowl Opponent Outcome Rank#
Colorado (Big Eight) (1995)
1995 Colorado 10-2 5-2 T-2nd Cotton Bowl #12 Oregon W, 38-6 #4
Colorado (Big 12) (1996 -- 1998)
1996 Colorado 10-2 7-1 2nd Holiday Bowl #13 Washington W, 33-21 #8
1997 Colorado 5-6 3-5 T-4th
1998 Colorado 8-4 4-4 4th Aloha Bowl #21 Oregon W, 51-43
At Colorado: 33-14 19-12
Washington (Pacific 10) (1999 -- 2002)
1999 Washington 7-5 6-2 2nd Holiday Bowl #7 Kansas State L, 24-20
2000 Washington 11-1 7-1 T-1st Rose Bowl #14 Purdue W, 34-24 #3
2001 Washington 8-4 6-2 T-2nd Holiday Bowl #9 Texas L, 47-43 #19
2002 Washington 7-6 4-4 T-4th Sun Bowl Purdue L, 34-24
At Washington: 33-16 23-9
Career: 66-30
National Championship Conference Title
†Indicates BCS bowl game. #Rankings from final Coaches Poll of the season.

by Free the 16 on Jan 17, 2007 11:32 AM PST reply actions

No to Neu

Seems to me, the only way Rick would be competitive with our crosstown rivals would be with his charm, giving Pete a run for his money. Only thing is, though, I don't think his is as genuine as (I am afraid to say) Pete's. What we want/need is a Howland for the football team. What does that mean? Someone who has proven himself time and time again turning around programs. Going from 6-7 first year, 8-5 the next year to 10-2 the following and then winning it all and keeping the team at that level from then on out. Rick did the opposite. I think we could find an up-and-comer who would jump at the chance to coach at UCLA and accept the pay that went along with the job. After a few years, you give that person more salary if warrented. Previous Head Coaching experience and ability to turn around programs a MUST...Also must be clean as a whistle (ability to keep players and himself on the straight and narrow). Also, I am not sure if many are aware, but UCLA has higher standards for the academics of its student athletes than I think even Cal does. I forget the code number/rule but UCLA doesn't allow these exceptions, making recruiting sometimes tougher than say, USC.

by smayhew on Jan 18, 2007 11:16 AM PST up reply actions

if getting neuheisel meant we get rid of dorrell

than i'm all for him. . i wouldn't have minded hiring rick as a backup plan until i read he's still friends with dorrell. no friend of dorrell is allowed to coach ucla. that's my final answer.

today on cold pizza skip bayless was making fun of the raiders for considering hiring the san diego chargers wide receivers coach to be their head coach. skip was yelling that his only experience has been to be a position coach in the nfl for five years, a wide receivers position coach. you can't hire a guy who has only been a wide receivers coach to be a head coach he was screaming. i was saying tell me about it.

by babyblue98 on Jan 17, 2007 12:21 PM PST reply actions

Neuheisel

I agree with Nestor on the concerns about RN. If his attitude remains "can't be touched" as in the violations at CU and UW, then no go. However, I believe that could be sorted with a few phone calls and maybe an interview. RN is a good coach, but not perfect. He would certainly spruce up Westwood and be able to offset PC's charm with his own. He would also win a hxxl of a lot more games than you-know-who. I mean it is not as if PC has not be transgressing on his own watch at SC. The only difference is at SC they know the football program will cause problems and they hire the lawyers ahead of time and manage it well (whatever happened to the Reggie Bush investigation?)....

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Jan 17, 2007 12:32 PM PST reply actions

I'm still in favor of Rick

I see all the negative comments, but there do not seem to be too many about his actual coaching. Rather, it appears to be about his recruiting (a big deal, obviously) and his "baggage."

I vote for a coach. Someone who knows how to coach football. Someone who can put the team in a position to win, and then will go for the jugular every time. There ought to be enough oversight around him to make sure he stays on the straight and narrow. And with his charisma, he ought to be able to convince some good kids (both in terms of ability and character) to come to Westwood.

Hence, I vote thumbs up on Rick. I guess this post is all DG was waiting for. KD is out and RN is in.

by Fox 71 on Jan 17, 2007 12:46 PM PST up reply actions

stay away from Neuheisal

Yes, I know he was the beloved "golden boy" who we let get away, but if I were an AD, I wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole. He pretty much took Colorado and Washington, both top programs when he assumed the reins, and drove them into the ground in a Lavinesque manner. Yes, I'd love to get rid of Dorrell yesterday, but Neuheisal is NOT the answer.

by SactoBruin on Jan 17, 2007 12:48 PM PST reply actions

Thanks Sacto

For saying what I was trying to say in my post so succinctly. Lavinesque is a very good way to put it.

by Free the 16 on Jan 17, 2007 1:30 PM PST up reply actions

New Aspect of the Rivalry

I totally agree with you SactoBruin. Neuheisal is not the answer. He's just a different kind of problem.

Tho if Neuheisel did become the UCLA head coach, it would add a new dimension to our crosstown rivalry with USC. We could start a pool to see whose head coach would be the first to get sanctioned for recruiting violations!

by insomniacslounge on Jan 17, 2007 2:19 PM PST up reply actions

I would rather

pick someone with current HC experience, a la Howland, someone with an uninterrupted resume of over 5 years of college HC experience, preferably with different schools, and successful at each place.

Whether we can get that coach for a reasonable price is another matter, knowing this day and age when poaching football coaches has become somewhat of a bidding war.

by stevenucla on Jan 17, 2007 2:16 PM PST reply actions

It's the money, honey

UCLA will not (or at least has never gotten anywhere near) paying the going rate for a head coach. If Neuheisel will take that job (i think he would), we should jump on the chance because he's the best, by far, the Bruins will get for what we're willing to pay. And I'd rather have good, with the potential to be great, previously damaged goods coach than our current proven loser or the next inexperienced experiment.

by greatgymnasticsschool on Jan 17, 2007 3:09 PM PST up reply actions

Steven, 16, Sacto et al.

I think my brain geneally agrees with you guys wrt to RN. The recruiting transgressions at Washington and at CU are legit issues.

But I think I fall into "unsure" category when I think of RN's potential at a school like UCLA. I don't think RN would have to go the extra mile (like Petey) to bring elite recruits at UCLA. I think he can do that on his own charisma, experience, and the natural advantages at UCLA. What my concern is his recruiting strategy at those schools. He just went after 4 stars, 5 stars, w/o paying much attention to the overall balance in the team-depth charth, leaving his OL/DL very thin when he left those schools. That's the key question IMHO.

I think (and may be I am speaking with my heart here) the ethics issues will not be a problem at UCLA. But I could be wrong.

But your points have merit. They are legit. But I am still conflicted.

by Nestor on Jan 18, 2007 6:12 AM PST up reply actions

More on Neu

I don't question that Neuheisal would be an effective, if not outstanding recruiter.

But I have yet to see that he can actually COACH. That's why I look at his history of implosions at UW and CU to assess his viability at UCLA.

by SactoBruin on Jan 18, 2007 9:02 AM PST up reply actions

The Anti-Rick Sentiment seems to be based

on real facts and factors, not on personalities and other abstract things. I'm still not convinced that the negatives outweigh his positives.

Greatgym raises an important, albeit sad, point. It's disheartening to think that those in power apparently do not believe it is important to pay what the market demands for a good, proven coach. Instead, we get experiments like Coach Dorrell which we know in retrospect were doomed to fail.

To me, if Rick is the best available candidate given our artificial (and counter-productive) budget constraints, I still say we should try to get him.

by Fox 71 on Jan 17, 2007 7:43 PM PST reply actions

Yes, it's sad...

But I am not sure if our budget constraints are artificial. I don't think there is another public university that has to fund as many sports as UCLA does, sports in which we are perennial national championship contenders. I do think the budget gets spread thin for that very reason, across a lot of sports where we need to have good coaches and funding because so many of them have a winning history. That doesn't mean that the administration can't get creative (legally of course) in finding ways to improve compensation for the football coaching staff. Of course, with better attendance...we've already spoken about the revenues left on the table...sigh...

by tasser10 on Jan 18, 2007 7:58 AM PST up reply actions

Mistakes = Experience (for most)

We complain about our current HC KD and his constant learning & growing on the job.
Well RN has been learned and has made mistakes while at other HC positions,
He is a smart person (UCLA grad) I believe he is ready to apply his experience
and move to the next level. Question is will it be at UCLA

I don't think its fair to compare RN to Lavin, reason is, when Lavin left UCLA
He basically left coaching, when RN left his HC position he persevered and jumped
right back in the saddle again and has had sucess.

by 8252364 on Jan 18, 2007 8:27 AM PST reply actions

Rick Neuheisel as HC at UCLA

The board is "diverse" on this topic. While Lavin did leave coaching (thank goodness), I fully agree that RN has perservered and kept
"growing" (getting to hate that word). Whether we like it or not, TD is still sought for advice and counsel, and he would likely approve of RN (one of his guys). Also, UCLA, knowing the salary offerings, could get RN for a bit less, and RN would probably stay longer. I think it is worth exploring.

In the end, KD goes, and that is worth a lot.
Bill

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Jan 18, 2007 10:09 AM PST reply actions

Salaries

I think there is a limit that a State school can offer as a salary and the rest is in shoe contracts, radio shows, alumni donations, etc. Remember that both TD & the "Lavinista" were at base salaries of 150k regardless of what they were making in total and that was what the school was legally required to pay for their Contract.

by artybruin on Jan 18, 2007 6:15 PM PST reply actions