Random Thoughts on Yesterday's Game
Bumped. Actually this diary fits perfectly front and center of Bruins Nation. GO BRUINS. -N
These Don't Seem to Fit Anywhere Else.
I stayed out of the fray last night. Hard to take seriously a bunch of people who only come over when we win, to gloat and talk trash. When they can explain and justify Utah and ND, I'll read their posts.
I watched the game on TV yesterday, and had to pay attention -- I was the "play-by-play" poster for our brothers and sisters who didn't have TV in their areas.
Here are some thoughts:
- The D: The best part of the D was the adjustments Walker made at half. For once, we made significant changes. Longshore was 16-19 for 173 yards passing at the half. Not good. We played a much better second half against the pass.
In the first half, a gimpy Longshore had all the time he needed to throw. We didn't get to him until the second half. I assme that our adjustments brought that about. Good Job, DW.
But, I am not ready to call DW a defensive genious, yet. This is exactly the type of O he has handled. It is a "pro" style O, drop back passer -- not the spread that has been so successful against us in other games. This is the type of O we should handle, easily.
When will be stop being vulnerable to the pass?
My hope is that DW can get us off to a better start in the remaining games and continue to make good adjustments.
All that said, we were saved, once more, by an interception. AV is a great player and I am pleased for him. But, CTS can take no more credit for this interception than the one that sealed 13-9. Great players make great plays in spite of the coaching.
- SPTR -- really in evidence yesterday. And, unlike in most games when the calls are evenly bad and split down the middle, these calls were truly bad against us. The obvious leg whip, and Austin's non existent PI (I saw the replay, it wasn't there) could have been game determining calls. Every since I joined BN, Nestor has been calling for better Pac 10 officials, in all sports. We really need that. They should not decide games.
- The 4th and 1 call? Need anyone say anything? He should be fired for that, alone. Or, did he know that AV was going to intercept a pass and run it in? Was that a planned play?
- Just as the Cal O was tailor made for our D, so too was the Cal D made for our O. RRR works against Cal. It doesn't work against other D's and our coaches have to figure out how to take advantage of what other D's give us.
We weren't brilliant. The real minds in college football saw this coming, too. The Vegas odds makers -- the real minds -- didn't put up a line for most of the week. They finally posted Cal by 1.5.
This supports our mainstay posters who have been making clear, to last night's "visitors", that this can't be seen as a big upset over a superior team. In fact, pre-season we all expected to be undefeated at this point in the season. We counted this game as a win. it only seems to be an "upset" because we have been playing so far below our potential that we now can't predict any easy wins.
And, when I say playing below our potential, I am calling out the coaches not the players.
For those of you visitors calling us out as "haters" -- and challenging us to "support our players" -- what the fuck are you talking about?
If you can read, you've seen a consistent pattern: the coaches throw the players under the bus when we lose, and claim they are driving it when we win.
Here at BN, we support our players. And, we point out when the coaches don't.
You really don't want to go there.
- We do not have one solid win this season. Not one. In that way, this is very much like the 10-2 year. Then and now, we are winning on freak plays -- plays not called by a coach -- made by great athletes who refuse to lose. (Unless the coaches want to take credit for teams punting to MJD instead of away from him and his athletic runbacks, OSU's complete failure in the kicking game, and Longshore's throwing a pass directly to AV.)
- The misuse of "parity" to excuse our play: We have yet to play one team that has talent on a par, or in parity with ours. When the commentators talk about teams losing to other teams because of parity, they are talking about good teams losing to good teams. The concept is that with even talent, either team can win.
Cal's talent was probably closest to ours. But, remember, we were projected, before the season, to win that game.
There is another type of parity involved in some games -- parity of coaching. We have been outcoached in every game but Cal.
This was a good win and I am pleased. Like most here, I can't cheer against us, I want to win out and I think that's a distinct possibility.
But, unlike most, I do not think winning out, and winning the Pac 10 SHOULD solidify CTS's job. I think that job was lost last year, especially at the nut bowl, during the Utah and ND games. Gone and lost. Lost on yesterday's 4th and 1. Gone and lost. So, let's win out. Let's cheer and enjoy. No AD in his right mind will keep this poser on the field. If CTS is here next year, DG won't be here long.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
0 recs |
23
comments
Comments
Nice work 66
Now, before anyone gets their panties all ruffled, I'm not talking about deliberately injuring him. The guy was obviously hurting going in, and if you knock him down good a couple times, he's probably coming out.
IMHO, we should have been all over him the first half, but we really weren't.
You mentioned that we could win out this year. I've been saying we could "lose out" this year (meaning, we lose every remaining game). That's the crazy thing about Dorrell's teams--they could win every game or, just as easily, lose every game.
So, if UCLA's talent level generally stays the same from week to week, what is the reason for this inconsistent play of ours? It's called bad coaching, folks.
by Barnes2JJ on Oct 21, 2007 11:55 AM PDT 0 recs
The same solid comments by sjh
Can this team, with it's current group of coaches, win all the rest of the games? I doubt it, because it is hard to believe that this win means that somehow our head coach has figured things out. In fact, it seems likely that just the opposite is true. It looks in many respects like business as usual for CTS. My expectation was a 4-8 record, but obviously I have to revise that to 5-7. The sooner CTS starts losing, the better, because that enhances the likelihood that the team will improve next year with his departure.
I expected a win against Cal, and was glad to see it for the sake of the players. But it truly is bad in the long run especially for the students, to the extent that it means CTS might be back next year. A bad analogy coming, so be ready. The next five games are our chemotherapy. If they are pleasant, it might be good in the short run, but it means that the cancer is likely to still be there, and that's bad in the long run.
by Fox 71 on Oct 21, 2007 1:48 PM PDT 0 recs
Vegas Oddsmakers
But here's a pretty good rule of thumb on the Bruins: if UCLA is riding high feeling good about themselves, looking ahead, and the other team seems seriously overmatched, give the edge to Bruin opponents. If Dorrell looks like he's one embarrassing loss away from getting canned, and the Bruins are playing an emotion-filled, high energy, rivalry-type game, give the edge to UCLA.
by godblesstyus95 on Oct 21, 2007 2:20 PM PDT 0 recs
OT
Nice to have the guys actually see us play well and win before a sell-out crowd in an emotional game.
by Barnes2JJ on Oct 21, 2007 3:20 PM PDT 0 recs
Win out...
by simibruin on Oct 21, 2007 3:52 PM PDT 0 recs
And yet
Why don't you post when UCLA loses?
by Barnes2JJ on
Oct 21, 2007 4:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Time For A Clear and Concise Post From You
Explain Utah and ND.
Or, shut the fuck up.
Your call.
by Class of 66 on
Oct 21, 2007 4:19 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Not to be a stickler for logic here but...
The opinion is based on the level of job competence demonstrated by our coach in all games, not just wins or losses. Overall the tone here has been and will remain, that KD is not performing to the level expected for a UCLA head coach. (Until proven otherwise) These wins do not prove that KD is a good coach. If he continues to win games in similar fashion on a consistent basis then the tone will become less vicious, but it will not go away. Lucky wins when your team has many advantages, SHOULD NOT solidify any coach's job security. KD is not responsible for individual greatness such as Eric McNeal's INT or Al Verner's. These were game savers. While the team did play better 12-2-06 and 10-20-07, they still remain statistical outliers, anomalies if you will.
I would like an answer to this though, in the interest of altering the "repetitive and boring" posts you are complaining about: On what do you base your conclusion that any of these posters speak out against KD based on a "tired and old animosity"? Why do you try to disparage this position (KD must leave for the good of the program) but give no proof, and only offer a veiled hint that it is mearly a personal beef?
Many of us would love an honest dialog and some real proof of KD's merits, so anything you can provide would be super.
by isodore on
Oct 21, 2007 4:45 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Something fresh
by Tydides on
Oct 21, 2007 4:48 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Speaking of repetitive and boring...
yawwwwwn...
these rants are old and tiresome. It's the same bitch and moan day after day. You and the millions of other "next day quarterbacks" will always find something to whine about...be it a season, game, play, quote...whatever. You have become repetitive, dull, and mean. There is absolutely nothing new in any of your posts. News flash...other thoughts and opinions exist. Many of us do not live in a vacuum with blinders on. We are capapble of independent thought and do not succumb to group think. Of course, those who engage in actual independent thought are ridiculed for not adhering to party line. Whatever.
by simibruin on Sun Oct 21, 2007 at 03:29:39 PM PDT
Again, rather than complain about the posts of others, why don't you try offering us readers some insight/content on UCLA sports? I for one would like to see you write a clear case as to why those of us who want nothing less than KD's departure are wrong. Make it your own diary entry for all to see. Don't include your standard complaining just clear and concise facts as to why BN has it wrong.
by UCngLA on
Oct 21, 2007 5:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Gee, Simi . . .
by lostnacfgop on Oct 21, 2007 6:41 PM PDT 0 recs
Great Post!
by abby8065 on Oct 21, 2007 6:47 PM PDT 0 recs
Sorry, Abbs
by lostnacfgop on Oct 21, 2007 6:57 PM PDT 0 recs
Absolutely right!! This year's team was supposed
Even if by some miracle we DO win the PAC-10 and CTS gets a bowl win ( A big IF) it will be because of our players not CTS.
The universty, the players, and the fans deserve mcuh better leadership than the embarassment we have in CTS.
by bruinhawk on
Oct 21, 2007 8:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Simi post
- Post something that advances an idea or concept that you have thought of as regards the UCLA football program, and has some sense of logic or fact.
- Do this post with an absence of personal comments about other posters.
Bill
by BillSouthBay on Oct 21, 2007 7:01 PM PDT 0 recs
Simi won't be heard from again until
by bluegold on Oct 21, 2007 8:48 PM PDT 0 recs
Excellent Post, 66
FWIW, I'm very worried about our game up in Pullman this next Saturday. Given our recent history with the Cougs we could come crashing back to earth in frightening fashion. As bad as I want to get a top-level coach to grab the reigns of our program, I don't want to see that happen.
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Oct 21, 2007 9:31 PM PDT 0 recs
About the D
Coaches can forgive gambles that pay off. Yet it wasn't really a risk, was it?"When he motions down, they've only done that a couple of times, I thought something had to be going on," Verner said. "Right when he came off the ball, I had a feel for what he was going to do, and right when he broke, I thought: `I've got it.' I broke, the ball came and I stepped in front of him. I caught it and knew I could get to the end zone. I didn't see anybody in front of me."
and the same thing from DW:
He, along with UCLA's other defensive backs, didn't hide the fact Verner seemed to know what was coming."Oh yeah, we've seen that a couple of times," Walker said. "As a matter of fact, we'd just watched it (on Friday)."
So even if Dorrell's incompetence almost cost UCLA the game, I guess it should be noted when one of the coaches does something right. Kind of sad that doing one's job correctly is cause for celebration, but perhaps it isn't pure luck that Verner made the interception.
By the way, I don't think running the table should guarantee Dorrell's job. I think he has done enough to show that he should be out of here. I am hoping that Guerrero feels the same way, so hopefully we can have the best of both worlds, and have UCLA win out AND have him fired afterwards!
by uclawarren on Oct 21, 2007 9:40 PM PDT 0 recs
Uh no
by Nestor on
Oct 22, 2007 4:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Verner's Interception Eligible for Two Awards
by mark the bruin on Oct 21, 2007 10:28 PM PDT 0 recs
Excellent
by Barnes2JJ on
Oct 22, 2007 4:22 AM PDT
up
0 recs



















