Our Head Coach

by Nestor on Mar 10, 2008 4:34 AM PDT in Basketball

So our team has wrapped up its third straight Pac-10 championship in a row for the first time since 1997. I will mention it again Coach Ben Howland is officially the first UCLA coach to accomplish that feat since the days of Coach Wooden.

No matter what Tim Floyd wants to assert from the other side of the town, the power shift in the Pac-10 (which titled away from Westwood during 96-02) is now officially complete. UCLA is now the unquestioned standard of basketball excellence in the Pac-10 and the entire West Coast.

As fundamentally sound in every which way (both on and off court) our basketball program is under the best basketball coach in America, there is another crucial factor that makes Coach Howland the most revered UCLA head coach since the days of Coach Wooden.

It's emotion. Here is Coach Howland after the Stanford game on his way to the locker room:

Photo Credit: Jack Rosenfeld

That's an image of the guy who grew up watching Coach Wooden's program.

That's the same kid who used to stay up watching KTLA's rebroadcast of UCLA games on late night television. Going back to memory lane from a New York Times article when UCLA hired Ben Howland on how a coach was coming home to Westwood:

Pittsburgh officials were irate when Howland campaigned for the job -- he arranged his own private plane for the interview -- but they might have underestimated the pull of home for someone who grew up idolizing Wooden and stayed up late to watch U.C.L.A. games replayed on KTLA. In March, Bob Howland thought back to those nights and said of his son, ''I always thought he was watching Johnny Carson.''

He is all grown up. Relishing and soaking up every moment in his dream job.

That's the same kid - who is now of the elite basketball coaches in America - who this off season rebuffed overtures from another program to stay with the program he grew up cherishing. If you think I made that up here was Simers' column in the LA Times from few weeks ago:

He was offered big bucks by a big-time basketball school to leave UCLA after last season, but it was his dream to coach the Bruins, he says, and he still has things he wants to accomplish here.

We are blessed to call him Ben Howland, the Head Basketball Coach of our UCLA Bruins.

Don't ever think of leaving us Coach. We don't want to imagine life without Ben Ball at Pauley Pavilion.

GO BRUINS.

Tweet Comment 37 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I remember...

sitting in the student section for his first game against some preseason foe (can't remember who it was). I recall Howland waving his hands, getting into familiar defensive stance, and yelling out instructions to his team. I turned to my friend, pointed at Howland and exclaimed, "That is a REAL coach. That is what a REAL coach does on the sidelines." He must have noticed me pointing at him cuz he looked right at me. Even in that first year uneven year under Howland, I knew great things were ahead (of course, we'd already seen what he'd done at Pittsburgh). His answering that reporter's question concerning who between UCLA and Kansas had a richer basketball tradition cemented my respect for the passion he has for this job.

by bruin8uclap on Mar 10, 2008 5:59 AM PDT reply actions

What school tried to hire Coach Howland?

I must have missed Simers article. Not hard to do. Did Simers name the school and what "reliable" sources he had?

by bruin75 on Mar 10, 2008 7:46 AM PDT reply actions

I don't care for Simers

But here he is not making things up. I heard Kentucky made a big push for Howland after firing Tubby. Howland didn't want to have any of it.

by bluestreet on Mar 10, 2008 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions

Heard Kentucky as Well

They pushed for him supposedly offering 3+ million a year. Which is pretty much doubling his salary.

If I were DG, I'd damn well make sure Howland is happy with his compensation package otherwise some heads will roll if we lost him cuz of $.

by kidro2001 on Mar 10, 2008 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions

we are a big-time basketball school

though we may not offer the big bucks?

I bet it's Kentucky.

by bruinliv on Mar 10, 2008 7:48 AM PDT reply actions

Dipsh*t Dohn

rattled off a list of 5 coaches better than Howland. I read arguments that Howland wasn't on that list because he hasn't won a national championship yet. Yet I simply ask, 'Is there any coach in America you would trade straight up for Ben Howland?' NO WAY.

"I just think, at the end of the day, UCLA is not a great job." Brian D'Oh!n, 12/07

by godblesstyus95 on Mar 10, 2008 8:32 AM PDT reply actions

The dipsh!t

Also just dropped us to number 5 in his ballot. Just diaried it.

by bluestreet on Mar 10, 2008 8:34 AM PDT up reply actions

Great, But Not Perfect

He's a great coach, and I wouldn't trade him for any other. However, he needs to be more flexible in his approach. Against teams like Cal, he should stay in a straight man to man, because we have the better athletes. Against other teams the double team in the low post gets solved, leading to easy baskets. I think he needs to mix up his defenses a bit. Also, Keefe and Aboya need to played more minutes or the five starters are going to get worn out in the tournaments. Our defense this year is highly over-rated, given the points scored by Cal and Stanford against us. We have two excellent defenders, LRMM and RW, and three average defenders DC, KL and JS. That being said, without Collison and Love on offense and Love on the boards, we'd be no where. I love this team and our coach, but I am not at all confident that we won't have a bad game in the NCAA tournament. I hope I am wrong. The key is the return of Shipp's offense, which should get a jumpstart in the early rounds against weaker opposition. Go Bruins.

by 75NatChamps on Mar 10, 2008 9:03 AM PDT reply actions

yeah our defense is highly over-rated

We are only the number 4 ranked defense in the country.

Now I know why Coach Wooden left a little early because of having to deal with fans like you.

Our defense really slipped against Cal. But it was an aberration given what we have seen from that entire season.

To call our D over-rated is just totally clueless.

by bluestreet on Mar 10, 2008 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions

whoah guys, let a guy be a little concerned

about a coaching philosophy. i mean, the guy did say that he wouldn't trade bh for any other.

i'm not even sure i feel that strongly that ben howland is the BEST coach in ncaa men's basketball.

i echo and concur with some of the concerns.

I think we can all agree that a zone defense can be an effective defense, and yet howland is philosophically against it. we have NEVER seen him use one. he's a dogmatic idealogue as far as man defense is concerned. he may make a couple of tweaks here or there, but they are rarely noticeable.

Those of you saying that our defense is really good, i don't disagree with you, but are you so certain that it couldn't be better? that's the point that '75 was bringing up.

i love this site, but boy, make a criticism (even a balanced one) or take a position not part of the majority, and you're in for a thrashing.

GO BRUINS!

by woodenwannabe on Mar 10, 2008 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions

Hold it a second, Mr. Wannabe

First of all, I am strongly against your using Coach's name for anything. You might "wanna be" coach, but if so, don't talk about it, just do it. And I would prefer if you would not use his name.

Second, if you're able to remember that far back, which I doubt given your stats showing you have degrees or something in '02 and '05, Coach never used a zone. He always used man to man. Would you like to explain why a philosophical bent against using a zone defense is somehow intellectually bad? While you're at it, explain how Coach's other philosophies are bad and could be improved. (Coach, of course, would be the first to say that any of his thoughts or concepts could be improved, but that's the way he is. His admirers would say otherwise to guys who want to take on his philosophical bent.)

Next, explain why your take or that of '75 should be given more credence than Coach Howland. I am particularly interested in that. Why should he come to you for tips on psychology or coaching techniques or anything else. If you have an agenda to push, give the "because." "Coach Howland, let me introduce Wannabe and '75. you should listen to them and take their advice because ...." I don't have anything to fill into that blank. That's for you to do.

The only improvement that our team could make would be to get do-overs against Texas, Washington and justsc. Let's see. We beat both UW and justsc, so I guess we can say that Coach Howland's dogmatic idealogue approach has been demonstrated to be successful against everyone we've played except Texas. Now explain please how using a zone would have generated a win in the Texas game. Would it keep Love from fouling out? Oh, wait - he didn't foul out. Just what would going to a zone have done for us agains Texas?

I looked, Mr. Wannabe. As far as I could tell, this was your first post. You have, or claim to have, two degrees from UCLA. You should be able to do better than this.

by Fox 71 on Mar 10, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions

My main problem here

is that the suggestion is that we should listen to what the original poster has to say despite the fact that the numbers and the facts don't back up the opinion. In my mind, if you come with an unsupported opinion, then you should expect the blowback.

by Tydides on Mar 10, 2008 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions

far be it from me

to discourage active discussion and argument. by all means, if a person is stating something illogical, with no basis in fact, one should expect to be blasted.......

blasted with facts which demonstrate that the person is wrong.....

that makes sense to me.

what doesn't make sense to me is..

"because of having to deal with fans like you."

"To call our D over-rated is just totally clueless."

"I am strongly against your using Coach's name for anything." (not personally offensive as a statement, but the implication as i perceive it is "you don't deserve to even want to be like wooden"..oh is that because i belong to the untouchable caste of "just starting to post on bruinsnation"ers? i didn't know you could be so welcoming!)

"Frankly, 75NatChamps, I'm disappointed that there are still fans like you out there."

now, i'm all for a "blowback" of arguments demonstrating the stupidity of an idea. I'm all for discussion. I'm all for the interchange of ideas. it just seems to me that this is not mutually exclusive of class, courtesy, and hospitality.

To take things even further, the post by 75champs, or whatever his name is, was not particularly suggestive, critical, or unbalanced.

"He's a great coach, and I wouldn't trade him for any other. However, he needs to be more flexible in his approach. Against teams like Cal, he should stay in a straight man to man, because we have the better athletes. Against other teams the double team in the low post gets solved, leading to easy baskets. I think he needs to mix up his defenses a bit. Also, Keefe and Aboya need to played more minutes or the five starters are going to get worn out in the tournaments. Our defense this year is highly over-rated, given the points scored by Cal and Stanford against us. We have two excellent defenders, LRMM and RW, and three average defenders DC, KL and JS. That being said, without Collison and Love on offense and Love on the boards, we'd be no where. I love this team and our coach, but I am not at all confident that we won't have a bad game in the NCAA tournament. I hope I am wrong. The key is the return of Shipp's offense, which should get a jumpstart in the early rounds against weaker opposition. Go Bruins."

when people attacked 75 they didn't exactly attack his specific comments and claims. they attacked his character.

nothing in what 75 said seems controversial to me.

sure we're currently ranked 4th in kenpom.com's defensive efficiency. last year we were second.

did anyone disagree that we had better athletes than cal? no one tried to disprove that claim. did anyone think that doing a straight man to man wouldn't have been a good idea and explain why? nope, no one did that either.

instead they resorted to emotional, to the man arguments of "you're the kind of guy that made wooden want to stop coaching!"(paraphrased)

wow, that's convincing!!!

does anyone disagree with the idea that playing your starters lots of minutes puts them at risk in terms of injury and in terms of stamina? these are not crazy off the wall ideas that 75 brought up.

sorry for the uberlong post tydides(hope i spelled that right). blowback i expect, if it is blowback tied to facts and argument. but that wasn't what i saw.

by woodenwannabe on Mar 10, 2008 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Calling our defense over-rated

is actually kind of clueless. If anyone actually looks at our defensive stats this season and compared to those from las two, calling our D "over-rated" would come across as ignorant and clueless.

by Nestor on Mar 10, 2008 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions

Add

You brought up Kenpom.

We are ranked 4th in Kenpom in adj defense this year. Last year we were number 3 and the year before we were number 2. Oooh so we dropped couple of notches in last two years. But looky here.

What you didn't mention was our offense this year is ranked number 4. The year before it was number 23, and the year before it was number 28. I think I will take that tradeoff (and this could be due to Love's deficiency in D which we have talked about here on BN (instead of hiding from it). But we will take that trade.

We had a bad defensive game against Cal and bad halves against Stanford and Oregon. But to take the sample of those few games and call our defense ... yeah ... I call that ignorant and clueless w/o any perspective.

by Nestor on Mar 10, 2008 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions

I really hope

You're not arguing that a drop from #2 to #4 in defensive efficiency out of 300 something NCAA teams constitutes a precipitous drop in defense. I have been an advocate of giving our starters more rest, especially for the last meaningless games before the REAL tournament, but to complain about the #4 defense in the country as being "overrated" is going to generate a LOT of negative feedback. The #2 ranked defense started 2 seniors including an eraser in the middle in Ryan Hollins. To replace that with a freshman in KLove to only drop to #4 is a pretty damn good coaching job.

by Tydides on Mar 10, 2008 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions

foxy, here's my reply

but i'm not going to get into the sarcastic stuff. we all know that none of us are basketball experts, otherwise we'd be in the game not talking about it. (at some level i mean, whether its high school coaching, college coaching, etc.)

by all means, go ahead and feel that i shouldn't be able to want to be wooden. not sure that those feelings demonstrate anything but some overly obsessive and controlling instinct. if you really feel that strongly, perhaps you should try to copyright his identity and get rid of all his books, seeing as their purpose is probably to get people to try to do more things like wooden has done them.

as far as the texas example, that is exactly where a zone may have been effective. In that game Texas attacked us the way many successful teams have attacked us in the past. (stanford last year. texas this year. i'd have to replay usc from this year but i think they did this too. pretty sure oregon did it to us last year. there were other teams that have tried this approach with varying success, but the teams mentioned above were teams that actually beat us)

spread the offense and run one on one's. obviously the most convenient example of this was the last play, but if you replay the game they did it a lot where they iso'd collison on augustine and let augustine take him. meanwhile they moved their other players so far out that none of our other players could help on the weak side in case collison got beat.

same thing happened last year with us against stanford when hill decided to go for it. they also ran their guards at us after spreading us out. oregon did that to us as well. there were some games where brooks won the game for oregon. how? spread the floor and let brooks take whoever guarded him

how would a zone have helped? for obvious reasons a zone would have kept that, in particular, from happening. it's the purpose of a zone, to decrease drives, decrease people's ability to get in the lane.

i'm not suggesting that the zone is God's gift to basketball, nor am i suggesting that wooden or howland are not good coaches. I AM suggesting that any approach is BOUND to have consequences, both good and bad. Better to be willing to change approaches when a certain situation dictates it.

i'm not a big fan of floyd, but he is creative. see his junk zone versus memphis. usc almost beat memphis this year without davon jefferson. you may not think memphis is good, but pretty much all of the talking heads disagree with you.

that brings up the second way that teams beat us. really good passing big men. another seeming dogmatism of the howland approach is the double on the post. it happens in almost every game regardless of the opponent. (although, in our game against stanford we only doubled brooke, not robin).

hence our loss against florida. i would've liked to seen what happened if we didn't double in the florida games. if you go back and watch whenever we doubled their big men were good, very good, at passing out of it quickly and efficiently, either to the other big man for a lay up or out to humphrey, green (sp?), or brewer.

now, one could argue that Texas HAD to take that approach because our defense on abrams and augustine was so good and we were limiting their shots. this is a good argument, and if we had switched to a zone it certainly would've increased their opportunities for a clear three point shot. we'll never know for sure as it didn't happen.

one last thing regarding the comment about our defense being worse/better this year than last year. wooden didn't worry about what other teams did, he just wanted his players to do what they were supposed to do excellently. (i personally don't know if i'm courageous enough to take that approach. maybe someday if i'm ever convinced i know something well enough)

i don't think that our defense has "done what it should do" as well this year as it has in the past. we miss a lot of defensive assignments. i haven't been keeping track of how many per game, but all of you know you've seen an opposing player free in the post after someone got lost in the rotation, said opposing player gets ball, opposing player scores an easy basket. i'd say we average between four and eight points a game due to those mistakes. i don't think those mistakes happened that regularly in the past. i think part of it is love. He's new to the system and still figuring things out, but...nonetheless, its a problem. and whether its perception or reality, i don't think we're doing as good a job in that respect this year as compared to last.

by woodenwannabe on Mar 10, 2008 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions

You lost me very early.

Unless you have Coach's DNA, you shouldn't call yourself "Wooden." It's not right. You apparently don't see it that way. But I think it's wrong.

Sorry, but what I perceive to be disrespect to a great man colors my thinking about your ideas. I know that is immature, but I guess that's another facet of geezerdom that I have to accept.

You get the last word. And as many of them as you want.

by Fox 71 on Mar 10, 2008 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Calmly and Without Sarcasm

Please change your username. You certainly have every right to each and every one of your opinions, and you clearly demonstrate a well-developed philosophy regarding this great--and intricate--game.

Coach Wooden is sacrosanct here. It is extremely difficult to fairly absorb and ponder your point, because many of us cannot help but react negatively to the username you have adopted--it's somewhat like designating yourself "___God."

I can't imagine that you'd choose to be anybody"wannabe", anyway. Isn't that a designation for someone who simply cannot get the job done? Coach Wooden has said, "Be true to yourself," and "Be yourself," in his famous Pyramid of Success. I can't believe he would ever want ANYONE to ever be a "wannabe."

Please consider this.

Thank you.

Love My Bruins

by Bruingirl83 on Mar 11, 2008 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions

Agreed

Its in bad taste to take Coach Wooden's name as a screen name.

by Nestor on Mar 11, 2008 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions

That's true

If he weren't so darn inflexible, we might have been the Pac-10 Champs and looking at a #1 seed in the Tourney... oh wait...

by swc89 on Mar 10, 2008 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions

Overrated defense??

You must be joking. No defense (or offense) is perfect 100% of the time. We are allowing fewer points per game this year than we did the previous two years, according to what I saw during the Stanford game.

My fear, and one that's been echoed here before, is that now that we've had two Final Four appearances in a row along with a National Championship game, the bandwagoners will start up again and call every season in which a banner is not hung in Pauley as a "disappointment".. and that our team was "overrated."

It brings to mind the fan that told Coach Wooden after his last championship in '75, "Well, I guess this makes up for last year." Coach said that that was when he knew he'd made the right decision to retire.

I don't know where we'll end up this year.. It takes more than just skill and perfect defense to make the Final Four.. Luck plays a big part, as do injuries, fatigue, and momentum (see George Mason in 2006). If we lose early, we lose early. I'll be disappointed, but still excited for next year's prospects, which is a credit to Coach Howland and his staff. As long as there is a real possibility of a National Championship each year, whether we get there or not, I'll be happy. Banner #12 will be there eventually, I'm confident of that. It's just a question of when.

by Class of 86 on Mar 10, 2008 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions

No Banner every year!

Besides the genius of Wooden, things are a lot different now. Being dominant in the current era, is making the Final Four most of the time (3-4 out of 5) and an occasional NC (one of those 3-4). I remember everyone thinking Coach K was the greatest when he was making the Final Four frequently in the late 80s and early 90s. That is the current standard. What Coach did is unthinkable now, because there will not be another Coach, and even he might have won only 7 or 8 out 12 in the current era.

by bruinblue85 on Mar 10, 2008 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions

I disagree

Our defense is overrated only if you expect us to throw a shutout every game. Our defense was apparently overrated 3 times this year (against Texas, justsc and UW). But it was rated just fine 28 times.

I agree with the WHP's take - it's fans like you, Mr. 75NatChamps" that made it easy for Coach to know he had retired at the right time. Your screen name seems to indicate that you expect perfection every minute of every game of every season. None of us have that in our lives, so why should we expect it of our favorite basketball team?

I expect our team to be physically and mentally tough, to play smart basketball, to play the game right (no fastballs to the face), and to be gentlemen on and off the court. (Yep - I expect more of them than I do of myself.) If they don't win then I'm disappointed, but I'm not going to call them overrated or anything else.

One other thing I expect, and it's Coach Howland's fault. I expect him to do something that will make the team win. That's an unreasonable expectation, but we all have them. When Joe Montana got traded to the Chiefs and I could finally root for him (I'm an anti-Niner), I found myself saying more than once, "If our defense can just hold them and give Joe one more chance ...." Same with Coach Howland. If we can just get to halftime not trailing too much, I know Coach Howland will do something.

But overrated? Maybe to you, but not to me. We are a great team, playing great ball, with a great coach. I'm not blind to the shortcomings in certain areas, but I'm also not blind to the greatness the team displays.

Frankly, 75NatChamps, I'm disappointed that there are still fans like you out there. I guess for some it's more fun to focus on the three losses than on the 28 wins. Or to try to figure out why the Mona Lisa doesn't show a great big grin.

by Fox 71 on Mar 10, 2008 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions

BH and salary

I have said it many times here and elsewhere, UCLA needs to keep BH in the middle of the upper band of coaching income (not just salary) and he will be a happy camper, plus move forward on the Pauley redo. He doesn't need the most $$ but he needs to be recognized for what he is. Doing both items, $$ and Pauley, is DG's job. He hired the right football staff, and has BH in place, but needs to keep intent on the BB situation to cement his place in UCLA lore.
Bill

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Mar 10, 2008 9:54 AM PDT reply actions

The Great Ones

As before and like Wooden, it will take more than $'s to steal Howland away. Both Wooden and Howland are men of their words and love of UCLA. Like any relationship We and UCLA need to show our love in return, which means supports and the tools to do the job. Like an elite Pauley. If it takes donations from us, then lets get it underway. Have a heart, Valentines day is upon us. Go Bruins.

by Blue Critter on Mar 10, 2008 10:57 AM PDT reply actions

i know ...

that sometimes as fans we can be in our bubble and be a bit disillusioned about how great it should be for somebody to coach our school (see: our head football coach search) but:

He was offered big bucks by a big-time basketball school to leave UCLA after last season

isn't it safe to say that we're a "big-time basketball school"?

by deepdish on Mar 10, 2008 11:06 AM PDT reply actions

but.....

Obviously there are few basketball programs that come close to UCLA, but in terms of generating revenue UCLA is not in the top ten schools. A lot of other schools can afford to throw around more money than we can. But having money comes at a cost too-- the McKale center at UA doesn't even offer a student section. Their seats go for way more cash than any student can afford.

I'm glad we have a coach like Howland who cares about more than just cash.

by bhbruin on Mar 10, 2008 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions

ahh

that's a good point.

by deepdish on Mar 10, 2008 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions

Coach Howland,

I'm delighted that coaching our Bruins is your "dream job," because you are making dreams come true for us, too. We are so proud and fortunate to have you as our coach...

Maybe "Big Time Basketball School" ought to have a broader definition than just the salary paid to the coach.....?

Love My Bruins

by Bruingirl83 on Mar 10, 2008 12:48 PM PDT reply actions

We've been getting torn up on ESPN today as usual

I do enjoy catching my regular fix of all the up-to-date sports with those SC bandwagoners in the ESPN office, Sports Center, jim rome, first and ten, PTI, etc. But I hope our bruin players are watching these highlights soon because certain phrases such as "stole the game" and "lucky to win" are floating around. We may have gotten a few close calls, but our depth in talent is one of the best in the country if not THE best. And while the games were close, I know we can hang that 12th banner with a few minor improvements in our play. Anyway I hope we come out with not just a winning intensity but an intensity to WIN IT ALL as we march through the tournament.

by UCLABRU1 on Mar 10, 2008 1:40 PM PDT reply actions

I'm hoping

Stanford gets a #2 in the East and takes out North Carolina. That'll shutup the talking heads.

by bruinofthenorth on Mar 10, 2008 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions

Coach Ben Howland

2 years ago, after the loss to UF in the championship game, coach howland was eating lunch at northern lights around that fire pit. My friend was reading his paper when he realized it was Coach Howland's voice right next to him, and as he got up, he told CBH, "Great game coach, sorry it didn't go our way" To which CBH began a 10 minute long conversation with my friend explaining to him how UF wasn't that much better of a team than us, and what happened in the game that caused us to lose it.

I mean wow! What an amazing guy. He did not need to give my friend an explanation. And I was told he did it with so much passion and so nicely, my friend was touched.

UCLA is just such an amazing place, and it is represented by some really classy people. I swell with pride knowing I'm a bruin

by uCla on Mar 10, 2008 5:38 PM PDT reply actions

You can tell

Coach Howland loves what he does and he loves being here. We're incredibly fortunate to have him here and we need to do all we can to make sure he stays happy here.

by Tydides on Mar 10, 2008 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions

In Coach Howland we trust

I know people like to wax on how we should be doing this, or need to do that, or so and so needs to step up... CBH will have these guys 100% prepared, mentally and physically come tournament time. You will see this team at a level which will make your collective jaws drop. They will have the intensity and focus like no other. I will not predict #12 yet, but we will not be disappointed.

by UCLAMD89 on Mar 10, 2008 10:10 PM PDT reply actions

good perspective

It's like having a Ferrari and saying the steering wheel could be better. Is this is a valid critique? Sure. Is the counter response of "Dude, it's a Ferrari" valid? Sure. In the end, no coach is perfect, but I think we can all agree that Howland is BEST coach for UCLA.

At this point, I think everybody is just so jacked up for the Big Dance, that we are just spouting off to release that nervous energy. Let's get this thing started.

by Dienekes on Mar 11, 2008 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions

Agreed

I really can't think of anyone I would rather have in charge of our team at this point than Coach Howland. He is the right guy for many, many reasons.

And to put that in perspective, about 6 months ago, I was all for picking someone at random out of the stands to take over the football job, after Mrs. Fox 71 took her name out of the running. I was serious then, and I'm serious now.

by Fox 71 on Mar 11, 2008 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions