Howland Intractable?
by whp68 on Apr 7, 2008 4:27 PM PDT
21 comments
Bumped. GO BRUINS.-N
(Yet another "me too" attempt to salve the hurt resulting from this past Saturday's loss.)
I was corresponding with a friend and discussing Ben Howland's "performance" in Saturday's game and I mentioned that there are two levels involved here. The first is the MSM droning, casual fan blather, and BN analysis (not to lump us with the other two, but for the sake of discussion) and the second is what really goes on in the halls of power..
..you know, deep in the innermost recesses of the coaching and AD staff.
What is said on the first level is anywhere from head-up-one's-ass stupid to blindingly keen but doesn't mean squat. It's what is thought and said and done on the second level that counts.
We (and the MSM drones) are just the enlisted guys, speculating how the war will be fought. Howland and his staff and related personnel on the AD staff are the generals, the command structure that will ultimately decide how best to fight the war.
I maintain that Ben Howland is not stubborn -- at least not over the long term. Another thing I believe Ben Howland is not and that is content with status quo. He was not content with pulling UCLA back from the losing-season debacle that Lavin left it in. He was not content to settle for winning seasons and pretty good performances. He is a man driven to kick his accomplishments to the next level and certainly not content to rest on his laurels so long as the big prize is still out there.
Otherwise he would not have left NAU to take the Pitt job and he would not have left the Pitt job to take the UCLA job. He could have stayed at Pitt; it was a major college who's program he revived. He could have made them more of a success with an the occasional foray into the NCAA tournament and kicked back.
He knew (and knows) that, while unspoken (except for the MSM blatherers), there is that expectation of a banner if you are the UCLA coach.
Now, I know these words are sacrilege and to many of us personally, that is not the number one goal. The MSM missed the point when they said we ran Gene Bartow out of town. Nice old "Clean" Gene didn't move the yardsticks; there was no palpable drive to improve, just a contentment with winning seasons. That is not the case with Ben.
Nonetheless, somewhere in those mysterious corridors of power at UCLA someone's gotta be thinking "banner, banner, banner.."
..and I think that person is Ben Howland because that's the kind of guy he is.
These past five years have been a series of steps: get the recruiting going, start winning games, have a winning and successful season, win the PAC 10, get into the NCAAs, get to the final four..
..and that last step will be to go over the top.
O.K., from now on, I am not talking level one MSM bloviation, blather, and fan analysis, I am talking 100% pure, driven, in-Ben-Howland's-mind expectations.
Here's the deal, Neal: the previous two years, Ben Howland has been able to write off the losses to Florida by saying that, well, they were Florida and they were exceptional and, besides, we didn't have a Kevin Love, etc.
But he bumped into Memphis who also had some pretty talented folks and handed the Bruins a defeat.
MMMMmmmmmmm.
So now he'll go back and factor all three games into the mix, extract the common points, recalibrate, reload, and show up with a shiny new product.
Whatever it takes!
I think it was Einstein who said, "stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Ben Howland is as far from stupid as one can get on this earth. He is a brilliant basketball coach, he will factor all the data, act accordingly, and we should not expect the same results.
After all, he has already outstripped John R. Wooden in the "per-season success for a coach in the first 15 years of his career at UCLA" category..
".."Goodness Gracious, sakes alive!"
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 |
21 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Another way to look at it...
Look at the other teams in the Final Four for the past THREE years, how many have repeated? And how many flame out early? (Florida being the only one to repeat due to the miracle of all of them returning)
IMO, when you think of it like that, the only thing that comes to mind is that Howland developed his players TOO well and we got TOO far to have a team stocked with talent. If we don't make the Final Four run the 1st year, is Farmar a 1st rounder? Or Afflalo the next year a 1st rounder? Is Westbrook a 1st rounder on ANY other team in the country after his sophomore year?
The problem is that we over-achieved and lost players that weren't replaced and weren't expected to go. That is the price to pay when you are rising to the top. That is something Howland is also new too. Its something that will adjust itself now that we are among the elite. There is a reason why we have 3 guards + 1 forward coming in. It replaces the Mata/Farmar/Afflalo/Shipp class. So just give it time and let the roster issues sort themselves out. Because really, we are WAYYYY ahead of schedule here.
by kidro2001 on Apr 7, 2008 1:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
The unfortunate thing for Coach Howland is that we live in a society of instant gratification, on top of the fact that we also don't recognize Final Four trips. Having said that, any true Bruin should stand up for Coach Howland, and if they don't, I will tell my tales as a student and younger alumna who survived the dark times.
by bruinbabe2000 on Apr 7, 2008 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, Ms. 'Babe..
All excellent comments made here made here.
The point of my post is that, if there is any unreasonable expectations going on, it would be in Mr Howland's mind because he is a coach who doesn't settle for status quo and "good enough".
If one goes back and reads all the posts ranging from about -- oh, say -- 15 minutes into the second half of Saturday's game ("We are doomed to a life of basketball mediocrity under Howland and DC is a failure" from the drive-bys) until now, one will see/feel a definite lessening of the sting of this loss and the realization that we ain't so bad after all.
"Hope springs eternal in the human breast."
by whp68 on Apr 7, 2008 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree 100%
So, as I see it, we're two years ahead of schedule. No need to worry. CBH is going to take us to the promised land. It's just a matter of when, not if.
by norcald503 on Apr 7, 2008 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
here's my feeling
So you can't fault Howland for not bringing home the hardware. You just can't. However, I do think it is a fair question to ask why his teams have gotten thumped three years in a row in their biggest game, and why the top players on his teams have all had terrible games.
I do not doubt for a second Howland will win it all. But man, seeing the team wilt up in the Final Four is getting old. The Memphis game was a lot better than the two Florida ones but the team still lacked the je ne sais quoi that got them there.
by njbruin on Apr 7, 2008 2:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thats my point
2006 - Lose to Gonzaga (Sweet 16)
2007 - Lose to Kansas (Elite 8)
2008 - Lose to Memphis (Final Four)
Thats what would've happened had we not overachieved so much. If you asked any Bruin 3 years ago, if they would be happy with the alternate reality I present, they would have been thrilled. Especially 1 year removed from back to back 10-11 win seasons.
Howland has done a purely phenomenal job the last years. We got thumped because he can't teach height. Theres only so much you can do when you are over matched physically.
by kidro2001 on Apr 7, 2008 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right on, whp68!
The type of immediate post game panic/despair/finger pointing I saw in some quarters has been around for a long time in any program - but the long view should be considered. Thanks for your posts. I mean, is anybody outside of the Tar Heel nation's bandwagoneers (I'm sure they have theirs too) feeling like Carolina isn't a national power today? Of course not! UCLA is relevant in the NCAA hoops discussion again, and we have Coach Howland and his players to thank for that! We're going to finish climbing that mountain to a twelfth banner soon, folks. Have some faith, and some perspective, as whp68 urges.
Did CBH coach perfectly Saturday? No - but he is sharp, and he is adaptable. I firmly believe that a program must learn how to win at the highest level, and sustained excellence requires some time to develop. We're knocking on the door, Bruins
As an aside, I wouldn't be at all shocked if KL decided to stay - he's smart enough to see the benefit of improving his conditioning, and I suspect that he may feel that another year might bring us to the promised land. We have a GREAT recruiting class coming in to help with depth if he should stay. This loss might be the catalyst leading to a banner in 2009.
Keep the faith. Bruins forever!
Jim
by bruinjim on Apr 7, 2008 5:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Memphis State
On another note, our very own Steve Lavin has been going around complaining to anyone that will listen that his tourney teams were also defeated by teams with better players, yet it would be he that would be blamed for the losses while his successor gets off scot-free for any coaching shortcomings. Can someone please confront this moron and tell him that he is no where near the class of Ben Howland?
by bruin8uclap on Apr 7, 2008 6:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Scheduling
Before the NCAA tournament had started, Memphis had played no team which reached the round of 16, except Tennessee (in-state opponent played at home). It is not clear that Memphis would have played us even if we wanted to. And Conference- USA was a joke, so Memphis had one hard game (Tennessee) before the NCAA tournament.
Kansas had also played no team which reached the round of 16, except for Texas. They clearly had played more hard games than Memphis, because they faced Texas and Texas A&M during their regular season and/or in their conference tournaments.
However, despite the disparaging comments above, 3 Pac-10 teams made the round of 16, which is more than any other conference. As you point out, Stanford and WSU got blown out in the tourney, but their losses were to Texas and UNC, who are hardly chopped liver.
UCLA, meanwhile, played Texas at home, Davidson at Anaheim, and Michigan State on a neutral court.
These schedules are set well before the season begins. The fact that UCLA played 3 sweet-16 teams before January (i.e. earlier in the season) speaks pretty well to a high degree of difficulty.
In hindsight, you may have wished that we had played Kansas and Memphis, but there is no indication that they wanted to play us (given their relatively easier schedules).
by islandbruin on Apr 7, 2008 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True but the comment has validity
Maybe he should schedule some teams that are wildly athletic earlier vs some of the many games we played against pansies. Sure you can pick a few good games on the list but there are plenty of cupcakes.
Not sure that is really the issue as to why we lost to Memphis though.
by bruins grad and dad on Apr 8, 2008 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Media Darlings
So, I am really starting to disregard much of the garbage that they push on tv/radio/papers.
But this made me think. In football, Pete Carroll is always regarded by the media as the savior, the genius despite losing several big time games, the can't do no wrong coach despite all his previous and current players' legal troubles, you get my point...
Coach Howland has done just as good, if not better, with our Ben Ball team if you consider the tremendous amount of talent in numbers versus the numbers in football. Now why does he get so much criticism with such consistent winning record while Pete Carroll always gets a free pass for losses and running a shady program? Same reason Florida's Donovan and Memphis' Calipari gets a pass...they are colorful media friendly coaches. I keep hearing from smaller local sportscasters that Coach Howland is less friendlier and less approachable...my opinion, it's all good, let our coach do all his talking on the court...forget kissing up to these media ignoramuses and all their bandwagon jumping speeches. We keep doing what we do...WIN!
Go Bruins.
by bruin98 on Apr 7, 2008 8:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Apples & Oranges
Every UCLA coach after him come with the UCLA name brand that makes it easier to recruit. So they should be expected to win a championship much sooner than 15 years.
by Heffer on Apr 7, 2008 9:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Meant as tongue-in-cheek..
by whp68 on Apr 7, 2008 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are talking about Ben
by 75NatChamps on Apr 7, 2008 11:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ben's goal from Day One...
by bruindodger on Apr 8, 2008 1:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Howland isn't perfect.
by Chandler on Apr 8, 2008 5:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Just to play devil's advocate
But I think the criticism from the media, et al, isn't about CBH's drive to win a championship, but how his teams play.
by Westwood Wizard on Apr 8, 2008 9:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Here's an example from a moron
I am writing in regard to your April 7 article entitled "UCLA in need of boost".
Your comments are so completely inappropriate and uncalled for that I am having a hard time even formulating a response.
The "incapable" Bruins offense you describe was rated in the top 5 in terms of offensive efficiency. The UCLA offense is not designed to run and gun. It is a patient, deliberate offense, the purpose of which is to find a high percentage shot that will prevent the opposition from running its break. When UCLA makes its shots and forces the other team to play half-court offense, it is nearly unbeatable. The problem is not with the offense, but with having the players who can hit the shots. Last year, the team had no inside presence and had to rely on the perimeter players too much. They were very good, but obviously that cannot take you far enough unless you shoot lights out, which is why we lost to Florida. This year, the team had Kevin Love, whom I believe is the best post player in college basketball. However, Memphis was very good at taking him out of the game and once again UCLA had to rely on outside shooting. Well, having lost Arron Afflalo and with Mike Roll being injured, that is not a good formula.
To suggest that Ben Howland needs to "overhaul" his offense because it "only" took him to three straight Final Fours without a championship, reeks of a sense of entitlement and unrealistic expectations. All Ben Howland needs is to have an outside threat AND an inside presence at the same time. If the offense was as "broken" as you claim it to be, I doubt this team would have won 35 games. It's a good thing Coach Howland doesn't care what you think.
Articles like yours perpetrate the illusion in the mass media that UCLA fans will only be satisfied with a championship. It is ludicrous and way off base, a lie planted by the incompetent Steve Lavin to justify his mediocre achievements. Ben Howland is an amazing coach, dare I say the best coach in the country right now. You forget that, outside a couple of exceptions, his players were in fact not all that highly recruited when they came to UCLA, but somehow they leave with much more than they came with. He resurrected the careers of Ryan Hollins and Cedric Bozeman, players who languished under the Lizard of Westwood's "coaching". And he will have a championship long before you have a column that makes sense.
by tasser10 on Apr 8, 2008 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good one, Tasser!
Dear "your name here" ....
by snorkeldorf on Apr 8, 2008 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
by tasser10 on Apr 8, 2008 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
snorkeldorf is right
by bluestreet on Apr 8, 2008 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
