E-mails, letters, voice mails, etc can all be ignored, deleted, trashed, etc., but one thing that cannot be ignored, deleted or trashed is our economic support. These are difficult economic times, and every dollar that goes into our University is precious, but we must have our voices heard: this athletic director cannot and should not be employed another day.

Tell Chancellor Block that you will no longer be making any more donations to this University. Tell Chancellor Block that you will no longer be purchasing any more tickets. Tell Chancellor Block that you will no longer be purchasing any more UCLA merchandise. Tell Chancellor Block that Dan Guerrero must be fired immediately.

This has gone on long enough. There is no more room for error. This University is losing MILLIONS of dollars in potential revenue every year by fielding a poor to mediocre football team. This athletic director is irreversibly hurting the brand that is UCLA by not firing Rick Neuheisel after getting destroyed by Southern Cal and dragging on this embarrassing and disgraceful situation.

Continue reading this post »

I haven't posted in a while, mainly because I haven't the intestinal fortitude to follow this football team since week one. I have never felt so detached from this program since I enrolled as a freshman back in 1989. I do read daily, but just couldn't find it in me to post anything. My passion truly is at a all time low. I was planning on staying away until basketball season until I heard a segment on the radio today discussing whether or not it was okay for NFL fans to "root against" their favorite team in hopes of landing the crown jewel of the 2012 class, Andrew Luck. Basically, the consensus was that it indeed was alright, because a "true fan" wants what is good for their team in the long run, and if that means losing in the short term achieves that goal, so be it. So, that got me to thinking, is it okay to root against UCLA, knowing that every loss gets us one step closer to a change in leadership, and hence achieving what is best for the program in the long run? I say "yes".

If a coaching change had already happened, as I believe it should had after Rick regressed to 4-8 after year three, culminating with that embarrassing loss to southern cal, or, at the very least, after last Thursday, I wouldn't be writing this. However, knowing that our AD is the same AD that kept Karl Dorrell around for a 5th year after a 7-6 record in year four and a unexpected victory over southern cal, and knowing this is the same AD that kept Rick around after regressing to 4-8 after year three and a embarrassing loss to southern cal, and knowing that the schedule shapes up nicely in that something north of 6 wins is entirely achievable even for this poorly coached team, and knowing that anything north of 6 wins and, perhaps, with southern cal strategically lying down for us during their throw-away probation year, is "good enough" for this AD to keep Rick around for year five, then I wouldn't be writing this. But, unfortunately, I simply do not trust those making the decisions to do what is right for the program, unless the pressure is so immense, and the amount of defeats are so numerous, that they simply do not have a choice. This, unfortunately, is what I know true about my alma mater following this program since 1989.

I understand those who disagree with me and feel that it is never okay to root against our kids. I get it. I respect it. But, on the other side of the coin, do understand those who see the big picture and understand how things operate at this school. I came to the conclusion last year after the southern cal game that Rick was "not the guy". Now, just about everybody realizes that Rick is "not the guy", and what is best for this program, long term, is for a change in leadership as soon as possible. If losing now achieves that goal, then that is what I want. And I think it is okay to feel that way. Hence, I am writing this to convey to those who may feel the same way that I do that it is alright, you are not alone, and in my opinion you are no less of a fan than any one else. Go Bruins.

Bumped. - BN

Purveyors of the "One and Done" paradox point out that the small handful of the most talented high school players in the country actually are a negative impact to the program, and thus should generally be avoided in recruiting. They argue that these players are more preoccupied with getting their points, auditioning for the NBA, don't play defense, and generally don't "buy in" to the team concept. They argue that their departure leaves a void the following year, and years to come. And they argue that Howland's "system" (actually,at this point, I really don't have a good grasp of exactly what Howland's "system" is) is not conducive to bringing in these talents. I'm in opposition to this view, and was asked to create a fan post to generate further discussion on this topic.

If Howland's system in not conducive to bringing in elite-level talent, regardless if whether or not they may be "one and done", then I really have to question if Howland is the right fit here at UCLA in the long term. Other programs, programs that generally are thought of as being in the elite category, are operating under the same rules, regulations, and atmosphere that we are operating under, are not only doing just fine, but are flourishing. They are winning championships or are competing for championships nearly every year. And when their early departures move on and leave voids, those voids are quickly filled up, with perhaps a rebuilding year every so often that probably consists of 20-25 wins and a 1st or 2nd round tourney exit. It appears that coaches at these programs have "systems" in place that are conducive to bringing in these talents. We should have a "system" too. This "system" needs to attract the most talented high schoolers in the country, integrate them, maximize their talents, coach them up and mesh them well with the less-talented, longer-tenured players, and have contingencies in place to fill the void left behind after their departure. This is the system that other programs have. This is the system I want at UCLA.

Continue reading this post »

southern cal's AD Mike Garrett sent apology letters to 5 schools yesterday stating, after looking into the matter, that Dillon Baxter in fact did not receive phone calls from those institutions, as was alleged and  reported earlier from sc's compliance officer, allegations of which would be violations of  NCAA regulations.

Essentially, Garrett has strongly implied that Dillon Baxter fabricated these allegations. 

If Baxter did indeed lie about this, then it would appear he violated a NCAA Bylaw and would be subject to suspension by the NCAA:

NCAA Bylaw 10.1, which addresses “unethical conduct” and includes “Knowingly furnishing the NCAA or the individual’s institution false or misleading information concerning the individual’s involvement in or knowledge of matters relevant to a possible violation of an NCAA regulation.”

There is a precedent in this matter. Oklahoma St.'s Dez Bryant was ruled ineligible by the NCAA for most of the 2009 season for violating this very bylaw when he lied to the NCAA about being in contact with Deion Sanders (which was, in of itself, not a violation per se).

It would seem that Baxter's fabrication would meet the criteria for a violation of this bylaw, as he apparently gave false information to his own institution regarding matters relevant to a possible violation.

So, NCAA, now that 5 schools have been publicly slandered due to false information given by one of your student athletes, how are you going to handle this?

Continue reading this post »

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

So what are we going to do about it?

AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill

Many Bruin fans, myself included, went to bed last night with our blood pressure a little higher, our heart rates a little faster, and our jaws and fists clenched a little tighter. A few vulgar outbursts under our breaths. Anger, fury, and frustration firmly entrenched in our minds.

When is a loss not just a loss? When we lose to Southern Cal. When we lose the way we did last night.

Did we learn anything about Pete Carroll and Southern Cal that we didn't know already? No. They are classless. They are arrogant. They are hypocrites. They are low-lifes. Tell me something I didn't know, say, 20 years ago.

So now what?

My hatred for Southern Cal cannot get any stronger. I loathe them more than a loathe anything on this planet. Yet I am certain there are many Bruins out there that don't have as strong a hatred as I do. If I am on that campus right now, no Trojan gets within 100 yards of the Bruin bear during game week without getting knocked out. Plain and simple. Maybe after last night, there are a few more Bruins on campus that now feel the way I do.

A few more enraged, polarized Bruin faithful...that's a start.

Continue reading this post »