SB Nation User Blog: Class of 66

Random Thoughts on the Miami (OH) Game

Class of 66 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:22:46 -0000

We Are Where We Are -- Not Where We Will Be

Those who were complaining last night have to chill. Calling for zones, or other things we do not do, misses the perspective of where this team is, now, and the path it will have to take to get to where we want it to be, later. This is a young, inexperienced team. We lost 4 key players last year, all of whom can be called "starters" but for the fact that LMR, who had been a starter, was replaced by KL in the line up.

We return 2 experienced starters, DC -- who is spectacular, and JS who is playing well (but for the 3's -- sound familiar?). Roll, Dragovic, Keefe had very limited time last year; Aboya had more but still lacks experience. We are asking a lot from these players. Roll and Dragovic looked good -- Drago showing an inside game and some D, and Roll being the Roll of old, good D, passing and some success from outside. Keefe did not have a great game, but these guys will grow, rapidly, with more game time. I actually think we played best with Roll and/or Drago in the game. AA2 has never been an inside scoring presence and I'm not sure he will be this year. I wonder if trying to stay out of foul trouble is taming the monster in him. The freshmen, though incredibly talented, are freshmen. We have been spoiled by KL -- he was not a typical freshman. He came with a body, hands, knowledge and skill set that is rare in first year players.

The freshmen have been coached by CBH for a month or so. As good as they are, and as committed to D as they are, they really don't know how to play it yet. They will, later.

It is trite to call any game a "learning experience", but for them, all of these early games are learning experiences. On the whole, I think they looked very good -- save for a couple of them getting in foul trouble. These are FRESHMEN in the first week of their college careers -- let's cut them some slack. As good as he was, and he was as good as it gets, KL needed several games to find the path. These guys will be where we need them soon.

That said, the freshmen need time in the weight room. Ben Ball is built on muscle. As good as they are, they will be better when they are stronger. Best example? RW after a year with the weights.

Not being as strong as we will be and not playing the D we will play -- we allowed Miamioh to shoot better than 50% from both the field and behind the arc. Hard to win games when that happens. They stayed in the game at the FT line. We did not make FT's until the end of the game -- when they were essential. Had we made them all game long, we'd not have been in such a close game. (Sound familiar?)

The inside game? We've been here before. We do not have "strong hands" inside -- another function of youth and the need for strength. When the inside guys drop the ball, the ball stops going inside. We also had rebounds taken away from us. This, too, will get better. And, again, we were spoiled by KL -- but even he dropped some balls in the first few games.

A team with great talent, but not size and experience, will look better in a run and gun game than it will look in a half court game. We have a lot of guys who can run and make moves to the basket on a break -- but they are not as strong in a set offense. Last night, with the troubles inside, we really didn't run much of a set offense. Our ball movement wasn't there, and the screens not crisp and set. So, DC took over and slashed. Again, experience overcoming inexperience. Those screens will get stronger and more precise and our ball movement will happen. And, when we can confidently go inside/out, we will see more team O.

All of this should be no surprise to anyone who knows Ben Ball. THERE IS NO REASON TO PANIC. NO REASON TO CHANGE THE WAY WE PLAY. We are on the right path and we will get there.

Zones and full court presses? That's not who we are. Or, who we need to be to win it all. Pressing all game? First, Coach always had a very dominant big guy who played great D sitting back under the basket in case the press was beat. Second, teams today have better ball handlers and are harder to press. Third. Do you want to kill DC and JS who will have to play a lot of minutes while this team grows up? If so, give them the added responsibility of pressing.

We are a good team, not yet a great team, yet.

Were it not for the polls, I think our expectations would be more realistic.

I really cannot understand how anyone rates us TODAY, in the top 10. Doing so overlooks our youth and inexperience.

I think they are rating our year end potential not our current state.

We are going to lose some games along the way -- maybe soon. And, there are those who will wail and lament. Not me.

I've got my eyes on the prize. We will get where we have to be when we have to be there.

Random Thoughts on The OSU Game

Class of 66 — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 13:50:11 -0000

Reflections From Tunnel 4-H, Row 47 Seat 105.

Wherever I am, I bleed Blue and Gold. But, the colors are more vibrant when I am at home, watching the game in person with my Bruin Brothers and Sisters.

Friday, I flew in from Exile to attend the game.

The score notwithstanding, yesterday was a special day.

It started with the tailgating and ended with the walk out. In spite of the score, it was a day filled with positive energy and surprisingly good Bruin vibes.

I love everything about being a Bruin.

Now that I've got a kid that is in a marching band I pay more attention to marching bands.

I love our band!!! Last week, I asked questions about the "band culture" at UCLA -- I was concerned that what was going on at Wisconsin might be a national thing. I got strong, reassuring responses from the BN band people. Deeply appreciated responses.

So, yesterday, after eating, I wandered over to watch the band and guard warm up. What I saw was exactly what I wanted to see. A group of great kids, serious but having fun. Warming up, sounding good. I went from section to section, took some pictures and hopefully got a little sound to share with Jen who stayed behind in Texas. (I managed to inadvertently embarrass Daynuh by asking to take her picture while she was in the drum line; I wanted Jen to have a face to put on the sage advice that Daynuh had given her on BN. Sorry, Daynuh -- but as your band mates teased you, because of all you do on BN, you are "famous".)

I had a chance to meet the guard director and band director -- they were gracious and supportive to a father who really wants his kid to go to UCLA and be in the guard or band (something the kid really wants, too.) Interestingly, Mr. Henderson had just come back from judging a competition of Texas high school bands. I guess he was impressed with what they do, gave me his card and told me to stay in touch.

I know it is tough for kids to get into UCLA, even kids whose grades are above a 4.0, but I really hope Jen can get into UCLA. I know she will love the band and guard energy and that it will anchor her college years in the same way that band and color guard are anchoring her high school years.

I know that if Jen can get into UCLA, her future will be in good hands.

Go BAND!!!

It was great to be back with my seating section family -- we have grown up and grown old together. The little kid who sat behind me in the early '90's with his dad, went to UCLA, became a teacher, once passed out and puked all around us during an SC game, is now a young man, has a 4 year old kid of his own, and is a director of magnet schools for the LA Unified School District. He is a Bruin raising s new generation of Bruins. Our future is in good hands.

There is a distinct difference in the energy in the Rose Bowl this year. Yesterday, was not our best day on the field. But, there was very little negativity. People understand where we are and are CONFIDENT about where we are going.

The game looks very different from the stands than it does on TV.

First and foremost, our players play hard, play all out, play to win and take losing very seriously. There is no "joking" through bad times on our sidelines. This is part of the culture change.

A while back, I wrote a post about grading effort rather than accomplishment -- that I thought we had to judge this season by the effort we put out rather than our won/loss record. After yesterday, I believe that even more.

There have been constant questions about why we are playing certain players, both on the offense and defense.

I think the answer is clear. They are the best players we have at those positions.

The coaches know this best. They want to win. They are frustrated, too. They are putting the right people on the field -- the best they have.

Those kids are playing hard to the best of their abilities. I cannot ask for more.

A couple deserve mention.

Say what you will about Kevin Craft, but he is a total warrior. Watching in person, using my own focus, not the cameras -- on every snap, Kevin Craft is under siege. He rarely has the time to drop back and set up. He is hit, often very hard, on EVERY play. The fact that we can't run is obvious to all. So, they come after Craft -- hard. He gives every ounce he has.

Bell is a warrior with a huge heart. Because we have to at least try to run in every game, he is sent in to run, once in a while. And, most often he runs into walls. Yesterday, he was able to break a couple of runs. It is then that you see how injured he must be. Movement is not easy for him and it shows. So, why is he in the game? Because, with our need to pass, he is a ferocious blocker. There is always someone breaking through our O line, quickly, on every play and Bell more often than not picks him up. Think about this: Bell came to UCLA as a RUNNING back, not a blocking back. He is doing what he has to do probably not what he wants to do. This is not the season he expected but it is the season we need. Thank you, Kahlil.

People question why Michael Norris starts and plays so many downs. The answer seems clear to me. The coaches think he is the best player we have for the position. He looked very bad on two plays, yesterday. But, those passes were not on Norris, alone. They are on the entire D -- a D that has yet to figure out how to put pressure on a QB. He was given an unbelievable amount of time to throw and given the time, most every receiver will shake a coverage guy.

I wondered out loud to my seat mates what would happen if KC got that time -- especially with the great receivers we have. What we don't see on TV are the very good plays Norris makes, either making hard tackles or stripping away blockers so that others can get the ball carrier.

On both sides of the ball, you can see that the passion bucket, if not the skill bucket, is full.

The analogy is often drawn to Howland's first years here. Watching, in person, as Idid with Howland's teams, I can see that the analogy is apt.

And, I think all in the stands understand that.

In fact, on the last play of the game, Geoff got up and asked those of us remaining in the stands to make some noise -- to try to drown out the signal call from OSU's QB. The stands shook!

Enough said about the state of Bruin spirit.

And, then came the defining moment of my game day experience.

With stands that had started clearing out in the late parts of the third quarter only somewhat filled,

CRN came over and talked to us. Unbelievable, after what he had just gone through, he came over and talked to us.

Not some rah rah phony speech, but a deeply sincere talk along the lines of (paraphrased)

"I want you do know how much it means to us that you stayed and cheered until the end. This game is not what we wanted. I know you are frustrated. We are frustrated to. But, we will get there. I promise we will get there."

I know he will keep that promise

My passion bucket overflows -- not just for the football program but for everything it means to be a part of UCLA.

What a day. It is so great to be a Bruin!!!

. Our future is, indeed, in very good hands.

Waiting for the Facts on Dragovic

Class of 66 — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 17:49:00 -0000

As usual, CBH is doing the right thing -- and so should we.

Nestor asked me to turn this comment to his post on Dragovic into a separate Fan Post.

In Nestor's post, CBH is quoted as saying that "I'm going to wait for all the facts."

We must all “wait for all of the facts”.

I’ve written, several times here, at great length about “fairness”, “due process” and the fact that all who are charged are “innocent until proven guilty”.

ND has simply been charged.

I want to make one thing very clear. Our society should not tolerate violence of any kind. Those who perpetrate acts of violence should be punished.

Violence against anyone is unacceptable.

“Domestic violence” is an area often treated as “special” — one in which the beat officers are instructed to apply a “zero tolerance” policy. What that means is that they have no discretion in deciding whether to arrest and take into custody the alleged perpetrator — be it a man or woman. If a domestic partner says there was violence — there will be an arrest.

Most of the cops I know dislike “domestic” calls more than most others — because they are often called in by one party or the other, not because there was violence but because one party wants to exert leverage or up the ante against the other. In some instances, there was no violence — but zero tolerance often mandates that an arrest and removal be made.

I do not know whether the LAPD has a “zero tolerance” policy in this area. Rotten, do you know? If it does, that, in itself may explain why Drago spent a night in jail.

I am not saying it didn’t happen or that it did. All I’m saying is that CBH is taking the approach we all should take — let’s wait until the facts come in.

For more on this topic, please read my cautionary notes on the so called MJD incident. There was a lot of wailing and angst, MJD lost stature in the eyes of some, only to have he facts completely exonerate him.

Let’s give ND the presumptions of innocence to which he is entitled. There will be plenty of time to talk about appropriate dispositions if he is proven to be guilty.

sjh

PS. There is a difference between a societal sanction and one by an athletic team. CBH can make an administrative decision unfettered by the procedures mandated by the Constitution and the criminal justice system.

If there is any coach in any sport that I trust to do a fair investigation and do the right thing pending a full legal disposition, it is CBH.

One concern I have is that because some here have consistently nailed cheety petey for his lenient applications of administrative discretion, to justify our position we will demand that CBH act immediately and harshly — even though the facts might not warrant it.

We have good reason to distrust cp and absolutely every reason to trust CBH. Let’s just step back and let him handle this.

PPS. It is clear that my many years of work with the criminal justice system and my years of teaching criminal and Constitutional law have affected my judgment and conclusions. I have seen far too many people stigmatized by the reports of conduct that later proved to be unfounded.

OT -- Anyone In the Band Here?

Class of 66 — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 23:42:05 -0000

I've wanted to ask this question for several weeks. But, it is so off topic, I held back for a bye week. So here it goes:

My 16 year old daughter dreams in Blue and Gold. UCLA is her first choice and we'd all be thrilled if she can get in. (UCSB is her second.)

Wherever Jen goes, she wants to be a part of a band, particularly a big marching band. (We know UCSB doesn't have a marching band.)

Two questions:

1. First an easy question: Jen plays flute and marched with the flute for two years. Now she's a part of the color guard -- she dances and throws flags and swords and rifles. Does UCLA have a color guard? Is it a part of the band?

2. And, now, the more difficult question. I've been deeply disappointed that twice, in the last few years, the University of Wisconsin has had to sanction its band for bad behavior that included sexual harassment and the abuse of women in the program. That news would disturb me no matter the school. But, since I taught at the UW for almost 30 years, I am deeply upset.

I've read a lot about the situation in Wisconsin. I am troubled by the story lines that claim that sexual harassment and the abuse of women are a part of the marching band culture -- no matter the school.

We are out looking at colleges for Jen who is now a junior.

I'd love some honest feedback from my Bruin brothers and sisters who have been in the band or are close to it.

Is harassment a part of the UCLA band culture?

Like any father, I want my daughter's college years to create fond memories that last a lifetime, not scars.

Thanks.

sjh

"I think that in the world of football, a lot of times there’s a temptation to pick up rat d...

Class of 66 — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:40:14 -0000

"I think that in the world of football, a lot of times there’s a temptation to pick up rat droppings when elephant droppings are flying everywhere. So we try to focus on elephant droppings around here."

Mike Leach (San Francisco Chronicle)

Random Thoughts on the Cal Game

Class of 66 — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:53:26 -0000

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Playing the Cards We've Been Dealt.

I grew up to "question authority". I don't automatically trust many people.

But, I trust this coaching staff -- the entire staff (yes, including DW) -- to be playing the cards they have been dealt as well as they can be played. I trust them because from what I'm seeing, they are earning that trust.

No one can question the intensity with which this staff, and their players, want to win.

There has been a quantum shift since last year. The desire is clearly there. The effort is there. And, some times, the execution is there.

I would rather have CRN in Craft's ear than a deer-in-the-headlights coach who simply walks away when things blow up. There are rumblings of criticism about CRN's treatment of KC -- that he's destroying the kid's confidence. That's BS. How do I know? Because I listen to KC describe his relationship with his coach. And, I watch him play his heart out in every game.

As to KC -- I made a comment in the game thread that I'll repeat here: KC is playing because CRN and NC have decided that he should be playing. They know best who is best able to lead this team. Unless you see all the cards they are holding, it's unfair to speculate or criticize.

And, I made the comment that we have a 3rd string, transfer quarterback who has had to become the starter -- playing with more experienced and acclimated players. Does anyone really believe that KC is playing below the level of those around him? I don't and I don't think it is fair to call him out. He is doing his very best. I think the whole team is.

We just aren't holding very strong cards, now.

What I like most is that the coaches are constantly trying to put us in a position to win. Not to stay close. Not to lose by just a little. But, to win.

The criticized on-side kick was a good call. So was the fake punt. When you have weak cards, some times you have to steal a pot by taking a risk. As I wrote a few weeks ago, one does not create a culture of winning without trying to win.

The day will come when these things work for us.

And, then the day will come when we don't have to try them because we will be able to win games without taking the risks that trick plays present. Trick plays are an attempt to level the playing field. We will own that field, soon, and trick plays will only be needed for their entertainment value.

We all have concerns and here are some of mine from yesterday's game:

1. It's hard for a team like ours to overcome stupid penalties -- like the unsportsmanlike conduct call that really hurt us. Some penalties show a clear lack of discipline -- and we seem to be slipping a bit here. But, as others pointed out in the thread, some are the inappropriate manifestation of extreme frustration -- an inappropriate way of showing how aggressively we want to win. Penalties are like showing your weak cards to your opponents. We shouldn't be making their game that much easier for them.

2. For the last couple of years we've not had a kick off kicker who can put the ball deep in the end zone or deep in enemy territory. With each kick off we give up field position. Mike Leach held an open try out for a kicker and found one. Maybe, we should do the same.

3. I think our tackling was somewhat better, yesterday, but we still had our bad moments. One improvement -- it seemed that the first people to the ball were going for the stop, not the strip. Anyone else think that to be the case?

4. We cannot continue to play in the shot gun, which with KC is desirable, if we cannot get him the snap in the air. He should be able to take for granted that the snap will be on target. When he has to divert attention to finding it and retrieving it, he loses valuable time and focus. We criticize him for not going through his "rotation", for only looking at one receiver, but he loses a second or two trying to pick up the snap. I've noticed that our long snaps on field goals and punts are usually on the money. How about trying the long snapper here?

Notice, I don't jump on the "O line is terrible" bandwagon. Palcic is playing the cards he is holding as well as he can. He has tried all kinds of combinations to cover for his original talent level and the injuries our guys have sustained. How can you criticize his or the players efforts?

As to playing KB instead of DC -- once you understand that you are going to have to pass, not run, you put in the back who blocks for KC best, and that's KB. My heart goes out to KB -- he deserved a huge break out year. But, on this team, he's been relegated to a blocking back position; I love his attitude and commitment.

Finally, I'm not even slightly surprised about what we are going through. If you were to tell the champion of the World Poker Tour that he would have to play a full season in which his best hands would be low pairs, he'd play and he'd be as creative as possible, but he'd find it hard to win the championship. He'd win some hands he should, and probably one or two he shouldn't -- but by and large the cards will control the game.

At the beginning of the year we hoped to win the games that "on paper" we should and maybe one or two that we'd be predicted to lose. And, then we made some assumptions about what games those would be.

We thought we were better than predicted when we beat Tenn. The season is showing us that they were worse than predicted.

Looking at the teams we've played, I actually think we are about where we should be -- and maybe a little better considering that we were in a position to beat both FSU and Oregon, and despite the final score, were also in a position to beat Cal. (BTW -- Arizona is proving to be a better team than predicted and that loss should be in the "expected" column, too.")

I think we will win 3 of our last 4 -- and I'm not conceding a loss to sc but, rather figuring that we will be inconsistent in one of those games

We have 2 weeks to get ready for OSU -- and with the exception of their win over sc, they've played at a level at which we can compete. Washington is down this year. ASU is not better than the teams we've hung with. sc is beatable -- especially because it is the last game of the season and I think our coaches will have the players ready and believing that they can win the game.

I hate losing. But, I'm not suffering this season. Whereas, in the past, I used to look forward to the end of the season -- to the end of my misery -- now, I look forward to every game. Strangely enough, I've not even begun to think about basketball.

Maybe, in the last few weeks, the cards will start to turn our way. If they do, I know these coaches will know how to play them.

Random Thoughts on the Stanford Game

Class of 66 — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 14:50:42 -0000

Last night, hours after our game was over, I watched a DVR'd version of the game. I had followed the game, live, by reading the game day thread on my iPhone. (Thanks to all for keeping me in the game.)

Knowing that we won the game gave me a very different perspective as I watched it unfold -- and it put the angst/frustration, hope and relentless optimism of the game day thread in perspective.

Here's what I take away from the game:

1. When you watch the game knowing that KC will ultimately lead an incredible drive to victory -- you can overlook some of the frustrating things he did along the way. When you look at his numbers at the end of the game, you realize that he had a good game -- something that only comes strongly into focus when you know the outcome before you watch the disappointing plays. Yes, he made some bad moves, but when the pressure was on, he made the right moves.

Watching without fear that we will lose, you see a young to the program, inexperienced but very game quarterback. One with faults -- not looking downfield and not looking off receivers -- but also one with a lot of heart.

I have to continually remind myself that at the start of the year, not many of us thought KC would see any action -- and now he is starting.

He clearly has the confidence of his players -- ala Pat Cowan.

And, he has the confidence of the most important person in the equation, Norm Chow.

2. CRN impresses me every day in every way. (Except one. Did I see his play sheet tucked in the back of his pants, yesterday? If so, it proves the point that in every way he is the exact opposite of KD).

One of the things I most like about CRN is that he has his ego under control. For all the bad publicity he has gotten -- publicity that makes it seem as though he is egocentric -- what we see is the exact opposite. He gives credit to everyone but himself and takes the blame to shield others.

When he talks of his frustration with KC -- his tone is measured and indirect. I loved the "We should only do things on the field that we do in practice" half-time comment. He could easily have said "KC is out of control and playing out of the system". Or, as KD said more than once last year "We had the right play called, the players just didn't execute it."

I find very impressive that CRN -- who apparently wanted to pull KC -- let NC make the final choice. And, had it not worked out, I know CRN would not have called out NC for the decision.

3. NC is amazing. If you can see CRN's frustration with KC, think about NC's; he's calling the plays that apparently KC isn't executing.

Yet, NC works with his inexperienced QB, keeps calling the plays, nurtures him and brings him to the point where he can win the game, and does.

For all the weakness in our O, NC is finding ways to move the ball, stay on the field, and score. And, finally, win.

4. All of the coaches deserve very high marks for bringing along our first time starters, particularly the true freshmen. How many staffs can get such great contributions, on all sides of the ball, from first time players? Give the coaches credit -- they have worked hard to get these guys to a point where they can put them in the game because they think they will improve our chances of winning as opposed to putting them into the game to give them experience.

5. The Culture Shift is evident. We are becoming a team that understands the importance of effort, passion and commitment. And, we are becoming a team that takes losses hard and wins with an eye toward what we did wrong as well as what we did right. That is a very far cry from the culture of the last several years.

6. CRN and the Press: He is a great interview and represents us extremely well. it's not just that he is articulate -- which he is, perhaps one of the most articulate coaches in the game. It's that he has real things to say. How different from "We are a work in progress" or "we are turning the corner". CRN tells what we've done right and what we have to do better. Without throwing anyone under the bus, he lets us know what he's thinking about his players -- both the good and the bad.

I'm also struck by how he has silenced most of his critics. It's hard to say those terrible things about him when the viewers and readers can get to know him, first hand, through his media appearances.

This is the first time I've watched a game on replay knowing the outcome. Usually, if I know I'm going to watch it "delayed", I make every effort to go into the TV room uninformed of the score. I'm glad I followed the game day thread and knew what was going to happen and when. It really gave me a perspective I've not had before.

I liked what I saw. We are on the path to greatness. It is always great to be a Bruin. It's just a little greater, this morning.

Relentless Optimism and the Creation of a Winning Culture

Class of 66 — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 00:22:24 -0000

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Expanding On A Couple of My Game Day Thread Comments.

Some are questioning a couple of CRN's game decisions -- going for the 4th and 1, and accepting the penalty rather than forcing the field goal.

I do not question those decisions: In the context of the big picture mission -- the creation of a positive attitude and winning culture, CRN made the right call each time.

We must remember that CRN took over a team that played not to lose rather than one that played to win. For the last several years our players were told to take knees, punt on short yardage situations, always go for field goals in the red zone, and even to punt deep in sc territory.

The message this team received during those years was "we don't think you can do it" or "we don't trust you to make the plays".

Both of CRN's decisions that are being questioned conveyed the exact opposite message -- a message that must be sent and internalized if we are to develop winning ways.

On 4th and 1, CRN said to the O, you've been racking up yards, I trust you to get this one. I have confidence in you. Go do it.

And, on taking the penalty, knowing that FSU's field goal kicker was weak, CRN was saying to the D, "Stuff them and they won't make the FG". Again, the message was one of trust in the players -- a message that must be sent and internalized if we are to develop a winning culture.

To succeed and grow, our players must believe that "relentless optimism" is more than a catch phrase, it is a way of life. CRN had to make these calls to prove his point: we are always going to try to win.

Actually, the way we were playing and running the ball, the 4th and 1 call seemed a "no brainer". FSU just stepped up and stopped us.

And, shouldn't a head coach believe that his DC would not let a team score on a 3rd and 22? In making that call he was telling DW, "I trust you, get this done".

(I'm biting my tongue. I don't think that trust is well placed. That's all I'll say, now.)

A few more thoughts: Most of our coaches are doing incredible jobs.

Norm Chow is a genius. He is doing more with less than any coach around. What a brilliant game he called. He got as much out of our O players as one could. And, they played a truly inspired game. They played with passion and heart.

Coleman played extremely well. No one who watched the play or the replay can get down on him for the fumble. It was a great defensive play on the ball. Coleman had it secured but it's not always possible to protect it from a direct hit. He was the right player in the right place. Sometimes things happen. This one play cannot overshadow his entire game.

The O line is pulling together. Palcic is doing a great job. And so are the players.

And a special shout out to Kevin Craft. He has heart and skill. He played within himself and Chow's plan. Both coach and player should be proud.

We are still having special teams problems, but there was clear improvement this week. We are now getting run backs. The holding call was a killer -- but it was real and obvious. Kids make mistakes. Terrence Austin was huge.

Our receivers were running good routes and catching the ball. Embree? Terrific.

There was a lot improvement in all of these divisions of the team. This was not where the game was lost.

One last comment to some of my BN brothers and sisters: I am so tired of hearing that the O is somehow responsible for the D's poor play -- that the D is on the field too long and that it is the O's fault. This mantra started last year and was spread by Walkeristas as a way of defending him against many of us who questioned his coaching ability.

I have reviewed both last year's drive charts and statistics and this year's. The argument that the O is responsible for the D's poor performance is a complete fallacy. This game really proves the point. During the first half, we had a time of possession lead of about 2:1. Our O had long drives through out the game.

The D was on the field because it could not stop anyone. It's that simple. The D always controls its own destiny. All it has to do is hold for a 3 and out. This D allowed FSU first downs on more than 50% of their 3rd downs. That explains why they were on the field so long.

Our D players played their hearts out. Harwell and Price were stalwarts. I don't think the problem is with the players.

The ref's? The SPTR's were themselves, all game. Two or three very bad calls against us, the pass interference call and the roughing the passer -- neither of which were supported by the replays. They also made a bad call against FSU -- the interception that wasn't. I coined the phrase SPTR's years ago. I cannot understand why the Pac 10 doesn't deal with the issue; a major conference cannot continue to have such inept officials. I am not claiming that they were the reason we lost. But, I am saying that so long as we demand excellence from our coaches and players it seems odd that we accept mediocrity from our officials.

This is a game we should have won -- not on paper but on the field. I'm sick that we didn't.

But, I can't help but see the progress most of this team is making and the incredible contributions the new coaches are making to our program.

These new guys, and CRN are going to get us there.

We are not just playing games -- we are rebuilding a program and culture.

To CRN, we understand that to build that culture you have to put the game in your players' hands and let them know that you believe they can handle the situations.

When it works you will be a hero. When it doesn't people will grumble. But, go for it, we have your back.

Great Article on CRN in USC Law Center Magazine

Class of 66 — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:49:50 -0000

The Law Center is it's own world.

I don't know how it is, today, but when I went to law school the Law Center was kept separate and distinct from the undergraduate program. We started and ended school on a different schedule, our classes ran on a different schedule, and we did not identify with the undergraduate institution in any way. That's a good thing because at least a third of my classmates were Bruins. This very favorable article on CRN reflects the Law Center's separate identity. I cannot see this article being run in an undergraduate publication.

Disclaimer Over.

Main point:

I got my USC Law Center magazine, yesterday, and there is a great article in it on CRN.

In it he talks about how his legal training, which he sees as an education geared at "problem solving", has given him the skill to analyze a problem, see the alternatives and make a decision -- what some people call "thinking like a lawyer". (Others say that "thinking like a lawyer" is more geared to seeing down the road and determining how much money can be made on a client but, hey, I'm way off topic already.)

Anyway, CRN talks about how he uses law school type flow charts to analyze defenses to determine offenses that will succeed against them.

The article was "fair and balanced" CRN is quoted as saying that thinking like a lawyer got him into a bit of trouble -- he analyzed some recruiting rules, found some openings and exploited them, only to be sanctioned.

When CRN was being recruited, I (and several others here) looked at the primary documents in which the charges against him were set out. Many of us who had legal backgrounds could not see how the NCAA could take action against CRN on some of these rules. They were ambiguous, at best, and did not give a clear standard so that one could be fairly charged and disciplined for their "violation".

What I liked about CRN's response in the article was his acknowledgement that he had to be careful not to be too much of a lawyer while being a coach.

I think all of us with legal training have had to learn that same lesson. We have to learn to set aside our skills not because they are not applicable but because in some contexts they are not appropriate. When I am frustrated by people who are not communicating clearly, I have a tendency to force them to get to the point by "cross examining" them -- not the best thing to do in a social situation.

While the msm (lower case for lower class writing) continues to take cheap shots at CRN, it is interesting that there are many of us, including those at the Law Center, who are very proud of him and what he brings to the job.

sjh

PS. Duh! It just dawned on me that my two favorite coaches, CRN and Mike Leach both have law degrees (Leach from Pepperdine). This reinforces what I always tell people, a law degree is like an all day pass at Disneyland. You can take any ride you choose.

Effort v. Accomplishment

Class of 66 — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 13:05:16 -0000

A different take on the talent issue.

I'm a bit uncomfortable with columnists and commentators who say things like "30 of our players don't belong on a BCS school roster", or that KC is not a "Pac 10" QB.

That may be a realistic assessment of the talent they brought to UCLA, but I do not find it productive to run that mantra, over and over, today.

These players are us. They are Bruins. They are here. It serves no purpose to denigrate their abilities or accomplishments.

To me, the key is: Did they leave it on the field? Did they play to the top of their abilities? Did they make every effort to win?

If they did, they deserve praise -- no matter the outcome.

Said another way, I am one who prefers to grade effort rather than accomplishment.

I came to this view within a year or two of the start of my long, law school teaching career.I had students who came to school with 4.0 averages and perfect LSAT's. And, I had students who came to school with far less (some might say they did not belong in a Big 10 law school, but not me.)I learned that in terms of sheer character, tenacity, and desire, I would take an overachieving, go more than the extra mile, "less qualified student" than a slacker with great ability who never reached that ability for lack of effort. Many of the best lawyers I helped train were the high effort overachievers. Many of those who got lost in the world of the law were the highly qualified slackers.

Obviously, we would prefer to have players who bring both skill and character to the field. People who come, practice hard and play hard.

And, we will.

But, at this point, it serves us no good to continue the discussion about the "bare cupboard". That "cupboard" is a Bruin locker room. The "remnants" on the shelves are OUR players.

In time, we will restock the cupboard.

For now, I think we should stick to the standard that most in BN are applying. Are we playing hard? Are we playing to the best of our abilities? Are we showing character?

Because of Ike, I missed the last two games. All I know, I've read here. There was an undercurrent, after BYU, that we did not put out a full effort.

But, from yesterday's thread, it appears we did in the Az game. From what I've read in both games, and having seen him in the Tennessee game, there is no "quit" in Kevin Craft. If that is so, I don't want any columnist telling me he does not belong in the Pac 10 or in a Bruin uniform.

It is one thing to discuss putting other players into the game, and another to denigrate those who are playing by challenging their right to be Bruins.

BN has been both realistic and positive about the Bruins who represent us on the field. I think it's time for us to circle the wagons around these guys, to protect them from the slings and arrows of the outside world and to encourage them to leave it on the field.

And when they do whether we win or lose, we should praise them.