SB Nation User Blog: Guest Blogger

Smoking Gun: Trojan Bias In The LA Times Exposed?

Guest Blogger — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 01:11:52 -0000

RSM Bruin fan recently had a very interesting email exchange with Bill Dwyre , who was sports editor of the Times for 25 years until he stepped down in May 2006 to write as a columnist. In this exchange Dwyre seem to essentially hints at a Pro-Trojan bias (cover up?) by his colleagues in the sports section. GO BRUINS. -N

I've had some back & forth dialog with Bill Dwyre, the former editor of the Los Angeles Times in recent weeks, since the Mayo story broke on ESPN, and I thought I'd share some of the recent comments on the LA Times coverage of 'SC player transgressions that Bill has provided. Take them for what they are worth.

First, I sent a scathing email to just about everyone in the LA Times Sports department, along with most of upper/senior management basically lambasting them for their pathetic and embarrassing lack of journalistic integrity relating to the activities taking place within & around the 'SC athletic department.

From this email I received a lone response, which was from Bill Dwyre.

"I don't know if anybody else will answer you here, but, for what it is worth, I can tell you I'm damned embarrassed and I don't even run the section anymore."

My reply to Bill was that I appreciated his response and that it was truly a shame what has become of the LA Times. It's lost all its journalist integrity and professionalism and that the likes of Jim Murray must be rolling over in their graves.

Then a few days later after Menelaus on BruinsNation had updated the list of mischievous 'SC player activities, I sent it off to the same email distribution list as my original email. (Sarcasm alert) I let them know that since they seemed to be asleep at the wheel, I would try to help them restore some of their pride by providing them with the list in order to help jump start their pending renewal of investigative journalism. I said that I felt the tide was turning and that they would begin to actually do some of their own work rather than continue to only report on the work other true journalist performed (i.e. Yahoo, ESPN, AP, etc.)

The lone response from this email, again, was from Bill Dwyre.

"Pretty damning when you put it all together like this…."

My response back to Bill was that the most embarrassing part of it for the LA Times should be that not a single bit of all that was listed was uncovered, investigated nor pursued by the LA Times. Nearly all the information was made public by news sources outside the city. The LA Times only reported on most of it, after another news source broke the story.

To this Bill responded with what I consider to be a very enlightening comment, which prompted this post.

"Well, you are right on most counts except for one, the Mark Sanchez case. I investigated, pursued, wrote twice, at great length, and never got a word in the paper. I'd love to send you copies, but I'm not allowed to. But I sure have them.

Plus, although I no longer run the sports section, I hear that we are taking a good run at the O.J. Mayo case, although we've already been hammered by ESPN pretty good on that one.

We had the news of all these stories you mentioned, but not all that much in-depth follow-up."

To me his last email showed a clear and methodical strategy by the LA Times editors to keep things as quite as possible when it comes to negative publicity regarding 'SC athletics. Bill essentially says that the writers are doing the work, but the editors are vetoing it and not allowing it to be published.

- RSM Bruin

UCLA/Southern Cal Track Dual Meet

Guest Blogger — Sun, 04 May 2008 16:38:29 -0000

Huge thanks to Jack Rosenfeld for emailing us this report and some great pictures from yesterday's dual meet at Drake. GO BRUINS. -N

The UCLA men's Track and Field team won the annual dual meet on Saturday by a score of 89 - 74 Southern Cal at Drake Stadium (all time record vs Southern Cal is 34-41). After losing last year, the Bruins won their 28th victory over Southern Cal in the past 30 scoring meets. The men took advantage of the distance races, the field events, and the 110 m Hurdles to build a comfortable lead such that the meet was clinched before the triple jump and the 1600 meter Relay were completed. UCLA swept the 5000m, 3000m Steeplechase, High Jump, Pole Vault, Shot Put and Discus.

Kevin Craddock ran a very impressive 13.46 seconds, winning the 110m Hurdles.

More pictures and wrapup after the jump ...

In the Shot Put and the Discus, UCLA Football Guard Darius Savage scored a total of 6 points by placing second in both of these events with marks of 17.96m and 57.09m respectively:

As mentioned Bruins took advantage of the distances races:

The women's competition was a different story. The women started off the day with a 3 -6 deficit after taking second place in the Hammer Throw competition on Friday. Then they took second place in the Javelin--the first event of Saturday's competition--giving the Trojans an early 12 -6 advantage. The deficit continued to grow after taking second and third in the 5000m and third in the 3000m Steeplechase. By the time the first relay started, the Bruins were already down 25 - 11. The women staged a comeback including sweeping the 800 m, High Jump, and Pole Vault, as well as great performances by Nicole Leach and Jolanda Diego in winning the 400m Hurdles and the 200m respectively.

With three events left and 23 points still at stake (the 1500m, Triple Jump, and 1600m Relay) the Bruins had a slight 2 point lead. Yet UCLA could not dig deep enough to capture the victory. UCLA took second in the 1500 meters, which gave Southern Cal an 1 point lead. Then Trojans won the 1600m Relay by 2.55 seconds, which gave them a 6 point lead with only the Triple Jump yet to complete. At that time, USC was going 1-2 in the Triple Jump and UCLA would need to overtake both of those top two positions to win the meet. Renee Williams, with her fourth round jump of 12.88 meter overtook second place, but neither she nor Keneisha Creary could over take Southern Cal's Michelle Sanford as Southern Cal beat UCLA for the first time since 1992 86 -77. Here are some pictures of the women's competition:

The complete results of the meet can be found here. For those that are not too aware of the scoring of dual meets in Track and Field: the top three places in all events--except relays--score points. First place is worth 5 points, second place is worth 3 points, and third place is worth 1 point. Relays are scored 5 points for the winner and 0 points for the loser.

This is also Coach Jeanette Bolden's first dual meet loss in 73 attempts during her 14 year tenure as the women's head coach. UCLA now leads the series 21 - 4.

- Jack Rosenfeld

My UCLA Story

Guest Blogger — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:04:29 -0000

"Riles" have been around the UCLA online message boards for a long time. He was one of the original critics of Steve Lavin. He also was one of the first posters who called out Karl Dorrell. Oh he loves Ben Howland like the rest of BN. And just like BN he was one of the first to get on the hire Rick Neuheisel bandwagon last December. In other words, he is one of those UCLA fans who have always followed/supported our programs based on reality based facts and who has a knack of getting things right. Well the kid posted this magical story on BRO yesterday and he was kind of enough to share it with rest of us here in the Nation. Amazing stuff and congrats to Riles. GO BRUINS. -N

When I was 7, my aunt Patty, a UCLA alum, took me to my first UCLA Football and Basketball games. My belief is that I was the fill-in for her son, who was a UCLA student at the time, but was attending games with his friends. She needed someone to go to the games with...I liked sports (hell, she started me on hockey, too). This became a regular thing. The '86 Freedom Bowl. Arizona road trips. SC @ the Sports Arena. Learning about John Wooden. Hearing about how bad Hazzard was as a Head Coach. Listening to game broadcasts on the radio. Basically, I was hanging around someone on a pretty regular basis that was a big UCLA supporter.

This is what led to me taking on UCLA Basketball and Football as something I was interested in - more than passively. I grew up playing traveling (ice) hockey, and didn't have the time to dedicate to competitive basketball or football. I stuck to watching UCLA in my downtime. I can remember watching 4.8 in an ice rink in Harbor City. I can remember the year after (or maybe it was 97), Charles O'Bannon hitting a game-winner against SC at the buzzer. Karim Abdul Jabbar (Sharmon Shah) go from side to side, and reverse his direction a few times before getting in the endzone. I remember finding UCLA Basketball Forums on AOL when I was 13/14, and reading posts with some good info from MrGladstne...early internet. Thank Science for Bruin message boards and blogs and what they have become.

So all of that said, I've always had a conflict about being a UCLA "fan" - in the sense that that is all I can be. I've never been a student there. I can't debate really on issues like admissions, budgets, etc. I'd sit back and think, "How and why do I support this institution in which my real connection is that of my aunt who introduced me too it (rather matter-of-factly, I might add. USC was never an option.)?" I don't know. I've never been able to reconcile it, to be honest. As it came time to apply to schools to transfer to, I had to think about life as a guy who used to be a UCLA fan. It's weird. I guess I could root for the Ducks. Or the Bears. Or the Gauchos. Longhorns? Maybe. It wouldn't be as fun, though.

In 2001, Patty passed away after a second bout with cancer. I wish she was here to read this note I received yesterday:

GO BRUINS

-Riles

Focusing On The Hilltoppers

Guest Blogger — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:14:30 -0000

Brittany Page, a Bruin senior (from San Diego) majoring in English sent us the following preview helping all of us zero in on the Hilltoppers. Brittany is graduating next quarter in June. Enjoy. GO BRUINS. -N

Top-seeded UCLA takes on No. 12 seeded Western Kentucky in the Western Regional semifinal in Phoenix, Arizona on Thursday.

The Bruins rallied behind Kevin Love and Darren Collison's combined 40 points, to defeat a dangerous Texas A&M team, 51-49, on Saturday to advance to the next round of the NCAA basketball tournament.

Western Kentucky, making its first NCAA appearance in five years, has been one of the surprises of this year's tournament. They upset No. 5 seeded Drake, 101-99, in the first round when senior guard Ty Rogers hit a deep three pointer at the buzzer. In the second round, the Hiltoppers beat No. 13 seeded University of San Diego, 72-63, to advance to the Sweet Sixteen for the first time in 15 years.

The Hiltoppers (29-6) press teams in hopes of forcing an up-tempo game and are known for their ability to expose and defeat opponents by shooting plenty of three pointers.

As a team, Western Kentucky is 18th in the nation in three point percentage shooting 39.4 percent, with four players shooting over 40 percent from beyond the arc. UCLA Assistant Coach Scott Garson told me this morning in a phone interview:

"We have to do a great job defensively and a great job in transition."

"We have to get back in transition and have to guard guys who not only can shoot the three very effectively but who can beat you off of the dribble. So we will have our hands full but I think our team is very excited about this matchup."

Western Kentucky is led by an experienced backcourt consisting of senior guards Courtney Lee, Ty Rogers and Tyrone Brazelton. NBA scouts have been watching Courtney Lee much of this season as he led Western Kentucky in scoring. More from Coach Garson on Lee:

"He is a very good player and has a great chance to do very good in the future of basketball."

Lee is shooting 40.4 percent from 3-point range and averaging 20.3 points per game. He scored 29 points in the NCAA tournament's second round when Western Kentucky defeated USD.

This will be the first time UCLA plays against Courtney Lee, but his game is similar to a player they faced in the PAC-10, James Harden of Arizona State per Garson:

"He compares a little bit to James Harden of ASU who is obviously also a great player."

"Lee has the ability to shoot threes, score off the dribble and rebound like Harden."

It is safe to say that while UCLA has not directly faced Lee in conference and non-conference play they will try to defend and contain him much like they did with Harden. Although it will be a team effort, Russell Westbrook, the PAC-10 defensive player of the year, will be in charge of defending Lee since he usually takes on the best perimeter player while on defense.

While the Hilltoppers will attempt to speed up the pace of the game UCLA will try and maintain their control of the tempo. Here is Garson on tempo:

"When you can control the boards you are able to control the tempo of the game."

"Darren Collison is a great point guard and he knows when we want to push and when we want to slow it down and run our offense."

UCLA Coach Ben Howland will seemingly counter Western Kentucky's presses by controlling the tempo with a disciplined halfcourt set led by point guard Darren Collison.

While the Hiltoppers have scored an average of 85.5 points a game, their defense has not been as successful, allowing opponents to average 81 points per game.

The main advantage the Bruins have over the Hiltoppers is in the low post with 6-foot-11 freshman sensation and PAC-10 player of the year, Kevin Love playing underneath.

The Hilltoppers will use 6-foot-9, 190-pound sophomore Jeremy Evans and 6-9, 260-pound D.J. Magley to guard Love. Once again from Garson on their inside game:

"Evans is a great player who has more blocked shots than anyone on our team and Magley I'm sure is very excited to play against Kevin."

"We expect them to do a good job down in the post."

The Bruins will no doubt try to get the ball inside to their bigs as often as possible to expose this lack of low post presence and the size advantage they have over the Hiltoppers. They will attempt to get the ball into Love at the low post as much as possible for the high percentage shots and to exploit the offensive threat he poses.

Both teams have proven themselves thus far in the tournament and this matchup will be nothing short of a great game. Here is Garson one last time on the key for tomorrow night:

"The key to winning is always our defense and rebounding."

"We have to play great defense and make it a battle of the boards. The key for this game will be taking good shots, our shot selection and rebounding."

UCLA has the obvious size and tournament experience advantage over Western Kentucky; however the key to the game for the Bruins will be defense and tempo. If UCLA establishes the tempo and defensive presence early in the game and stick to their game plan, they should come out with a victory. But, this will be no easy feat for UCLA, as Western Kentucky has proven they are capable of pulling off upsets.

- Brittany Page

A Report On Our Gymnastics Team From Pauley

Guest Blogger — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:33:57 -0000

Many thanks to Jack Rosenfeld for sharing this story on our women's gymnastics team. Regular readers of BN should know Jack. He is the uber talented photographer who is always kind of enough to send us his wonderful pictures from Pauley. Thanks Jack and good luck to our Bruins for rest of the season. GO BRUINS. -N

Tough day at Pauley. The women were in the lead after the first two rotations. They had a tough beam rotation, including two of the women falling off the beam. One of them was Brittani McCullough, who had very strong vault and uneven bars. After her beam performance, she had her ankle worked on and re-wrapped before her floor routine. On her first tumbling pass, she hurt her ankle on the takeoff, but was able to finish the first pass before being unable to continue.

She is out for the season with a ruptured Achilles tendon. UCLA finished third, as McCollough could not complete her floor routine and UCLA used senior Natalie Padilla's 9.1 score. Although it would have been tough to win the overall meet without McCullough's floor routine, UCLA might have been able to take second place with a stronger beam performance. Tasha won the all-around and Jordan took third. UCLA finished third behind Arkansas and Alabama, but finished ahead of Cal State Fullerton.

Great way for the Schwikert sisters to end their Pauley Pavillion careers.

You can find more photos of the meet on the Bruin Report Online's other sports forum.

- Jack Rosenfeld

Jack Gets His Autograph (from Maurice Jones Drew)

Guest Blogger — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:50:11 -0000

We reached out to 'lvucla' after a reader of ours emailed us this story. Again a huge thank you to lvucla for being kind enough to share this beautiful story with rest of the Bruin Nation. If any of you who are reading this know how to get in touch with MJD please make sure he sees this post. GO BRUINS. - BN Ed.

A couple months ago my son and I sent an 8 x 10 picture of Maurice Jones-Drew to his PR firm in hopes it would get personally signed. Weeks went by, and I even asked Jack, my son if he thought Maurice would sign it and send it back. Jack told me Maurice is very far away, and he probably gets "millions" of letters and it probably wouldn't happen. I honestly had no clue if it would really get personally signed.

Well, low and behold, it came! It even said "To Jack" which was great. I was going to frame it and hang it in his room so he could wake up and see it. However my best friend had the best suggestion ever. He said that it would be way more exciting for Jack if he was actually able to get it from the mail box himself. It has been really cold here, so I had to wait until it "warmed" up to take him to the mailbox without wearing gloves.

Well, thanks to my best friend's suggestion, I put the picture back in the envelope and put it in the mailbox. It was truly an incredible moment for me as a dad.

What you will also notice is we are covered in snow (30 degrees) and my son is wearing a sweatshirt and was totally fine. (I don't want any child abuse allegations!)

The quality of the video is not as good as I hoped for on you tube, but you get the picture. It was an incredible father/son experience.

-lvucla

lvucla graduated from UCLA in 1992. lvucla and Mrs. lvucla run a small legal practice in the very small town of West Branch, Michigan which is in Northern Michigan. Jack is 5 years old and loves the Bruins. To no surprise, Kevin Love is his favorite Ben Ball warrior. GO BRUINS. -BN Ed.

The Howland Era Revisited

Guest Blogger — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:34:33 -0000

Our friend Bruin Blue is back with a little commentary on UCLA hoops following Saturday's game. Please note that the following post represents BB's commentary and not the view of Bruins Nation. I noted to BB that I disagreed with this take slightly because I think, even with the new rules, Howland's coaching style works as good as anyone else including Roy Williams, and I am not worried about mass defections to NBA as are some of the alarmists on message boards. Nevertheless, this is an excellent read which gives us a lot to think about. Also note that BB told me that this is not meant to be a negative essay at all. In fact, if anything, the main point from this essay is to appreciate Coach Howland's coaching abilities in today's college basketball world of coaching with mostly talented underclassmen while also dealing with injuries GO BRUINS. -N

Two years ago, before the Final Fours, and after a loss to Washington, which ignited a lot of debate about Howland's coaching, I expressed my opinions about Howland. My belief, then as now, is that he is one of the very best coaches in college basketball, probably the best defensive coach out there. However, like any coach (outside of the nonpareil John Wooden, who even so had a couple of critics), Howland is not impeccable or infallible. His offense is not a thing of beauty, and we seem to need at least half the game to figure out an opponent's zone. He substitutes rather more than I would like; and while the early timeouts are a legitimate approach, they can be a problem near the end. Put it all together, and there is no coach whom I would rather have at UCLA than Howland, as his abilities far outweigh these slight negatives.

However, what we are seeing now at UCLA is the burden of high expectations. It was one thing two years ago to be overjoyed to beat Gonzaga and then make our first Final Four in a decade. Last year, we expected more, but still many of us (including me) were not very confident that we could beat Kansas and do it again. Now, this year, we expect a Final Four, or at least will be quite disappointed if it is not forthcoming. And of course a National Title is something that we consider a very legitimate goal. In fact, if we don't win it this year, we may not for several years; and that would be disappointing to all. So it seems as if the excitement of beating Washington State or Arizona or Stanford has mostly dissipated; and most of us are anxious for the tournament to start. That is great in some ways--that we have gotten so far--but it also causes us to take things for granted, and in some sense spoils much of the season.

I will admit that I am trying very hard to keep my love for college basketball and UCLA basketball at the level of the past. To me, the NBA, and all those players leaving so early, has made this very difficult. There have been a lot of discussions on Bruin message boards about which players will leave this year, and who would do what in the pros. We watch Kevin Love, and for all his abilities, realize that his UCLA career is almost over. Worse than that, all the natural improvement he will make in the future will not benefit our program. He is a freshman, and as polished as he is for that level, there are obviously things he needs to improve. He will, but we won't see it, unless we care to watch the NBA, which I do not. Whatever he can do this year is what we will benefit from, and that's it. We are obviously still struggling to adjust from our guard-oriented approach of the last two years to one which emphasizes feeding the post. Sometimes in games one can see the two approaches conflicting with one another . Again, if Love were here three or four years, it would all fit in; but as it is, we have only the one season to master this, which seems terribly unfair. And as good as Love is, he is not a physical marvel like Greg Oden, who was more likely to dominate in his one year of NCAA play. How good was Christian Laettner in his first year? No one remembers, because he got to play four. It's really painful for me to see Love, as good as he is, and realize that if he would just stay and learn from our coaches, he would be a dominant player in a couple of years. But he won't; and that is what Howland must deal with.

Which leads to a key point--that I think Howland is hurt more than the other top coaches by this current state of affairs. Howland is a teacher; his players improve from year to year more than most coaches' players. If things were as they were thirty years ago, with no NBA defections, we would be the best program around. But in this era of the top players going one- or two-and-out, it's the programs like North Carolina which can bring in great offensive talent every year, which get the advantage. Roy Williams' style of coaching (and he is a fine coach, but not as fundamentally sound as Howland in my view) is perfect for this era, because his offenses are readymade for players with great offensive skills who can come in for a year or two. Howland's style is made for players to learn and grow into. Howland's juniors and seniors would be better than Williams', except that we aren't going to be having any juniors and seniors, except for "project" types like Mata and Roll.

So it's the battles of the underclassmen; and UCLA's academic and fit requirements make it difficult for us to match Carolina and Florida and Kansas in yearly recruiting. We get our share; but we couldn't match Florida's talent in the last two years, and may not be able to prevail with our underclassmen-laden class this season. Realize that we are starting a freshman (Love), a backcourt of a still-injured junior (Collison) and a junior (Shipp) who is really playing out of position, and a frontcourt of a very raw junior (Aboya) and an often-injured junior (Luc). Our backups are a sophomore Westbrook, a sophomore in Keefe who is just rounding into form, and our one senior, the hard-trying but obviously limited Mata. And that's our team. Yes, other teams are no more experienced, but some have better athletes. And so we go 16-2 to date, and are obviously one of the top seven or so teams, but we may well not make it all the way once again.

Next year, if we lose all those players whom people are speculating about, we will probably be a little short again. Again, if Howland could ever get a team of all juniors and seniors, we would be awesome; but we apparently never will. So our underclassmen compete with those of the other big-time schools; and in the end, talent with good coaching may trump our slightly lesser talent with better coaching. It did the last two years. Howland has probably taken us as far as we are likely to go in this era of short-time players and constant turnover of talent. We are a perennnial Top Ten team, but so are others; and there is no real reason to expect our freshmen and sophomores to consistently outplay the underclassmen of Carolina, Kansas, Memphis and Duke, among others. I wish that the NBA would go away, but it won't. Every year will see a mostly new UCLA team; and Howland will do everything he can to teach as many fundamentals as possible. Maybe that is why we are apparently going after Renardo Sidney--because he realizes that if he is going to rigidly adhere to "fit," he is going to likely fall short at the very end every season. Howland's coaching is as good as anyone's--but coaching can only take one so far, the way that college basketball exists these days.

- Bruin Blue

It's Nice To Finally Win One

Guest Blogger — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:51:50 -0000

Ladies and gentleman: Bruin Blue. GO BRUINS. -N

I'm not talking about me, of course. I'm talking about UCLA football; and how nice it feels to finally see UCLA hire a good football coach. This is the first time I've been excited about a hire in football since Dick Vermeil; and that's thirty long years.

I know that Rick Neuheisel is not the perfect coach; but very few are. And I tend to think that whatever success he has had--and he certainly has had it--he is going to have more success here. He is older, and more experienced, both in life and in coaching. And no one can say that Neuheisel is not a bright guy. He has coached at two major programs; seeing what worked and what did not. He will now have access to perhaps the best talent base in the nation right here in Los Angeles. And of course he knows what is needed and expected here, at his dream job. His first comments on Saturday, about how he has great respect for Pete Carroll; and that he knows it is up to him to make the UCLA-USC game the biggest rivalry game in the nation, evince his awareness of what will be necessary to take on that behemoth across town, and make them respect us, if not fear us. This is not someone who is going to come into UCLA and try to deflate expectations. Just that alone should make us very happy, after so many years of being mostly told that we should be satisfied with our current nondescript status.

After the anxiety and ups and downs of the last four weeks, I am just very glad and relieved that it came out so positively. There were of course our "dream candidates," but there were plenty of "disaster candidates," and of course some in between. As I have recently written; of the remaining credible candidates, I believe that Neuheisel was the best. How often do you get to hire someone with a .688 winning percentage, achieved at two major programs? We are already getting good national press about this. People are not seeing UCLA make another hire of an unproven assistant, or a little known head coach; they see that we are getting someone who has been a successful head coach at the highest levels. That infusion of new interest in, and respect for, our program has to help us. It's just nice to see UCLA being taken seriously once again, even in the first two days of the Neuheisel era.

Of course, the initial excitement inevitably wears off, and there is much to do. But at least it will for once be fun to follow it. I so vividly remember how utterly dispirited I was when Karl Darrell was hired. I was certain that he would not be successful (I don't think even I could imagine how bad he would actually be), and I really wanted to just get away from the whole thing. And for five years I have not cared about recruiting, have not cared what assistants we hired; to me it really didn't matter much. But now I think we can all enjoy the football off-season (while we are avidly following our basketball team, of course), and actually have fun following the recruiting and the Spring practices. And for once we will not have to be embarrassed about the football coach we have; for we now have Ben Howland in basketball and Rick Neuheisel in football. That sounds pretty good to say, doesn't it?

It's not going to be all happy times, of course. Our talent level is severely depleted. We have a murderous schedule next year. And we currently have some people who are hoping for Neuheisel to fail. Hopefully, these numbers will lessen as time goes on. But it's going to be a new position for me, at least; defending the football coach against those who are angry that Dorrell was fired; those who desperately wanted Walker; those who simply don't like Neuheisel; and those who just hate UCLA on general principles. I'm not too worried about it; but in some sense this is a major new step for UCLA; and those both inside and outside the university who were happy with the way things were running before, are going to be unhappy about the new state of affairs, and we'll undoubtedly hear from them. But it's sure fun to be on the side in the ascension, for once.

Not to lessen the happy mood, but I always want to say what's on my mind; and I am concerned about the Walker situation. I know that Neuheisel indicated that "Walker is my first recruit," and so if he is happy to keep Walker and his other defensive staff, it's fine with me. I do hope that Walker will thoroughly dedicate himself to helping the team win, no matter what it takes. I hope that he will not feel that he is anything but an assistant to Neuheisel, who is the head coach. I do not want to see him relying upon any of his media supporters to advance his personal career, wherever it might ultimately take him. After the first game or games, I do not want to see or hear about "Walker's defense vs. Neuheisel's offense," or anything implying that there are two coaches here. Frankly, I have mixed feelings about Walker staying, if only because of the all-out campaign which has been waged on his behalf, and the inevitable aftermath of that. This kind of situation doesn't usually work; but maybe it will here, for everyone's benefit. All we care about is for UCLA to have the kind of football program we are proud of; and that can only happen with everyone on staff on the same page. As for certain of the beat writers--well, all we can do is either ignore them, or unmask them for what they are. Let's hope that if others are expected to learn from their mistakes, they can, too. We will just see.

It's been a lot of fun writing these essays and sharing my thoughts. And I am so impressed with the level of intelligence and literacy, which I see from the many contributors to Bruins Nation. Depth of insight and football knowledge, almost always expressed by people who actually know how to write well--it always makes it rewarding to read the various comments and essays. And it will be nice now to be able to visit without my nerves being on edge, afraid to read that some awful hiring scenario was unfolding. Time for us to all to just indulge ourselves for awhile, secure in the confidence that we now have two major seasons to look forward to each year, not just one. And come to think of it, baseball is looking pretty good too, isn't it? Well, it's never good to get too gushy; because my natural tendency is to have high expectations and to be disappointed if they aren't borne out. But I'm pretty pleased right now, anyway. And thanks again to everyone here who added to the intelligent and thoughtful atmosphere; and of course to everyone who was kind enough to let me know that they enjoyed reading my essays.

I'll be back, no doubt; but I might take a rest for just a bit, But I'm sure that there will be plenty to discuss in the upcoming weeks and months, and I look forward to adding my thoughts as well.

-Bruin Blue

Looking At Neuheisel As A First-Tier Choice

Guest Blogger — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 06:00:13 -0000

A Bruin Alum (BruinBlue) Makes A Pitch For Another Bruin Alum (Coach Neuheisel). BB makes a fairly convincing argument for the return of our prodigal son. GO BRUINS. -N

Perhaps the tension of this coaching search is getting to me; but I tell you, the more I think about the relative merits of the various coaches, both those whom we thought about in the early stages, and those more currently viable, the more I am thinking that Rick Neuheisel is not only the best candidate available now, but one of the top two or three overall. I guess it was that I never really thought of him as a candidate at the outset, since we didn't look at him five years ago; and I sort of went along with the conventional wisdom that he was being effectively blackballed by the NCAA. But now that he is in the spotlight, I have thought a lot more about it, and also looked up some of his past records; and a very compelling case is made.

It's not that I get my ideas about coaches from stats and even scores. Like many of you, I have watched a great deal of college football over the years; and I do pride myself on my ability to separate the really good coaches from the pretenders. It's not an exact science, of course; and a lot of it is just the "feel" of how they handle playcalls; how they perform in big games, etc. And of course some of it has to be the actual scoreboard results. Anyway, I do well remember watching Neuheisel closely at the outset of his career; because, like many, I was very upset that Terry Donahue had apparently pushed him out as his heir apparent, in favor of making Bob Toledo the offensive coordinator. Then he went to Colorado, and rather lucked into the head job there after only one year. Well, the first two years, he did a commendable job. Then he struggled in the next two. I don't think he was really ready for the pressure of such a high-profile position. Then he left and went off to Washington, where he looked like a better coach to me. 6-2 in league in his first year, taking over for Lambright. Then 7-1 in league, 11-1 overall, and a fine performance in the Rose Bowl win. Actually, Washington wasn't far off from deserving a bid to the national title game. Then the next year, he was 6-2 in league, 8-2 overall, going into the last game, where he went to Miami (he had beaten a fine Hurricane team the year before) and was humbled by an overpowering club which went undefeated and romped in the national title game. Then he lost a bitter but thrilling Holiday Bowl game to Texas, to finish 8-4. The next year was the down year at 7-6, and 4-4 in league. But it appeared that he had the pieces in place for a fine team the next year, when he was unfairly fired. At least that's what I've read from some apparently knowledgeable posters who were up there then and appear to have no essential bias about it. I believe that his last two recruiting classes were both in the Top 25, belying what some have said about him not being able to recruit.

Putting this all together, we see that Neuheisel has a record of 66-30 (.688). This puts him higher than all sorts of coaches, just based on winning percentage. His teams have finished in the Top Ten three times in his eight years. He has played in three BCS games, winning them all. He has a Pac-10 winning record of 23-9,. He won all four Apple Cup games against rival Washington State. Now, how many coaches which we have considered or are considering, have records to compare with that? This is not to say that there aren't some fine coaches at other programs where the talent is lesser, who might be extrapolated to do as well; but the fact is that it's still extrapolation, not certainty. I cannot believe that with the recruiting advantages inherent in UCLA, Neuheisel won't do better here than he did anywhere else. I also believe that with some NFL experience to give him some more depth of knowledge; and with the last eight years having chastened him, he will really do a fine job at his alma mater, the school where he has always wanted to coach. Legitimate concerns have been raised about the fact that he had his best years at both Colorado and Washington in the first two at each school; but that is awfully scant data to extrapolate from, since he only had four at each place; and he did go 6-2 in the conference in his third year at Washington. I cannot say with absolute certainty that Neuheisel will do better here than he has done, but I do sense that he would. And that would be pretty darn good.

It's so ironic that I have argued for years about UCLA's propensity to hire the alumnus; to go with the guy that the insiders like. And we have missed so often in that way--with Farmer, Hazzard, Dorrell, even Donahue, at least in my view. And I have always demanded that we go outside the "Bruin Family" and get someone who will bring a whole new perspective. But Neuheisel may actually be the one alumnus with the credentials and the acumen to break that losing streak. And note that he has been away from UCLA for a long time; working at different schools, with different heritages. So he is far from an insular candidate. And I like that he is so smart. Smart coaches usually do better than...not-so-smart ones. Sometimes his cleverness has been his downfall; his thinking that he can get away with things that others cannot. But I have to believe that he is intelligent enough to learn from that, too. And as others have said very effectively on Bruins Nation, most of his transgressions were really pretty minor stuff.

I'm writing all of this because I am actually thinking that ironically enough, we might have the right coach right there in front of us, and are going to bypass him. It's becoming pretty obvious to me that Dan Guerrero either does not want to hire Neuheisel, or is trying very hard to find someone else who would placate the alumni and boosters. It may just be that he is afraid to take a side in the growing internecine warfare between the Walker faction and the Neuheisel faction. He may fear upsetting the NCAA; though my understanding was that Neuheisel was recently vetted by that body. I am not sure what he is doing. But he longer he keeps looking at outside coaches, the more it appears that he may just try to grab one of them, and thus extricate UCLA from this increasingly contentious struggle. I hope that Neuheisel hangs around long enough to see how this plays out, but he really might not; and then where will we be? Well, we might possibly get Leach; we might possibly get Jones. I personally prefer Neuheisel to either of them; but certainly respect the opinions of those astute contributors here who might disagree. We might also get someone like Herman Edwards, who is a great guy, but not all that much of a football coach, and completely untested in college. Believe me, if I thought that we had a real chance at someone like Mark Richt or Urban Meyer, I'd be all for it; but this isn't going to happen. And I see a real danger of us ending up with some "neutral" hire, whose reputation (particularly if it's NFL-based) is more than his actual ability.

Another thing to really like about Neuheisel: Can you think of many other coaches who would have the confidence, even the arrogance, and the dynamism to stand toe-to-toe with Pete Carroll, not only for recruits, but in the big game? Neuheisel has all of Carroll's cockiness, without its overbearing side. Leach and Jones certainly seem to have this, too. But again, with Neuheisel you are not really doing much extrapolating from a record at a smaller school; you are looking at someone who has played in BCS games more than once. I know that all of us are aching to be able to take it to Carroll, not just once every seven years, but to give him as good as he gets. That's really a tall order, and one that most Bruin fans have essentially given up on, no matter how they talk. But though it won't happen overnight (the talent level next year will be lacking), I can actually see Neuheisel making UCLA a force to be reckoned with on the national scene; and along with that would go a pretty fair chance of playing even with the monster across town. We used to do that, as we all remember.

Well, we'll ultimately get the person that Dan Guerrero chooses. I could certainly live with anyone who has been a successful college coach. But it's just my sense right now that Neuheisel is a lot more than a "fallback" or "second-tier" candidate; but is actually one of the very few people who might actually make a difference in our long-suffering football fortunes.

- Bruin Blue

Dan Guerrero's Self-Created Dilemma

Guest Blogger — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 19:14:58 -0000

DG finds himself in between a rock and a hard place and as Bruin Blue notes this was his own doing. Once again to echo Menelaus below a very Merry Bruin X-Mas and Happy Holidays to everyone in this blue and gold bleeding Bruins Nation. GO BRUINS. -N

We are all still hoping that Dan Guerrero ends this extensive coaching search with a winning hire . And that might well still happen. But I think it would be pollyannish to believe that the ultimate choice is going to be someone who is met with consensus approval, or whose name immediately gains us much-sought national respect for both the process and the hire. It is tempting to simply hope that the man who brought in Ben Howland will do it again; but it is equally easy to believe that this search has been mishandled and compromised to such an extent that however it ends up, there are going to be some very unhappy people, and some immediate problems to deal with.

As I said the other day, no one is certain as to whether there are any "big name" candidates left with whom we would have a reasonable chance. At this point, I think it's doubtful, though not impossible. There is a good chance that the three candidates who will shortly all have been interviewed twice--Rick Neuheisel, Al Golden and DeWayne Walker--are really the final list, barring some real deus ex machina in the next week or so. And if those are indeed the three finalists, we can look at the problems we will face, some of which were actually created or at least accentuated by Guerrero.

By letting Walker coach the Bowl game, Guerrero gave him a chance to "audition," in an almost "can't-lose" situation, since the fact that we were using our backup QBs would be a pretty good excuse for a loss. And a win, or the close loss which we got, would inevitably be used as major ammunition by the corps of Walker supporters who have been pushing for his hire since midseason. Letting Walker handle the gathering of recruits a couple of weeks ago gave the media a chance to collect quotes from some of them about how much they hoped to play for Walker. Now we are seeing various current players push for Walker. This is very common, as players and recruits always want to play for the person they know best. But it is part of the media narrative which drives the Walker campaign. And now, if Guerrero chooses Neuheisel, there are going to be some unhappy people, a lot more than there would have been had these situations not been allowed to occur. And even worse, if Neuheisel coaches and Walker remains as defensive coordinator, is there not a very real possibility that sides are taken by some of the players who would have preferred Walker? And if the offense initially struggles while the defense is the stronger side, could this not cause real internal discord and dissension?

If Guerrero chooses Walker, he will anger the group of boosters which supports Neuheisel. Guerrero will have chosen a man who has coached one game (0-1) over someone who has coached 96 (66-30), and has actually won a Rose Bowl. If the team gets has a bad season next year, how ridiculous will Guerrero look, particularly given that he will have once again done the opposite of what he said he would do--bring in someone with head coaching experience? At that point, Guerrero would be in the UCLA hall of shame along with the incompetent Peter Dalis. And after Guerrero waxed rhapsodic about how UCLA's increased revenue under his tenure has allowed them to be very competitive in the football hiring marketplace, how could he credibly sell Walker as the best choice for UCLA? And would anyone mind that a school as academically prestigious as UCLA would pay its second highest salary--far more than that of any professor--to someone who "graduated" from an online "university" known as Excelsior College?

If Guerrero goes with Golden, he will anger both the Neuheisel and the Walker factions, all in support of someone who may have fine potential, but who currently has a lifetime record of 5-19. Some programs--really bad or really good--might be able to get away with this kind of hire; but can UCLA, at this point? If the team struggles next season, the outcries will grow louder. Walker would likely not stay if Golden is hired, since Golden's specialty is defense. Golden would be stepping into a minefield here.

So any of these choices now come with significant risks--not just on-field risks, but internal risks. And here is where Guerrero has painted himself into a corner. Had he gone with Neuheisel last week, there of course would have been some criticism, but it would have looked like Neuheisel was his clear choice; and of course Neuheisel's on-field record, while hardly spotless, is pretty solid. But then came the Bellotti bombshell, making it look like Neuheisel was certainly not the main choice. It may have been bad timing there--that Guerrero had wanted to speak to Bellotti, but that Bellotti had only granted access late last week. Whatever was intended, this episode managed both to hurt Neuheisel's image and to make UCLA look rather futile in its search. Then, of course, by not hiring Neuheisel before the Bowl game, he allowed Walker to try to enhance his case. He has now granted Walker a second interview, this with the Chancellor included.

I have always said that an athletic director should never be afraid to be turned down by a coaching prospect, or even two or three. Too often in the past, we have seemed unduly afraid of being turned down, so we have gone for the safe choice. I do not at all blame Guerrero for seeking out Bellotti, even though the latter would not have been one of my top choices. But with the various leaks and rumors (some undoubtedly false but some very possibly valid), it looks to all the world that UCLA is casting about frantically to find a coach. We hear that Steve Kragthorpe was contacted but declined interest; similarly for Chris Petersen. We have heard various things about Steve Mariucci; he's interested, he wants too much money; we're still talking to him; negotiations have broken down, etc. We have heard that there was an interest in June Jones, but that he is either not interested or that he wants to take his entire staff with him, and we have insisted on Walker being retained. Most of the reasonably fair part of the national media, such as CoachesHotSeat Blog, are seeing UCLA looking like a program which can't attract anyone of prominence, so will have to settle for another assistant, an alumnus who desperately wants the job, or a very young coach whose current claim to fame is winning four games this year. Now, that may not be at all fair, since I happen to think that both Neuheisel and Golden have good credentials, but that's how it looks to most. We are not in the business of placating the rest of the country, but I am also tired of being looked at as a national joke.

Well, the proof is always in the pudding. Whomever Guerrero hires will have a chance to vindicate it by doing a really good job. As always, he will be given a chance to do so; though I think that the patience of Bruin faithful has now worn very thin indeed. Right now, it looks to me as if Guerrero was either not prepared for the rigors of this hire, or that he severely misjudged the landscape. It appeared that he was not certain that he was going to fire Dorrell until after the USC game. The search firm seemed to be hired late. The amount of money that we originally came to the table with (by all accounts about $1.5 million a year) would have been impressive five years ago, but is at least 30% under market value today. The apparent insistence on having the new coach keep Walker as defensive coordinator may well have turned off those few current coaches who didn't balk at the salary. There are legitimate questions as to whether Guerrero had the knack for "selling" the job, as a good AD must have. Going after some big names is commendable, but not so much if nothing was broached to them that would make them really consider the job. If the final list does indeed come down to Walker, Neuheisel and Golden, can anyone say that the list is appreciably better than that in 2002? And if not, does it not enhance what the critics and carpers always love to say: that UCLA is not an appealing place for a coach, and that our program is destined to always have to settle, while the other schools go after and often land the big fish?

I personally think that Neuheisel is still a very credible choice. But the longer we extend this, the more it looks as if Guerrero wants to go in another direction. And the more it appears that he might be looking for the excuse to take the easiest way out and hire Walker. If he does that, I can comfortably predict that UCLA will lose a good 25% of its booster and alumni support base. It's not a good position for an athletic director to be in; and we will soon see what the final decision will be.

- Bruin Blue