SB Nation User Blog: OCBruin95

Pride Goeth...?

OCBruin95 — Fri, 02 May 2008 15:42:14 -0000

May 13, 2007. Women's Water Polo secures national championship #100.

We are coming up on the first anniversary of that momentous occasion. The buildup to that was palpable. People asking all the time, which team would do it? Who would bring us up to 100?

And I can even remember posts that showed up from idiots, er, folks saying how football might do it last year with so many returning starters and a (relatively) easy schedule. Remember those?

Or maybe our second final four trip would do it. Or soccer. Or softball. Or whoever.

Even then I struggled with myself with the various disappointments of teams falling short and not delivering #100. I didn't want to be greedy, and Lord knows how many schools don't even have one championship, but how cool getting to 100 would be? I wanted it, too.

But even with wanting to get to 100 national championships, I never expected quite the fanfare that getting to 100 first brought from the school. I know it was designed to help with recruiting (not just players, but applicants to the school), but couldn't we show some restraint? Yes, 100 was great, but did we have to have it shouted from the rooftops at every opportunity? Did we have to boast so much? Where was the idea of winning with humility?

I probably would have been ok with a little bit of recognition of the feat, but it just went too far for me. The C being changed in UCLA for the Rose Bowl end zones and the basketball jerseys was really over-the-top for me.

And so it has been almost a year since #100, and with all that bragging, where does our tally stand at now? Oh yeah. Still 100.

We had been having quite a run.

2003 -- three championships
2004 -- five! championships
2005 -- two championships
2006 -- two championships

And across the board recruiting was going stellar for most sports after all that. We were going extraordinarily well (if you don't get too focused on only football and basketball -- which I can do sometimes, too).

2007 -- Struggled to get 1 and none since.

The rational part of me says that there will be natural peaks and valleys with this.

But for all the boasting we did about it, a good portion of me would rather say, "Karma is a bitch."

So now I officially blame our loss in the final four this year to karma. That's got to be the reason. It's very logical and rational.

And gosh doesn't it feel good to blame something else...

Double Whammy

OCBruin95 — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 06:35:09 -0000

I am so wound up with this coaching search. God knows how many times I troll around the various sites looking for the tiniest scrap of new information like a famished stray dog looking for a hint of food.

And with the search being done with such secrecy, the only thing we have seen lately are rumors. Rumors which often don't meet the sniff test, and my head tells me to dismiss them, but nonetheless elicit a reaction from my heart as the rumors often cut to the core, preying on the vulnerability of many of us who are petrified the administration will lead us down the same pathetic path of mediocrity we have been subjected to for so long.

Sometimes I feel like an idiot for letting a rumor get to me. And then sometimes a rumor really throws me for a loop.

Exhibit 1: Today at lunch. I read about Chow on campus with his attorney. And the only reason for his attorney being here would be to hammer out a contract. There were a lot of things about the story which didn't make sense (especially the timeline of when Chow would be free), but coming on the heels of the rumor from the weekend how Chow had already been offered, the rumor at lunch hit me hard.

I felt sick to my stomach.

And then frustrated.

And then here-we-go-again....

And emotions swirled in me for a good 90 minutes, and probably affected the first class I taught this afternoon (I'm a high school teacher). It was nauseating.

And at times I am extremely frustrated at the environment DG has allowed Bruin Nation to fall into. We should never be in a situation where a loss doesn't hurt like hell and where many people were hoping we would lose (because maybe it is one step closer to axing Dorrell). And the current environment where rumors are running rampant is not healthy for Bruin Nation either. I realize that some parts of the search need to be done behind closed doors, but this rumor mill is not healthy either.

Note Exhibit 1.

And so this evening, in another pathetic search for new scraps of information, I decided to take a break and was wandering around places where there would be no talk about the coaching search (XKCD, Digg, and the like). And I had seen a lot of talk about this "2 Girls 1 Cup" video for a while now. It is certainly a phenomenon. And so I said what the hell and went to find out what this video was about. And it didn't take long for me to think "Holy Sh!t" -- literally.

And it was nauseating.

And then it hit me a few moments later. I had the same reaction at lunch today. I literally felt the same thing watching that video and seeing a rumor about Chow and his attorney. How unbelievably sad is that?

My nauseating double whammy of the day.

That is what this coaching search is doing to me.

Trust and Patience

OCBruin95 — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 15:55:40 -0000

Bumped from the diaries. GO BRUINS. -N

Trust and patience. Two things I would love to have with this coaching search, but both are being put to the test this week.

Most people have this inkling about UCLA, in general, that we are the nice guys (and with 100 national championships, clearly nice guys don't always finish last). Stereotyping is often a bad thing, but stereotypically speaking, many people view the UCLA vs. USC rival as good vs. evil. Even Cowherd a couple days ago talked about UCLA needing to hire a coach who fit the upstanding, good moral qualities typified at UCLA over the years in order to fit in. USC can hire the outlaw, the guy with a mean streak, the guy with a sketchy past, but not UCLA.

Live in SoCal long enough, and you will end up with many friends, co-workers, and even family members who are Trojans. Even my Trojan friends embrace the evil side of that good vs. evil comparison, and acknowledge that those general feelings are out there.

I can remember when the handicapped parking scandal broke, and being amazed at the fervor of backlash from the Bruin community. Not that I support what the students did, but I was amazed at the ferocity of the response. People were outraged how athletes, UCLA athletes, could do such a thing. We are supposed to be the good guys. Toledo took a lot of heat for that, and it was a big part of his lack of support when he stopped being part of the national championship picture. People pointed to that as a reason to fire him. Admittedly, that scandal was pretty minor in the grand scheme of things, but at UCLA it was magnified.

Yesterday I was discussing this coaching search with a Bruin colleague, and I brought up how this Dohn report was disconcerting, even considering how unbelievably unreliable that source is (it's like trusting Fox News to be "Fair and Balanced"). I could go off on a diatribe about Dohn, but I am going to resist the urge to go off on a tangent on that piece of crap. Piece of crap or no, his post about Leach and the money issue touched a sore spot -- my ability to trust in our administration where UCLA football is concerned. My friends response to my feelings was, "We are UCLA. We are the good guys. We are supposed to uphold good values. We need to be patient and trust in our athletic director."

He came just short of saying Bruins are paragons of virtue. It was a bit much, but it is certainly a sentiment many share -- although maybe not to that degree.

Trust and Patience. I have seen those things flying around the message boards this week. Forget about what Dohn said, we need to trust DG. So what if some coaches are being hired and off the market, we need to be patient.

Do we? Do we really? Are those really "good" qualities all the time? I actually don't mind being branded the good guys, but are trust and patience really something to blindly do? NO!!!

Trust needs to be earned. And damned if UCLA football has screwed with us so long that pardon me if my trust is being strained. I remember being so hopeful after Toledo was gone, and that I needed to trust this new AD. He was supposed to be so much better (and he is so much better than his predecessors). But I can remember the absolute deflation I felt when I heard the three finalists for the job, and the absolute dejection at hearing Dorrell had been hired.

I was supposed to trust. I did. I got burned.

And after that dejection, people came back again (again!?!) saying to trust. Trust in them. They know what they were doing. Dorrell will turn out well. And damned if I didn't watch that Colorado game the first year, and see that all my fears were realized. Dorrell was an absolute deer in headlights. Train wreck.

So people changed tunes and started preaching to be PATIENT! Give Dorrell time they said. GAH!

And now I am back to hearing how I need to trust again. Seriously?!?!

Fool me once...

Too bad it has been far more than just once or twice.

Guerrero HAS earned some respect with me. Many things he has done very well -- even beyond Howland and Savage who people keep bringing up, but football is still a major issue and a sore spot with me. I still don't trust UCLA where football is concerned. I'm sorry if that flies against what many think, but they haven't earned it. Period.

And I won't just sit by and blindly trust that things will be ok. Screw that. I want everyone to know that I want this done right this time. And I am glad for this website, where people who think like this can make that sentiment known.

I want this done right, and I realize patience is often a good thing, but holy hell is this pushing that limit. I do NOT want a quick hire. I would actually have been a little scared of any hire already (recruits be damned -- leave the incoming class out of this discussion!). Texas A&M and Ole Miss can do that all they want, but I want to be thorough. I want this done right. But only NOW are we getting a search firm finalized?!

Seriously?!

Guerrero is losing trust points quickly with that one. Thorough is one thing, but that smacks of being unprepared and unorganized (and actually hints that he might not have been committed to getting rid of Dorrell until really recently). And for someone with trust issues, that is scary as hell.

We might not have gotten Paul Johnson, but I would have at least liked to have a shot at him. An interview if nothing else. Let him know we are interested. Being patient has cost any shot at that.

I actually am very proud to have such athletic and academic excellence overall while generally doing it the "right" way (for the most part). I have no problem being the "good" guy. However, patiently sitting by and trusting blindly are not "good" qualities, despite what many of my fellow Bruins seem to think, and I am going to let my tiny voice ring out proclaiming that I am not going to take it anymore! I am not settling for mediocrity! And maybe my voice combines with other tiny voices around here, and together we can make our opinions heard. We want a national championship caliber football program.

We are so good at everything else, maybe that makes me greedy. Maybe I am not such a "good" guy after all for being "greedy".

Fine. So be it. I am greedy. Sue me. I WANT IT ALL!!!

How much of a gamble can I stomach?

OCBruin95 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:35:16 -0000

I, like many of my fellow Bruins, have been intently pondering the future of our football program. For months (heck, years for me) we have been throwing around names, looking at the pros and cons of each, and trying to imagine what they would do if given a chance in Westwood.

But the question I keep coming back to, the idea that keeps circling around my thoughts throughout all of this, is how much of a gamble can I stomach?

There is no home run hire this time. There is no Howland -- someone who has demonstrated rebuilding at the D1 level, has a lot of head coach experience, has success everywhere he has gone, and on top of it all had UCLA as their dream job.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a candidate like that at this point?

But we don't have that luxury. So every candidate has definite risks involved.

Which gamble do I pull for? Do I go with the riskier guys who might also end up being the coach who brings us to national championship caliber prominence? Do I go with the safer guys, who don't have as much risk, but also are less likely to bring us to the greatest heights?

Peterson is the name that keeps getting thrown out there most often. Clearly he is the one that has the most support overall (and apparently DG's first choice), but my God he has a lot of risk associated with him.

People don't seem to think of him as risky as I do, but I don't know why. He has only been a head coach two years. TWO YEARS!

He clearly has been successful, but was he just in the right place at the right time? Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl, and he was no coaching gold mine, he just happened to inherit a great team.

Petersen took over a program clearly better than everyone else in the WAC -- which isn't exactly the toughest testing grounds. Do we really give him such great credit for racking up a great record over bad competition? Kansas didn't beat a really good team all year -- do we really believe they are a worthy BCS team? Do we really believe Ohio State would be one of the two teams left if there was a playoff?

The one thing people point to (over and over) is the win over Oklahoma. And that was indeed a great game. Clearly Petersen showed no fear and a lot of guts. But does one game really put him that far ahead of the field of candidates? People forget Oklahoma was only favored by 7 over Boise State. For comparison, Oklahoma is favored by 6.5 over West Virginia this year. Would you really be that shocked if WV wins (assuming Pat White is healthy again)? People also forget that Oklahoma came out flat as all hell as they probably took Boise State lightly and Boise State jumped out to a big lead. If Oklahoma had taken Boise State seriously, we probably aren't having such a groundswell of support for Petersen.

All of that being said, there are a lot of good things to say about Petersen. He could be great. He could be the next Urban Meyer. But even Urban Meyer had more of a track record than Petersen (having won at Bowling Green) before Utah. Petersen undoubtedly has a ton of upside, and could be awesome, but damn if he isn't one of the riskiest picks out there.

Do I pull for a Petersen hire because there is a chance he could be Urban Meyer?? Can I really work myself up for such a risky hire (albeit less risk than CTS), if it means we might hit oil?

How about Leach? That NY Times article was great, and my favorite quote in the whole article was:

"If you're on this offense, you expect to score. Most offenses on fourth down are coming off the field. On fourth down we expect a play to be called. Because we haven't scored yet."

That would certainly be a change from CTS. I also was amazed to see Texas Tech through 11 games had only 12 3-and-outs. 12!!! It sometimes seems like we do that in a half!

Offensively, with the athletes that would be at his disposal, I have no doubt we would become an offensive juggernaut. And, if nothing else, it would be a lot of fun to watch -- something which has often been lacking the last 5 years. But man is Leach a gamble. Is he Toledo v2.0?

Given a stellar D coordinator (a NEW one please!), and possibly solid people to help recruiting CA, we could really have the makings of a dominant program, but those are some big ifs.

Leach is also a bit loopy at times, and has had issues with PR.

Can I stomach all of those risks if it means potentially reaching the mountaintop? Can I summon up that fortitude after having CTS leech it out of me?

Mariucci is the third most popular choice here. I guess I don't get that. I don't see Mooch having as big an upside as the first two. I do think he would be solid, but I really question his dedication to the college game, and how much he wants to deal with recruiting. If he passed up the Michigan State job, which should have been a near perfect fit for him at the college ranks, why would I expect him to embrace it here?

Paul Johnson is the 4th most popular choice, and is often my top choice for CTS's successor (CTSS?). He has been flexible and won with multiple types of offenses. He has won without even 3* recruits. Everything on his resume is impressive, but the one thing I worry about is recruiting. He has never been a D1 recruiting star (and clearly, Navy presents some massive recruiting obstacles). He was an assistant as Hawaii, but he really doesn't have true West Coast ties or know anything about recruiting CA. And then I think that recruiting will take care of itself. 3* and 4* recruits come without much effort to UCLA, and if he is successful (which his resume seems to point to that he would be), that breeds more recruiting success.

All in all, I think he is, by far, the safest choice. Certainly a lot safer than Petersen and Leach. But in no way do I think he has as much upside. Petersen could be a future coaching superstar. Leach, paired with the right people, could produce an absolute monster.

Which brings me back to my original point. Who do I pull for? How much of a gamble can I stomach after the last 5 years?

Some Random Lighter Thoughts

OCBruin95 — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 05:37:11 -0000

I came across my Oregon tickets today, and they depressed me. How utterly sad. So instead of dwelling on that flaming pile known as CTS, I thought I would post a random collection of lighter thoughts.

* Cal is clearly my least favorite Pac-10 school after USC based on their fans and annoying as hell mascot. But I have to give their band props....I just wish our band had come up with it:

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gaming/the-cal-marching-bands-amazing-16%20bit-video-game-halftime-show-3 22662.php?autoplay=true

My wife tells me she read Nikola Dragovich was out for the season, but that it said he was a senior. She was confused. I still find it amazing we have two Nikola Dragovich's on our teams.
Speaking of Nikola, I keep wishing every time Nikola hoists up a 3, that the Den would chime in unison Niiiiikooooooolaaaaaa (to the cadence of the Ricola commercials). Or have Chuck White (the announcer) say it after he nails a 3.
Think MSM folks love Kevin (yeah...I did that on purpose) as much as we do? He gives a great interview (CTS should take notes), and his name just lends itself so easily to so many clever headlines.
If your last name is Mayo, O.J. is a horrid nickname. The thought of Orange Juice flavored Mayonnaise is not exactly pleasant. It's almost as bad as finding out your daughter is dating the original SUC O.J.
People complain about Howland no longer going after Renardo Syndey. Now, I don't even know if it is true or not, but at what point do people Trust In Howland and have faith that the man knows what he is doing. If he doesn't go after him, I am fine with that. I won't be doubting Howland anytime soon.

Time to get back to work...

RW's new hairdo

OCBruin95 — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:31:48 -0000

Dorrell depresses me, so here's a basketball question...

I just went through my pictures from the APU game, and I didn't get any of RW's new haircut. I know most of you didn't see this, but he has the beginnings of a mohawk.

It was hideous.

Just like the C on the jerseys.

Does anyone here have a picture of that haircut of his? Didn't he learn just how much people made fun of Nick Young's hair a couple years back?