So, I posted a video of the UCLA pre-game huddle below.  What is not captured in the video is that as I was sitting in the stands, I noticed a UCLA coach in a white shirt run towards the center of the field to call the huddle, to which the players obliged.  Then, as if this were an Alabama or USC team, the players began jumping up and down on the logo, eliciting a rightfully earned booing from the hometown fans.

Whether or not we'd have won the game, that is absolutely not what I would expect from a team (induced by a coach, nonetheless) representing our university.  Maybe from a Miami or USC team, but not UCLA....who has accomplished nothing for going on 12 years now.  But it is worth noting that this team then proceeded to get curb stomped by the very same team they so flippantly disrespected, making the display all that more embarrassing.  

I'm sure some of you will be offended by this, but while I like individual players on this team, I'm beginning to not like the overall identity.  As others have noted, trash talking continues while we're down ala the USC player last year that celebrated a tackle even though the Huskies were lining up the next play to kick the winning FG.  We never know if the team is going to show up not only for entire quarters, but entire games.  CRN literally using the phrase that it has to get better because it can't [get much worse].

I had a long drive home from the Bay area yesterday and the only analogy I can come up with that seems to describe this team is an intramural team.  They show up physically to play, but they don't care whether they win or lose....it seems to be very much like my city-league games which I use solely for exercise purposes; I show up and hope to win, but in the end, the outcome of the game doesn't really matter.  The difference is I'm not representing anyone but myself; nor getting a scholarship to do so; nor hoping to make milliions in the NFL.  

Coach, If we're going to support a poor team on the field, lets at least be able to support one that is likable.

Rant over.

Man, great feeling to be able to put together this compilation of Larimore's National Player of the Week performance last Saturday against Houston.  I hope to be putting many, many of these together in the future for him and his teammates...

Pat Larimore = 250 lbs of 'pissed off'...which complements Akeem 'Freak of Nature' Ayers athletic abilities rather nicely.  And the best part?  He's only a RS Sophomore....

Be sure to click '720p' for the best quality.

Arrived about 1/2 hour late, but I think I just missed the stretching and team warm-ups.  Team was in shorts, so no tackling or big hitting.  So, thoughts starting from biggest impression to random tidbits

Richard Brehaut.  Very inconsistent yesterday.  He would go from making some nice throws to forced throws that resulted in INT's.  It appears as if he just has a hard time making a decision, then just decides to go for it.  The beginning of practice saw him make a nice 7 yard completion to Marvray and then on the very next play, force an INT to Hester...I think Hester was as surprised as anyone since he had to make almost no effort to catch it.  Later, Brehaut made a sweet leading pass to marvray in the back of the endzone for a short-yardage TD....the kind of pass where you think "what the hell is he throwing at....oh...didn't see him coming.'  That was followed up by an underthrown completion to Embree and, in the 2 minute offense, a pretty poorly thrown bomb to Rosario that went for an incompletion.  I also noticed on a few plays that he waited too long to make his pass...after the receiver made the break and, at times, ended up just standing there or starting the 'break free' dance to try and get open.  Unfortunately, it very much reminded me of last year where we could get a first down or two, but never sustain a drive for 5 or 6 first downs.

Nick Crissman.  What struck me at this practice was that I think his throwing motion is weird to the point it messes up the receivers' timing.  There were two passes that were dropped (one a crossing pattern and the other a slant, I think) where it seemed the passes were catchable, but the receiver seemed surprised when it arrived.  Maybe it was the receiver not paying attention, but I think it might be that they are used to a certain delivery style and Crissman's kind of throws them.  At the end of the day, the receivers need to make the catch.....That said, he did have some nice completions on longer balls.

More worthless thoughts after the break

Continue reading this post »

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Thoughts from yesterday's evening practice....

- Ricky Marvray. Seriously people, this kid is hungry. I really can't see, at this point, how he is not in the rotation from Day 1. He is just a scrappy, blue collar playmaker. I can't remember if it was 7 on 7's or not, but the first play of the day that got the crowd amped was Brehaut's perfectly thrown fade pattern to the corner of the endzone that Marvray out-jumped the defender to haul in. It was a thing of beauty. Of course, it figures we use the 5'10" guy when we have 6'4" Rosario and Embree.....The second play was during the scrimmage where he outjumped the defender and literally wrestled the ball away. He just wanted it and was not going to be denied. So, the two top crowd-pleaser plays of the day? Made by Ricky Marvray. Lastly, the kid is a BLOCKER away from the ball. This is the first memory I have of him and despite the showtime catches, the dude rolls up his sleeves and goes after DB's with a fury during the run game. Love it.

- Randall Carroll got some payback today for the mayhem that Dietrich Riley has been causing. Run play that ended up a mosh and Carroll comes from the opposite side of the field and put a hit on Riley that made the crowd 'Oooh.' Riley didn't go down, but it was a loud crack and I'm sure got his attention.

- Dietrich Riley. Uh. Man. Kid keeps stepping it up. 7 on 7's he had two interceptions today. Both throws were atrocious by the QB's (can't remember who exactly), but so were some of the receptions Rahim logged last year. No big hits this practice, but I think I'd rather have the INT's. I would love to see him pick up the scheme well enough to get on the field with Rahim at the same time.

- Tony Dye. Just when I made the comment that he hasn't done a whole lot to standout during practices he goes and makes a sweet pick. it was a tipped pass that he kept after and I think dove for. I'm for whoever steps it up (him or Dietrich), but this is a good place to be.

Continue reading this post »

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Random notes from this morning's practice:

- Chris Ward. Big, big boy. Missed him when I went to the last practice, but saw him today for the first time and I was impressed. He's got a gut, but not a sloppy gut..like when a person is big, but not flabby....The below photo is him walking next to Wade Yandall....check it out:

IMG_1597 (via Scotucla)

More photo, notes, and a short video after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Bumped. Yet another incredibly informative post on practice. Keep it coming guys. Today's practice starts at 3 pm PST. GO BRUINS. -N

Let me start by saying I missed the first hour of practice, which consisted of the first team unit, primarily.  As such, I don't have a whole lot of commentary about them.  However, I think the easiest thing to do is talk about who made the biggest impression and devolve into random thoughts:

- Ricky Marvray.  I don't want to be 'that guy,' but I think I wrote on this board last year and in spring that he was going to be a presence to deal with.  He is.  Ricky was the most consistent receiver on the field that I saw yesterday.  He maybe had one dropped pass, where the pass wasn't ideal....but other than that, dude makes plays.  He is like a smaller Taylor Embree....but because he is more compact, he is quicker (versus Taylor's long strides).  I am pretty sure at this point that he's in the top three receiver rotation...if not, then by mid-season I think he will be.  More after the break....

Continue reading this post »

So those of you that are lucky enough to attend practices know that the players usually hang around afterwards signing kids footballs and the such.  Well, since I don't have kids and don't typically plan ahead and have good questions for the guys (So...uh....how're you liking UCLA?), I was thinking of asking you all if you had any questions you'd like me to ask any of the players.  I know all the collective knowledge here has to be able to come up with some good, open-ended questions for the guys...or even general questions that could be asked of any player and that are a little more original than what I inevitably come up with.  

I'll compile the questions by player and, depending on whose path I cross, I'll see if I can get us all some answers.  Fire away!

So, I see this article show up on Bleacher Report (here) written by some dude who attended the 'University' of Arizona.  In it, the 'author' purports to rank the Pac-10 fair weather fans.  Knowing what I know of LA football, I decided to indulge the author and get a good laugh at USC's expense.  However, as I clicked through the slides and noticed USC ranked as having less fair weather fans than UCLA, I realized that it was garbage.   Other than the low hanging fruit, like Oregon & Utah selling out their stadiums, the rest of the slides were pure conjecture and opinion.  

As a result, I did a quick search for UCLA and USC attendance figures to do a little more in-depth analysis.  I found the results on the NCAA website, but only as far back as 1998.  However, I thought this a relatively appropriate time period upon which to run a simple statistical analysis.  For the period 1998-2001, SUC amassed a pretty mediocre 25-24 record, while UCLA amassed a 27-19 record.  Meanwhile, for the period 2002-2009, USC amassed an impressive 91-13 record, while UCLA amassed a pretty horrid 53-47 record.  Subsequently, I was able to find UCLA's attendance figures back to 1994 thanks to an LA Times article, but was not able to do so with USC.

Admittedly, the data is sparse with only 16 years of data for UCLA and 12 years for USC.  However, that is the nature of the beast and, I believe, captures enough down time for both programs, as well as capturing the recent pinnacles of each.  I also decided to list the wins in both the year of analysis, as well as the previous year's win count.  I then determined the standard deviation and R-square, Pearson & correlation of attendance to current year wins and previous year wins.  Results are below:

0001K7 (via Scotucla)

To begin with, you'll notice UCLA has a much lower standard deviation than USC.  On the face of it, it would appear that UCLA's fan base is much more steady, attracting a more consistent fan base in good times and bad (i.e. is less volatile).  Meanwhile, the standard deviation for USC is noticeably greater than UCLA (14,154 vs. 8,474), which would seemingly imply that their attendance fluctuates more wildly.

However, what I find most interesting is the correlation/R-squared/Pearson analyses (which are all the same for each team due to the small sample size, I presume).  The results indicate there is very little correlation between attendance and current or previous year wins at 15.47% and 4.92%.  It would appear the previous year wins correlation is depressed since attendance fell so dramatically after our 1998 season (any ideas as to why, anyone?).

Meanwhile, there appears to be a VERY high correlation (remember, a 1.0 implies perfect correlation) between both USC current and previous year wins at 83.24% AND 92.51%(!).

So, while not a statistician by any means, who would appear to have the more fair weather fan base (i.e band wagoners!).

And I welcome critiques and suggestions to improve the analyses by those more knowledgeable in such areas than myself! 

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

She may not be pretty, but she's ours.....that phrase might best sum up our Spring Game offense.  

With an O-line that maybe didn't get pushed back as much as in years past, but nonetheless failed to open many holes or provide more than momentary pass protection, the offense looked strikingly familiar to many UCLA followers.  However, keep in mind this is a review of last night's scrimmage, which is a single data point.  The sky is not falling; in fact, our athletic improvement is palpable.  Yet the execution last night was definitely lacking and needs to be reported as such. And these comments hopefully, if anything, initiate a good back and forth.

First, starting 'Prince Team' offense.  Prince, Coleman (RB), Sheller (LT), Baca (LG), Tayloer (C, for Maiava, who is injured), Eddie Williams (RG), Mike Harris (RT),  Cory Harkey (TE), Embree (Slot), Carroll (FL; F-back), Rosario (SE).  

Starting 'Brehaut Team' defense:  Damien Holmes (RDE), Nate Chandler (RDT), Justin Edison (LDT), Datone Jones (LDE), Aaron Hester (RCB), Sean Westgate (WLB), Steve Sloan (MLB), Akeem Ayers (SLB), Tony Dye (SS), Rahim Moore (FS)

Second, starting 'Brehaut Team' offense:  Brehaut (QB), Franklin (RB), Harris (RT), Yandall (RG), Capella (C), Hasiak (LG), Downey (LT), Fauria (TE), Presley (Slot), Marvray (FL; F-back), Johnson (SE)

Starting 'Prince Team' defense:  Keenan Graham (LDE), David Carter (LDT), Nate Chandler (RDT), Iuta Tepa (RDE), Isaiah Bowens (SLB), Patrick Larimor (MLB), Glenn Love (WLB), Viney (RCB), Dalton Hilliard (SS), Andrew Abbott  (LCB), Mascarenas (FS)

More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »