SB Nation User Blog: bruin7982

Cheatey Has Always Been A Classless Tool

bruin7982 — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:46:05 -0000

Cheatey Has Always Been A Classless Tool

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but back in 1992 when he was the Jets defensive coordinator, Cheatey gave the "choke" sign to Dolphins' kicker Pete Stoyanovich after he missed an extra point. There was poetic justice later when Stoyanovich kicked the game winning field goal with seven seconds left. Even though Cheatey later apologized, Don Shula's quote was "I'm glad (the classless gesture) came back to haunt him." Let's hope that there is another haunting in Cheatey's future!

Tentative Ruling In Reggie Bush Case (Lake v. Griffin)

bruin7982 — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:21:16 -0000

Tentative Ruling In Reggie Bush Case (Lake v. Griffin)

By now, perhaps there has been a final ruling. But the tentative ruling by the court was to deny the motion to compel arbitration on the grounds that there was no evidence that the plaintiff (Lake) was at all a party to the arbitration agreement. If the tentative ruling holds, it means that the case will continue to be in court and it will be difficult for the Bush side to keep whatever information that comes out from the NCAA. In a victory for the Bush side (Griffin), however, the court denied the plaintiff's request for further responses to additional interrogatories and sanctioned the plaintiff $2,720. The request for further responses was deemed untimely and there was a failure to properly meet and confer. I assume the sanctions were for abuse of the discovery process by the plaintiff.

Espn investigation of OJ Mayo

bruin7982 — Sat, 10 May 2008 20:59:58 -0000

Espn investigation of OJ Mayo

On Outside the Lines tomorrow, ESPN plans on releasing the results of its investigation of O.J. Mayo's relationship with L.A. "event promoter" Rodney Guillory. Might be interesting viewing for Bruins fans!

Losing that Lavin Feeling (Confessions of a Spoiled Fan)

bruin7982 — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:11:38 -0000

Reading Nestor's excellent post comparing defensive statistics over the last several years and reading some of the grousing that has appeared on this site over the last couple of weeks has caused me to reflect on how I need to resist the temptation of falling back into UCLA spoiled basketball fan mode. Yes, I must admit that growing up as I did going to games when John Wooden was coach, I was the "typical spoiled UCLA basketball fan." My idea of an "acceptable" UCLA game was a 40 point win, as long as the team looked good doing it. When Jim Harrick (who I abhored as coach until he won in 1995) wrote a book about the 1995 team, I asked him to autograph it "to a typical spoiled UCLA fan", and he graciously obliged.

I have been grateful to Steve Lavin for breaking me of my unreasonable expectations for UCLA basketball. In Lavin's last inglorious season, it was almost liberating to think that I would be happy if UCLA could just finish above .500. I have considered writing a "thank you" letter to "Coach" Lav for allowing me to accept less than brilliant UCLA basketball, but I doubt he would appreciate it.

Now, Coach Howland is spoiling me again. With the team's great play over the last couple of years, I am losing that Lavin feeling, and am once again starting to get upset if the team doesn't win by 20 (I haven't quite gotten to only being satisfied with a 40 point win yet, unless it is against Oregon State). The last 3 games have been quite upsetting. It seems that the sky is falling on UCLA basketball.

But Nestor's post made me realize that the team is basically playing about as well as it has the last couple of years. After all, this season UCLA has lost only 2 Pac 10 games while last year the team lost 3 games during the regular season. Most folks seem to think the Pac 10 is better this year, so arguably the team has performed better than last year's Final Four team. Nestor's post motivated me to do some research of my own, and our point differential this year in conference is better than it was last year, +11.28 compared to +9.39 last year.

It is true that in the last half of the conference season this year, our differential has fallen to 9.76, but it seems to me that this is more due to our offense falling off slightly as compared to the defense. In the second half of the season, UCLA allowed an average of 61.3 points per game compared to 63.78 in the first half. One game that sticks out like a sore thumb in terms of points allowed is the last Cal game, since that was the highest point total allowed by UCLA in any Pac 10 game this year. But that game followed the very emotional Stanford win, and there could have been a defensive letdown (look what happened to Stanford against $C in their next game).

Does this mean that UCLA will go to the Final 4 again? Again, I should not revert to my old ways of finding only championships acceptable and remember back to the Lavin era. These days, just making the Final 4 is a tremendous accomplishment and doing it two years in a row happens very infrequently. Three years in a row is almost too much to ask for. But, I'll be disappointed if they don't and will be disappointed if they don't win a championship. That being said, I hope that if UCLA loses either before the Final 4 or in it, I'll be able to look realistically at what a great season it has been and appreciate what a great coach and team that we have!

Where do successful coaches come from?

bruin7982 — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:25:58 -0000

All of the discussion about prospective head coaches and whether UCLA should be willing to hire someone with no previous head coaching experience caused me to take a look at the AP top 25 to see what kind of experience those coaches had before they were hired by their schools. If something like this appears elsewhere on this site, I apologize for the redundancy.

Of the top 25 teams, 16 of their head coaches had some form of college or professional head coaching experience before they were hired, meaning that only 9 did not. The 9 are: Bob Stoops (Oklahoma), Mark Richt (Ga.), Mike Mangino (Kansas), Jeff Jagodzinski (BC), Phil Fulmer (Tenn.), Bret Bielema (Wisconsin), Bronco Mendenhall (BYU), Jim Leavitt (So. Fla.) and Chris Petersen (Boise St.). If I missed prior head coaching experience for any of these folks, I apologize. Of these, only four were promoted to head coach after the prior head coach left: Fulmer, Bielema, Mendenhall and Petersen.

Interestingly, two of the coaches, Mendenhall and Petersen, are among the more popular choices here to succeed Dorrell, even though it seems unlikely that either is interested in the job.

While I haven't carefully studied the background of all of these coaches and have also not carefully studied the background of Dewayne Walker, my gut feeling is that his credentials do not measure up to the other coaches on this list who were made head coaches without prior experience. For example, both Richt and Stoops had significant coordinator experience in very successful programs before they were hired. Of the four who were promoted, only one, Mendenhall, succeeded an unsuccessful coach.

The bottom line is that while it is possible to hire someone with no prior coaching experience and have success with that person, that is not the most common path to success. Unless you can find a Stoops or Richt out there who were longtime successful coordinators in major programs, it is a crap shoot to hire an assistant, especially one off of an unsuccessful staff.

40 Years of UCLA/U$C

bruin7982 — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:47:42 -0000

This Saturday will be the 40th anniversary of my first UCLA/U$C game and the 41st consecutive UCLA/U$C game that I have personally attended. The first game in 1967 was a heartbreaking 21-20 loss in a game featuring #1 UCLA against #4 U$C and its "slashing" runner, O.J. Simpson, who scored the winning touchdown. I have suffered a lot in going to these games, with UCLA's record being 16-22-2. Nevertheless, I used to view the UCLA/U$C game as my favorite day of the year because even in the John McKay/Robinson era, the games were usually competitive and in the 60's & 70's the Rose Bowl was frequently on the line. In both 1967 and 1969, the national championship was actually on the line as both teams were highly ranked. But now, in the words of B.B. King, "The Thrill is Gone."

I approach this week's game, as I have approached the last several UCLA/U$C games, with a feeling of dread (and fear for the physical safety of Ben Olson). I actually seriously considered breaking my streak of attending these games this year, but was talked into buying tickets by my friends. Since Cheatey Petey was hired by Figueroa Tech, its salary cap was raised, and its school motto became "Just Win, Baby!", the games are rarely competitive and it is viewed as a "moral victory" if UCLA even gives them a good game. Last year's win was viewed as a miracle. It is unlikely that a miracle will happen two years in a row, especially with the game being at the Vomitoreum.

I don't blame Coach Dull for the current state of affairs - the long slide into medicrity for UCLA football really began after Troy Aikman left and the major culprits are Dalis, Donahue and Toledo. Thankfully U$C was also mediocre during much of that time. But now, it is clear that Coach Dull is incapable of raising the program up to the level that it needs to be to deal with Cheatey Petey and the likes of Reggie Bu$h and Ray Thugaluga on a consistent basis.

My plea to Dan Guerrero is to make the day of the UCLA/U$C game once again my favorite day of the year. Hire someone who can go mano a mano with Carroll and his high priced thugs. If UCLA could be competitive with McKay & Robinson back in the 60's and 70's, there is no reason why it can't compete today.

I hope that DG can use the skills he demonstrated in hiring Howland and Savage to hire a top coach who can restore UCLA football to the prominence that it once had. I am confident that this can happen; all it takes is the will!

Bruin Football Over The Years

bruin7982 — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 20:43:52 -0000

Perhaps I should put this on Streeter's blog, but I don't want to increase his blog traffic. Others may have also done similar research. I wanted to check Streeter's assertion that Dorrell's record is basically consistent with the record of other UCLA coaches over the years, so I calculated UCLA's winning percentage in each five year period preceding Dorrell going back to 1950 (2002 to 1998, 1997-1993, etc.) (yes, I have too much time on my hands!).

I ignored ties in doing the calculations. With two games left to play this year, Dorrell's winning percentage is 57%. Toledo's record for the preceding five years was about 59%, and he got fired. There were only 2 five year periods that I studied where UCLA's winning percentage was worse, 1958-1962(55%) and 1968-1972 (54%). The coach from 1958-1962 was Bill Barnes who got fired and the 1968-1972 period reflected the end of Tommy Prothro's UCLA career and the beginning of Pepper Rogers' career. That period was sandwiched between two very successful periods, Prothro's first three years on the job (82%) and 1973-1977 (75%). From 1950-1957 and 1973-1987, UCLA won well over 70% of its games.

It is true that since Troy Aikman left after the 1988 season, UCLA has not done a lot better than Dorrell, winning around 59% of its games from 1988 through 2002. That can be attributed to the fact that Donahue was playing out the string during those years, mostly without Homer Smith as his OC (his record with Homer was much better than without) and Toledo was really not qualified for the job (slightly more qualified than Dorrell). The potential of UCLA football I think is reflected by the period from 1973 to 1987 when UCLA won well over 70% of its games (the Sanders era of 1950-1957 with its almost 80% winning percentage may be too much ancient history).

Assuming Dorrell gets fired, he will be treated the same as the only two coaches who were fired during the period studied, Bill Barnes and Bob Toledo, both of whom had comparable records to Dorrell, and will not be treated worse than any other UCLA football coach. I don't think it is unreasonable for UCLA fans to expect a coach who will bring UCLA up to its potential on the field.