-Bumped. - BN Eds.

11Banners opened our eyes a bit further with his post on the bonus awaiting Dashing Dan Chianti. And 11Banners included this as well:

"I recently spoke with some people at UCLA who relayed that Chancellor Block was not prepared to run a university like UCLA and does not like public scrutiny at all."

I hope to follow some of Gene Block's decisions and actions so we can get a better idea of whether he is leading UCLA with the foresight it deserves. (In all fairness, I have already reached my own conclusion — that he is the wrong man for the job.) And the recent disagreement about building a hotel and conference center on campus may be another case in point.

This opinion was voiced in a column in the Daily Bruin:

"In better financial times, the combination of a state-of-the-art conference facility and guest center could be an asset to the university, but now is not the time, and the university shouldn't be stretching itself thin with nonessential building projects."

Gene Block has been a supporter of the project. Unfortunately, some influential voices haven't seen it the same way. Doubts were raised at a recent meeting of a UC regents committee, and the support for UCLA's position on the Hannah Carter Japanese Garden has been anything but unanimous.

So where does all this end up? Well, for one thing it seems to provide evidence that the criticism of Mr. Block is not restricted to the lack of pride shown by our football and basketball teams, as well as the nearsighted decisions of our athletic department, and that readers of Bruins Nation and other websites are concerned about more than sports.

Continue reading this post »

-Bumped. BN Eds.

Dear Mr. Yudof:

Since you are a legal scholar, I'm certain you have expertise in both the law's idealism and its practical side. By idealism, I mean the systems and processes the law puts in place to try to ensure such things as "justice for all." However, I'm writing to you because of my interest in the practical side — that part of the law that deals with day-to-day reality. And it's in the spirit of what is practical and feasible that I hope you read this. You are, after all, the chief steward of a university whose achievements have torn down the walls of ignorance in many parts of the world.

I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that, despite his many accomplishments, Gene Block is temperamentally unsuited to lead my beloved university, and I would like to raise several questions that I hope are pragmatic in nature.

Continue reading this post »

Many years ago, as a kid, I ate Wheaties, the "breakfast of champions." After high school I was lucky enough to attend UCLA, the school of champions. Now as senior citizen I see my alma mater securing its place as the home of mediocrity.

Didn't Dan Guerrero say that a team with a record of six wins and six losses (seven losses after the Oregon game and eight losses after playing Illinois) deserved to go to a bowl game? Now Ben Howland says UCLA will accept a bid to the NIT if one is offered. Hey, Ben, is this how you honor John Wooden's legacy?

As Odysseus said, "We don't hang NIT banners at UCLA," so I direct this question to Gene Block: Is pride a thing of the past at UCLA? (Maybe a better question is: Do we have no shame?)

Diversity has long been honored at UCLA. New points of view are almost always welcomed — with the hope, of course, that they are based on critical thinking. There is, however, one exception — mediocrity. It has no place on our campus and has never been welcomed.

Does UCLA'a administration still feel that way? We're waiting for the right answer. So far, the evidence is lacking.

While the presumed purpose of making an argument is to rely on logic and insight, T.J. Simers fails both tests with his usual alacrity when he criticizes Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's views on UCLA's troubled basketball program.

Where to begin? Well, how about Simers' use of innuendo. After referring to Abdul-Jabbar's description of Trevor Ariza's decision to leave UCLA rather than continue working with Ben Howland, Simers says,

"He (Abdul-Jabbar) doesn't mention it, but I wonder what Wooden would have said about that?"

Innuendo, of course, is criticism of an indirect kind. (One definition on the Web is "an allusive or oblique remark or hint, typically a suggestive or disparaging one.") So what Simers is doing is hinting, not saying directly, that Abdul-Jabbar has it all wrong. Since we don't KNOW what Coach would have said, here's another innuendo of sorts: If the allegation of bullying is true (and it should be noted that Reeves Nelson denies it), what would Coach have done about it? Coach will always rest securely in our hearts, but speaking from what I assume are the operative legal standards, again we don't KNOW the answer to that, either. See how easy this is? You don't have to provide proof at all; you simply hint at possibilities.

Continue reading this post »

Although it's difficult to know exactly how you feel about UCLA athletic programs, it seems clear at this point that they're not high on your list of priorities. I'm not sure why that is. Maybe you have taken the University of Virginia (a very different school) as a model. Or maybe you're simply not interested in college sports.

Here's my best guess, though. I think you underestimated how important sports were in the life of UCLA students and alumni. And now that you're here, you've decided that supporting Dan Guerrero is your only option. That's why I'm writing: to remind you that you have alternatives.

Continue reading this post »

-Bumped. BN Eds.

I appreciated Bellerophon's fury and indignation; it's totally understandable. But what has interested me over the last few weeks — maybe going back to the bad times last year under CRN — is what's going on with Chancellor Block. As I said in a previous post, I was a freshman in 1959 when, I think, Franklin Murphy was the chancellor, and I can't imagine him letting this kind of situation fester in the athletic department.

Since I've worked as an editor for many years, language is important to me, and some of what Gene Block said in an interview on the UCLA/ESPN blog made me curious. (I am assuming the transcript is accurate. If it's not, I apologize for making that assumption.) Referring to Guerrero, Block said:

GENE BLOCK: Dan and I are both frustrated with some of our athletic performances in some sports, on the other hand if you look under Dan's leadership, there have been extremely strong performances including a re-certification by the NCAA. We've executed I think 22 NCAA titles since he's been here. We've had a tremendous amount of success and I would say that Dan focuses on and his concern is about our student athletes and all the different ranges of their development and I have great confidence in him.

And near the end of the transcript he says in part:

I have an athletic director that I have faith in and he is aware of the issues and as you've heard from him, he's dealing with them. We talk a lot and we meet regularly. With Dan's leadership and with my advice, I think we're going to get back on the track we want to be on.

So here are a couple of questions I have.

Continue reading this post »

and all the other legends of UCLA basketball to rescue the program John Wooden built. It's not your job alone, of course. Many people who love UCLA have written on this website about Ben Howland and Dan Guerrero.

We live in an era where politicians often sneer at the idea of accountability. A few well-chosen words, and it's back to business as usual. That's what I think happened with the quotes just posted from Chancellor Block, Guerrero and Howland. I can't imagine those remarks being made without a dose of contempt and cynicism.

For whatever reasons — and I've been unable to identify them to my satisfaction — UCLA's administration has decided that a well-run athletic program is no longer a priority. No one, of course, is demanding an unending string of championships. But what about pride, determination and intensity? Have they been part of recent UCLA basketball teams?

Here's another question: Has Dan Guerrero's stewardship of UCLA athletics made you feel that UCLA's tradition will be evident to the next generation?

The six of you and so many others (I think of someone like John Vallely, for example) have given so much to our school. Stand with us now. Tell the chancellor that the way the athletic department has done business is no longer acceptable. That trying to seat students away from the center of action when Pauley Pavilion reopens is not acceptable. (Yes, I know that plan was eventually canceled, but that was only after a furor on Bruins Nation.)

We're the school where Jackie Robinson forged his future, contributing not just to baseball but a better country. We're the school where Ralph Bunche studied (on the Vermont Avenue campus) and first awakened to the possibilities of a role in the larger world, eventually receiving the Nobel Prize for his work at the United Nations.

I began at UCLA in 1959, and as the campus grew around me, my interest in new and exciting ideas grew with it. The great thing about UCLA was that it achieved success in the world of athletics and academics. It wasn't necessary to choose just one — because they complemented each other.

I said earlier that politicians often sneer at the idea of accountability. And obviously there are some things we can't change in the world, at least for now. But do we have to settle for second best for our alma mater? The place where we planted our roots and embarked on a journey into career and family?

You have done so much for our collective pride. Stand with us now in making an audacious demand: UCLA should be all that it can be and not a distant memory.

I just read Ted Miller's piece that Nestor linked to on the hiring of Jim Mora. Needless to say, I am sickened by Dan Guerrero's contempt for UCLA fans and alumni, and I hope all BN readers saw T.J. Simers' story in the Times in which he said, "It remains almost incomprehensible how ill-prepared Dan Guerrero was after firing Rick Neuheisel."

But I want to say a few words about a remark by Ted Miller, who said Mora has ties to Greg Knapp, the quarterback coach of the Houston Texans. As an alumnus from many years ago, someone who has lived in the Sacramento area for decades and a longtime 49er fan, I'm familiar with Greg Knapp. He coached at Sac State before taking a job with the 49ers. At some point, he became the offensive coordinator (he might have first been hired as a quarterback coach.) In my judgment, Knapp lent a whole new meaning, if not dimension, to the word "boring" while with the 49ers. I recall one columnist who referred to him this way: "Greg (take a) Knapp."

I'm willing to give Mora a chance despite my loathing for Guerrero, but if Mora hires Knapp in any capacity, the game is over, in my opinion. Go Bruins.

I found this blog on NFL Pro Weekly. It makes a convincing case for Carnell Lake's place in the Hall of Fame. I remember his days at UCLA. Wasn't he on the same team as Troy Aikman? I'm not sure how many former UCLA players are in the hall. Bob Waterfield and Aikman are in, of course, and I assume there are others. (Maybe Tom Fears and Bill Kilmer.) And Jonathan Ogden is almost certain to be elected. Anyway, this is nice read.

The link is  http://profootballweekly.com/blogs/2009/09/24/lebeau-says-carnell-lake-should-be-in-canton

   
    It's only a few hours until game time, and I'm confident of several things over the course of the next three games (yeah, three games).
    I believe Lorenzo Mata, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute and Alfred Aboya will get key rebounds and be towers of strength on defense. I believe Arron Afflalo will regain his touch, make shots the way he has for three years at Pauley Pavilion and continue to show unparalleled leadership. I believe Darren Collison will continue to be the best point guard in college basketball, setting teammates up, making key shots and hounding the other team. I believe Josh Shipp will make vital and crucial baskets, and play tough defense. And I believe Michael Roll, Russell Westbrook, James Keefe, Ryan Wright and other players off the bench will make all the key shots and get the key rebounds when they're most needed.
    This team is battle-tested and will contest every shot and every pass their opponents make. Kansas represents a tough test, but UCLA has the best coach and the finest tradition in college basketball, and I think they're ready. Go Bruins!

This story on Ben Howland appeared in a special supplement to the Times' Sunday magazine called "Play." (It doesn't appear regularly in the Times as the Sunday magazine does; it comes out every few months or so.) The story, part of a "March Madness" section, was written by Pete Thamel.

I'm sure the title won't sit well with Bruin fans, but the story's worth reading. I didn't know, for example, that Howland played professionally in Uruguay or how much of an emphasis he puts on videotapes. ("In less than three years, U.C.L.A. has put together one of the most extensive video archives in the country, and the team's video room offers a perfect window into Howland's meticulous nature. Seventeen DirecTV units are hooked up to VCRs and the team records more than 1,500 games over the course of the season.")

Here are the lead paras of the story:

The night before the biggest basketball game of his Weber State career, Ben Howland called his close friend Jay Hillock, a former junior-college assistant coach. Howland had a reputation for nervous excitability -- he typically vomited 10 minutes before every game -- so Hillock wasn't surprised when the phone rang at 2 a.m., just hours before Weber was to play a powerhouse University of Arkansas team in the second round of the 1979 N.C.A.A. tournament.

"I'm going to give Sidney Moncrief the biggest charley horse of his life at the get-go!" Howland screamed, referring to the Arkansas star, and promptly hung up.

Almost 30 years later, Howland, now 49, is still wound tight. He's an ever-revving engine of obsessive energy, a principal reason that he has emerged as one of the country's most successful and respected basketball coaches. (He no longer throws up before games, fortunately.) Howland played professionally in Uruguay, then toiled for 12 years as an assistant coach at the University of California, Santa Barbara, before embarking on a series of impressive reclamation projects, reviving moribund programs at Northern Arizona University and the University of Pittsburgh before landing the most glamorous post in college basketball, head coach at U.C.L.A., in 2003. Howland's turnaround skills took center stage last season, when he led an offensively limited Bruins team to the national title game against Florida and was named coach-of-the-year in the Pac-10, the third conference to give him that honor. This year, his team is more polished offensively and even better defensively; as a result, U.C.L.A. spent six straight weeks ranked No. 1 in the Associated Press poll this winter, and will enter the tournament as one of a handful of teams with Final Four expectations.

I had never heard of the Bruin Standard Online until Wednesday, but the November issue has an interview with Dan Guerrero.

He says in the interview, "There was an article in the Orlando Sentinel last year that analyzed all the admissions criteria for athletes of each school in the country. And that analysis is broken down by conference. They rate the criteria from 1-10. The 10s are the Ivys, Rice. The 9s are Northwestern, Stanford. Your 8s are UCLA. Your 7s are Notre Dames. Your 6s are Cal."

He also says, "The misconception that we did not cast the net broadly in our football search is clearly wrong. The fact that the media only know about a few individuals is not indicative of how exhaustive that whole process was."

I find it hard to believe that athletes have a harder time getting into UCLA than Cal. It sounds like another excuse for an abyssmal football program.

But it's an interesting interview. At another point, Guerrero says, "When I was in school, it was in the middle of the Vietnam War. Students were activists. You had the brown berets at Campbell Hall. You had Bill Walton leading a lot of the protests of the war. Angela Davis was at Royce Hall with her first lecture after declaring her political stance. It was a vibrant, exciting time. And you couple those dynamics with the desire to compete and to play with the best and to play against the best -- for me, it was in baseball -- was really exciting. I can't see the world at UCLA from the filter of the student now. I'm looking at it from a different filter. But the fraternities were not dry in those times, so there were hellacious parties. You don't see that anymore. There clearly was a different vibe, a different dynamic in those days. I'm not saying it's any less exciting now, but I do know what it was then. It was pretty special."

The URL for the interview is  http://www.bruinstandard.com/interview.shtml

Dear Dan,

         I write to you with a mixture of pride and pain. Pride because I graduated from UCLA; pain because I think my alma mater has been so poorly served by Karl Dorrell and his defenders. You played for UCLA's baseball team and were elected to our university's Athletic Hall of Fame.

       And so I say bring us home to our collective past.

       Any discussion of UCLA's football coach has to begin with leadership -- making players confident about the direction of their program. Players have to believe a coach can develop a successful game plan and make the right choice at critical times (as opposed to the way Karl Dorrell called three running plays in the closing minutes when Notre Dame had stacked its defensive line). Players have to believe a coach will make a direct and honest evaluation of their ability (as opposed to the way Karl Dorrell vacillated between Drew Olsen and Matt Moore in 2004). Players have to believe a head coach won't duck responsibility for his mistakes (as opposed to the way Karl Dorrell has shifted blame to his assistants). Players have to believe a coach will succeed as a recruiter (as opposed to the way Karl Dorrell's record has led many recruits to regard UCLA as a second or third choice).

        And so I say bring us home to our collective past.

        As far as I can tell, Karl Dorrell brings the attitude of a CEO to his football team. I wish him well if he enters the business world, but a CEO is not what athletes who are 18, 19 or in their early 20s need. They need someone who demands their best effort and inspires them to give it. You've already given us an example of such a coach: Ben Howland, your choice to continue the legacy of John Wooden. It no longer matters if Karl Dorrell beats USC. He has established a pattern that is clear and disturbing. Equally important, his defenders every day sound more and more like those who contended UCLA could not find a better basketball coach than Steve Lavin.
    UCLA's students, alumni and fans have so many reasons for pride. We're one NCAA title away from 100 championships. No other university has achieved that, and we have yet to celebrate our 90th anniversary. We are the school of Jackie Robinson and Rafer Johnson, so it's painful to hear some of Karl Dorrell's defenders argue that racism is behind the effort to replace him. No one expects UCLA to dazzle the football world with one perfect season after another. But you had it right when you fired Bob Toledo. "We want to have a national caliber program" is the way you put it.
        Now it's time to stop the bleeding.

        And so I say bring us home to our collective past.

     The only reason I'm writing about Steve Mariucci now is that I saw a recent comment on bruinsnation that he could be considered as a possible replacement for Karl Dorrell. If and when UCLA decides to fire Dorrell, let's hope that Mariucci is not in the mix.
     As a longtime 49er fan, I can tell you that Mariucci and  Dorrell are incredibly similar. Mariucci was constantly outcoached in San Francisco and came under fire for not trying to move the ball at the end of the first half in a playoff game against Tampa Bay.
     I'm not optimistic about getting rid of Dorrell, but UCLA fans should be vigilant about suggestions for his replacement if that blessed event comes to pass.  

   Let's see: UCLA loses 29-19 and kicks four field goals. If three of those field goals are touchdowns, UCLA wins, 31-19.
   Now some background: Dorrell tells Brian Dohn before the Washington game, "We'd love every time to score a touchdown, but I think the best thing is to make sure every time we're coming out of there with points."
  And now some post-game analysis from UCLA offensive coordinator Jim Svoboda: "Probably have to be a little more aggressive and take a couple of shots. Just taking a look back at it, off the top of my head, it may be something we had an opportunity to do."
  Finally, some post-game statistics for your consideration (from Dohn):
  "On each of UCLA's four possessions inside the 10-yard line, the first-down play was a run. And of 11 plays called inside the 10-yard line, seven were runs, including a hand-off to Kahlil Bell on third-and-goal from the 10 with the Bruins clinging to a 16-14 lead in the final minute of the third quarter.
  "Before the last desperation drive, the Bruins ran 19 times on first down, compared to four pass attempts on first down. Olson was also sacked once on first down."
   Can you say "predictable?" Or, maybe more to the point, "outcoached?"
   

     UCLA fans will enjoy this article that appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle Wednesday. According to the Chron, this guy does almost everything -- and does it better than almost anyone else. If he performs to his potential, the sky's the limit for David Klech.

      The URL is http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2006/05/31/SPGROJ50LJ1.DTL

     If the URL doesn't work, click the "choose a  writer" link on the Chron's sports page. The story was written by John Crumpacker, I think.  

From the diaries -N

It was terribly painful to watch UCLA's complete unraveling against SC last week, but I can't share in the gnashing of teeth about UCLA's recent sports record. We hold the record for most NCAA titles, and unless my memory is wrong, we won at least two titles last year (men's tennis and water polo). And this year's basketball team has some tremendous talent, with at least two more new prospects next year. The win over Nevada was particularly impressive since the team still isn't in full health.

But I want to comment about about a story I saw on uclabruins.com.The story said Karl Dorrell is on a list of six finalists for the FWAA Eddie Robinson Coach of the Year Award. (I think that's the Football Writers of America Association.)

The other five coaches are Texas' Mack Brown, SC's Carroll, Central Florida's George O'Leary, Penn State's Joe Paterno, and Notre Dame's Charlie Weis.

Now it may not be diplomatically possible for Dorrell to decline the nomination. But it's embarrassing for Bruin fans; this's year's record isn't a source of pride, and if it's possible, Dorrell should do the right thing and say thanks but no thanks.