SB Nation User Blog: rfirpo

Beware: 2k Sports Coaches v. Cancer = Fake Tournament

rfirpo — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 04:25:50 -0000

Beware: 2k Sports Coaches v. Cancer = Fake Tournament

What ever happened to a legitimate pre-season basketball tournament? What I mean by legitimate is that, if a little school beats a big-bad host school, the little school advances and the host school goes home to lick its wounds.

Well, the 2K Sports Coaches v. Cancer is no longer a legitimate tournament. Apparently, Cal, North Carolina, Syracuse, and Ohio St. are guaranteed to "advance" to the semi-finals of the "tournament" in New York. In other words, if Cal loses to Detroit Mercy tonight, Cal still goes to New York, and Detroit Mercy goes home and misses out on New York.

This kind of fake tournament is bad for the game, and is ultimately a way to keep up and coming teams down and keep the money flowing to the big conferences. In other words, it sucks as much as the BCS. I'm sure its all driven by ratings, but it still renders the tournament a mockery.

The Scariest Part About 0-5

rfirpo — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:05:39 -0000

The Scariest Part About our 0-5 record this year is, in my opinion, how good the other teams in the conference look. We are battling WSU to stay out of the cellar, while the rest of the conference is playing pretty good football and is both competitive and showing improvement. Even scarier, it seems the balance in the Pac-10 is the result of some good coaching hires (Chip Kelly and Harbaugh just to name two) and some good young (or new) quarterbacks (Barkley and the kid from Arizona come to mind).

Who knows what UCLA has in store for the next few years, and Coach Neu might turn out to be the best of the best. But looking around the conference, we have a road to climb, and competing for 10 win seasons seems many years away. As for our quarterback situation--another huge question mark if you ask me. I'll let others talk about "silver-linings" and the fourth quarter. Sure it looked good, but doesn't every team shine at least one quarter in the year? We were due, and TJ Simers nailed it this morning (assuming you can appreciate humor at our expense). Of course, that doesn't mean Prince isn't our future. I hope he is. I just can't put much stock in one decent 4th quarter against a middle of the road Pac-10 team. Consistent performance and year-long data sets drive my opinions (sometimes unfortunately for my psyche).

The one good thing I can say about Prince and the 4th quarter is that maybe it will end this year's qb controversy. I say that because, in my opinion, this season will be largely wasted if Prince isn't the guy next year. Consistency and growth at QB is something we need desparately, and if we go into next year not knowing who the QB is, it's another year of blah if you ask me. If Prince is the guy next year, maybe 6 wins (or better), a bowl game, and significant improvement is possible. If not, scary-big question mark.

Congrats to Oregon, though it's too bad the balancing of the Pac-10 hasn't included UCLA thus far.

Team

rfirpo — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 03:33:45 -0000

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Another frustrating loss has got me thinking about what really makes good teams. And the truth is, it isn't necessarily the product of talent, good play-calling, and/or a star quarterback. No, generally a good team creates a family atmosphere where everyone takes their role seriously and professionally, even if the role is a small one. Players respect each other, fight for each other, and no matter how much playing time each gets, they treat each other as equals. A good team has everyone on the same page.

I don't know if UCLA has any top-flight talent on offense. I really don't. It is shocking how bare the cupboard seems. Nevertheless, the lack of talent doesn't mean that the offense can't play pretty good, game in and game out. Even without great talent, smart offenses can still put teams in position to win games. UCLA's offense needs to play smart, stay within themselves, and do what they can do well. They need to start thinking of themselves like a huge under-dog everyday, and realize they'll have to play smarter than better defenses to score points. Even without good talent, I refuse to believe they can't play well. They just need to play together.

The absence of a "team" feeling seems especially apparent on defense. On defense I think we do have some very good players. We have some stars actually. But for all the talent I think we have, I wouldn't put $10 on our ability to stop a decent-to-good team on a consistent basis. It's as if the players can't get past the hype that surrounds them. And unfortunately, this has been going on for years. Walker's defenses were always "the strongest unit" on the team, yet we couldn't expect them to win games for us. And great defenses can win games for teams, even with bad offenses. Sometimes it seems our guys think the UCLA logo on the helmet means they are the real deal. Turns out, its just a logo, and means squat on the field.

I'm not sure what to make of the Bruins this year. It's only year two under the new coaches, and certainly they'll need more time to mold this squad. But I think the team needs to band together, throw expectations out the window, assume an underdog role, put their faith in the coaches, and just play together. I read a lot about silver-linings and signs of life, but what I'd really like to see is the team just play like they are in a fox-hole with their lives dependent on each other.

Success does not require top talent; sometimes it is the result of some kind of "it" factor. I'm worried that we haven't seen the "it" factor in the UCLA football program for a long time.

Seems Like a Ways to Go

rfirpo — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:41:39 -0000

That was an incredibly frustrating game, and I'm not sure what we know or where we are. I do think we'll be back eventually, and someday we'll be playing games that are fun to watch. But the last two games tell me it will be a while still before we can expect a good game against a good team. We may play a good game against a good team this year, and maybe more, but I can't say I expect us to do so at this point. Are we better than last year? I don't know.

On Offense:

I'll say it again: we cannot be competitive without a couple of great skill players. And I don't see one on offense yet. Our QBs have not stepped up, and our receivers seem serviceable at best (maybe the QBs are to blame). And while Franklin has showed some flashes, I haven't seen something from him suggesting he is the skill player to deliver wins for our team (and while Coleman looked good at times last year, I haven't seen much from him this year).

I don't know who should be QB on this team. Prince looked horrible. Even before he threw the pick 6, he had at least two similar throws that could have resulted in the same result. The Pick 6 was surprising only to the extent that I figured he must have noticed that he got lucky twice earlier, and would have learned to stop throwing slow balls out accross the field. Prince also did not look particularly mentally tough. Psyche is one of the most important traits of college QBs, and yesterday it seemed like Prince withered when the going got tough. Still, though Prince had a bad game, I still think he is probably the best bet. One bad game (first back from injury) should not shoot down all that he has accomplished in earning the starting job.

Brehaut looked ok. OK, no better. Personally, I thought it was comical the way the announcers declared him clearly ahead of Prince and Craft. I certainly didn't conclude that. Brehaut made some decent throws, and he handled himself ok. But it wasn't like the ofense started really really humming. Maybe he deserves some more time, maybe he doesnt'. I honestly do not know. What I do know is that it should take time to find a starter, and it shouldn't change on a whim. Evaluation takes time. So just as I am always hesitant to say anything about the program at large under new coaches in a short period of time (at least before we start seeing consistent results), I am equally hesitant to say Brehaut should be the guy after yesterday.

The Coaches need to think long and hard about how to proceed. I like QB competitions. But didn't we already have that? And didn't Prince win? If that is true, injury + one bad game should not keep Prince out (assuming he is healthy). If Brehaut is the guy, fine. But make the decision now, and do it clearly. The QB problems aren't just about us finding a QB. Without a defined QB, I do not think the receivers can develop. Which means, everything stagnates until we figure out who's behind center.

The real problem here is that it seems like we've been having a QB competition for the last 4-5 years. Other teams are just wizzing by us with QB talent, and UCLA just keeps stagnating. Injuries have hurt . . . but when was the last time anyone thought they saw the real deal on the field? It's been awhile, I'd say Drew Olson. This PROBLEM is so BIG it warrants an entire blog. Ask Cal what happens when the team actually has skill on both sides of the ball, but a QB is missing. Disappoinment. Period. And Cal is still ahead of us . . . Who would think UCLA would have trouble getting top offensive talent, particularly at the QB position? Not me.

On Defense:

They played ok yesterday. Some big plays given up, but there is a ton of pressure on them. But they aren't a top-5 or 10 defense in the country. They are a top 25-30 defense. Good, but not great. Bottom line, we can't expect them to win games for us, except againt weak competition. They will keep us in a lot of games because they are good. But winning games is different.

Go Bruins.

Tourney Seed Comparison (Big East v. Pac 10)

rfirpo — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:25:38 -0000

Tourney Seed Comparison (Big East v. Pac 10)

The Big East has had a remarkable year, and has some great teams. But I am a little sick of hearing how the conference has proved to be even better than expected during the Tournament. For gods sakes, when you get # 1 seeds, you don't even begin to prove anything until the second weekend. Anyway, not to take anything away from the Big East and their fine year, but I find it amusing that with all the talk, they are actually underperforming in the Tournament given their seeds (-1, as to seed expectation as of today). I know, it doesn't mean much, but it sort of means that, as of right now, they have not entirely lived up to the hype. The Pac-10, by the way, is at +1, assuming I figured it correctly.

From the Opening Tip

rfirpo — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:00:45 -0000

Bumped. Let's hope the team is as focused as rfirpo, who in last 24 hours has been en fuego. GO BRUINS. - N

Thursday's game against VCU is going to be the most exciting and intense game of the year--and I don't even think it's close. Thinking of the CAL, USC, and Washington road games?--think again, those were cupcakes in comparison.

The crowd in Philly will be buzzing with anticipation, waiting to see VCU have its shot to rip into a UCLA team who made it to three consecutive final fours. People will be there, begging for the little guy to stick it to us. If VCU hits the first basket of the game-the crowd will roar; if VCU goes on a 5-0 run with a key three pointer thrown in, the crowd will go bezerk. They will taunt us, shout overrated, and belittle our program. Make no mistake about it: this game will be possession to possession of pure intensity and desire. It is the game of the year to date.

Our recent opening round NCAA Tournament games have been a little slow. The crowd expected blow-outs, and they got them. The cheers were muted, and it seemed the fans weren't completely focused. And that was understandable, as it seemed the games were second to the arena atmosphere, t-shirt booths, and tournament merchandize lines. No one had to be intense--everyone could be relaxed.

Well Thursday's game will be different. People will be tuning in around the country to watch UCLA lose. I hate to say it, but Seth Davis started a story-line that will put people in front of the TV hoping for carnage. Everyone who picked UCLA will be praying for their "I told you so" moment.

I've heard some people talk about the game suggesting that we need to have an "us against the world mentality." Well, we don't need to try to foster that mentality--because it's a freakin' reality. It is us against the world. We are being portrayed as the team who is overrated, as the team who will be surprised, and as the team who won't be prepared. Seth Davis doesn't like us, Fox Sports didn't like us, and bracket pickers everywhere are taking VCU. And the President--he doesn't like us either. They think we are garbage, last years news with DII talent and underperforming freshman. They don't say it, but based on their picks--they must think Howland forgot how to coach.

And so, yes, all those naysayers will be watching. You can count on it. They will be drooling for a VCU win. When VCU scores their hearts will race, and the VCU fans and every other team's but UCLA's will cheer--desperate to see UCLA go down. And the City of Philadelphia will also be cheering, rooting for the little guy. And the most desperate cheers-they'll be coming from the thousands of Villanova fans in attendance and at bars all over Philly. It will be 10'Oclock PM there, but they'll be watching--and praying. See, for all the talk about UCLA going down early, deep down inside, Nova fans and the Nova team are probably wondering--is UCLA really that bad? Didn't they go to 3 straight final fours? Don't they have an all-american point guard? Don't they have essentially the same record as us?? Don't they have a tradition of excellence which makes ours look like, well, nothing?

That's right. Of all the cheering against the Bruins, it will be the Nova fans who will be the most desperately in favor of VCU. Because they know what we know--UCLA CAN BEAT ANYBODY. They are hoping against all hope that VCU wins, because then they won't have to play us. Because if they do play us, they will be putting everything on the line against the most storied proram in the Nation. At home, a higher seed, with the pressure to prove that the Big East is the best conference--that's a lot of pressure on Nova against little old UCLA. So yea--they'll be crazy in favor of VCU too.

We need to strangle VCU from the opening tip. And we need to continue doing it for 40 minutues. It will be difficult, and it will be exhausting. The most exhausting game of the year, without a doubt. And everyone, from White House staffers to Philly bar hoppers will be rooting against us. But if we play from the opening tip like we have something to prove--then we can reap the hard earned rewards.

Photos - Preparations at Wachovia Center

rfirpo — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:06:43 -0000

Photos - Preparations at Wachovia Center

The link will take you to photos of the NCAA Floor as it is being prepared for the Tournament.

[I'd prefer if I just had the images posted here, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how to upload photos directly from my desktop into a post--because it seems to me that it wouldn't have a url. If anyone can help me with that in the future, thanks in advance]

Streets of Philadelphia

rfirpo — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:49:46 -0000

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

My first NCAA Tournament Game ever was USC-Kentucky. My second, the Sweet-16 nightcap at the First Union Center--#4 UCLA v. # 1 Duke. An incredible experience, even though we lost. Some things have changed since then, like the name of the arena (now it's the Wachovia Center) and our seed (#6 this year). But let's hope one other thing changes as well--let's hope we can exercise the deamons of our last trip to that arena, and leave this weekend with a couple of wins.

It was my senior year, and I had promised myself that if UCLA made it to the second weekend of the tournament, I would be there--no matter where it was. And sure enough, there I was watching the final minutes of UCLA's second round game, celebrating a victory and frantically booking southwest tickets to the closest airport to Philly--Baltimore, MD (BMI). And then, to seal the deal, I bum rushed the CTO the next morning as soon as they opened to put in my application for Tournament tickets. And then I waited and hoped for the best.

I found out soon thereafter that I got 2 student tickets to the games, and a friend of mine from high school, who didn't go to UCLA but understood the magic of the university, agreed to go. A borrowed Bruincard later, my friend and I were ready.

We flew into Baltimore late on a Wednesday night (right after a final the day before), and drove what seemed like never-ending toll roads to Philly. It was a lesson on East Coast driving which annoyed me, but it awesome nevertheless. In the car there was tournament trivia, and in the rear windows--huge signs in support of UCLA. "Go Bruins!" they read, and of course "Got Scissors?"

We arrived in Philly, exhausted but content. We rallied for some cheesesteaks at a dirty drive in at nearly 2 AM, and then slept them off.

Next morning, we cruised around town trying to see some sights, and then headed over to the arena at the first opportunity. Once there, we learned that only 3 UCLA students had applied for tournament tickets--and we were "2" of them. Of course, I knew that "one" of us wasn't even a student--my friend went to UC Davis--but it felt good to know we had travelled the length of the country to see our team. Then we got the good news. Because there were only 3 student tickets assigned, the athletic department had decided to give us the best tickets UCLA had available. The result: we sat at essentially mid-court in the third row of the lower level. Amazing. Behind us were Bruin parents and stars--and behind them, east coast bruin alums up to the rafters. It was a sight indeed.

So we all know how that weekend went. USC completely shocked Kentucky (and hoards of their fans) in the first game behind solid performances by Sam Clancy and Brandon Granville, and UCLA just couldn't stop Duke--as Shane Battier and Jay Williams were just too solid. It was brutal to watch SC win and UCLA lose, for me as a UCLA fan, and for the rest of the entire arena--as it seemed everyone was praying for an Elite 8 Kentucky v. Duke rematch. But I'll tell you this. I don't remember the UCLA loss as much as I remember the experience. If you are a student at UCLA, and you have not yet traveled to see the Bruins in the NCAA Tournament--you need to do it. It is a rare experience, and you'll never forget it.

Here's to hoping someone reads this and get to Philly this weekend. It will be worth it, I'm sure of it. Plus, since we lost our last game at that arena, it seems we're due.

Go Bruins.

VCU Players Soaking It Up

rfirpo — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:21:03 -0000

VCU Players Soaking It Up

Here is an article from the Richmond Times Dispatch. Apparently they are trying to create bulletin board material because not every UCLA player knew what VCU stood for. It's probably because we skipped that step and were already watching film. Go Bruins.

Next Year

rfirpo — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:48:19 -0000

Next Year

FYI: If you are someone who hates thinking about next year's hoops season or future years during the current season, you probably don't want to read this, because that is where this is going. [I'm trying to avoid a bunch of posts about how we shouldn't be talking about next year. For better or worse, I sometimes think about both the present and the future, and I don't personally mind it].
With that, I'm curious: Given the upcoming losses of Collison, Aboya, and Shipp after this year, where do people see this team next year? On the one hand, we have a great freshman class this year, and another great class coming next year. On the other hand, even assuming a couple breakout seasons next year--it still seems we take a huge step-backwards to me. Even with the disappoinments this year, there is no question that the seniors have been everything to this team. Anyway, I'm just curious what other folks think (if the thought has even jumped into their minds). At best I can say, next year will be almost impossible to forcast--which is both exhilarating and frightening. Go Bruins.