Bumped - An Awesome take by DJ. (Apologies for a lack of posting today...jammed at work)...P

As most of the 'SC faithful here pay little attention to UCLA football until the game rolls around, I thought it might help you all to Know Yer Enemy a little bit better. UCLA, in its second year under your second-most disliked opposing coach (that honor going to Charlie Weis), is performing about at expectations. Most knowledgeable fans and pundits were forecasting anywhere from 5-7 to 7-5, so at 6-5, UCLA is right on track. So what does this all mean for the game tomorrow? Note: all stats from the Pac-10 guide http://www.pac-10.org/sports/m-footbl/stats/2009-2010/confldrs.html

First, UCLA's offense is much improved from last year's absolute disaster. When you're that bad, there isn't anywhere to go but up, but even so, UCLA, especially in the last 3-4 games, has begun to show something approaching a decent offense. While the running game for UCLA this year has been merely mediocre, this is a substantial upgrade. Currently, UCLA sits 9th in the Pac-10 in rushing offense at an anemic 114.8 ypg. UCLA's rushing attack does have some big play potential with Jonathan Franklin at TB, and some speed and shiftiness with Milton Knox and Damien Thigpen, but a bout with fumble-itis has landed Franklin in the doghouse and the others have not seen the field much as they too have contracted, albeit to a lesser extent, fumble-itis as well. Most of the load recently has been carried by FB Chane Moline and Derrick Coleman, neither of whom will remind 'SC fans of Toby Gerhart (and you should be really glad abut that.) UCLA has generally avoided misdirection plays, end-arounds or reverses-the attack is pretty vanilla with stretch plays and most runs going between the tackles. USC's rush defense sits 6th in the conference yielding 135.6 ypg, so UCLA should be able to move the ball a little. However, this UCLA O line is not even remotely close to the level of Stanford or Oregon, so I do not expect much sustained rushing from UCLA.

Continue reading this post »

It's hard to believe, but Shipp's shot was not unprecedented. In a stranger-tahn-fiction turn, the Pac-10 has seen similar shots before, and UCLA was even involved in one of the more egregious instacnes of such a shot being made. Unfortunately, UCLA then was on the receiving end of a circus shot. Circa 1984(?), UCLA was "victimized" by a last-second shot by an Oregon Duck who made a miraculous shot from the baseline as he was falling out of bounds. The shot clearly went over the backboard and even the announcers were confirming tht the shot did indeed go over the backboard. The shot tied the game and sent UCLA and Oregon to overtime, where Oregon won. The shot was not waved off. Is this karma for UCLA working in our favor after 24 years or so?

As a side note, be sure to enjoy the short shorts and cheesy 80's haircuts. Also, there is some interesting but not terribly pertinent discussion regarding the retention of then-coach Larry Farmer, another great Bruin but not-so-great coach. Farmer's firing led to the hiring of Walt Hazzard, who helped bring the Bruins to depths not seen since the days before Wooden and not seen again until Lavin's regime.

Even more unbelievably, this shot is available on video, courtesy of youtube. Major, major props to the poster on Bruinzone who found this clip.

ESPN is ranking the D-1 programs for the past decade, and puts us at no. 27:

27 UCLA 74-47 .612 2 conf. 3-4

The Bruins came within one victory of playing for the national championship in 1998 -- UCLA lost to Miami 49-45 in the regular-season finale and then lost to Wisconsin 38-31 in the Rose Bowl. UCLA has struggled to find that level of excellence ever since, with only one 10-win campaign in the ensuing eight seasons. The Bruins' biggest obstacle has been crosstown rival USC, which has a 7-1 record against UCLA since 1999.

It's a pretty good ranking considering how mediocre we have been since '98, and not far from where UCLA has been historically ranked IIRC. ESPN deems these programs as unable to consistently win 9 games or more for a variety of reasons. In our case, they attribute it to being overshadowed by a higher-profile rival. I think this is short-sighted, since UCLA was clearly overshadowing USC in the first half of the decade they are using as their time frame. It wasnt until Carroll's second year when USC went to the Orange Bowl that USC began rolling and overshadowing us.

Derrick Rose is now considering UCLA. I'm not sure he is the kind of player Howland would take at UCLA; he's probably a one-and-done if he is all that he's cracked up to be. Still, he's quite a talent and the press around here (I live in Chicago) is really talking him up.

Here's the link to the story:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/campus/cst-spt-rose26.html