NO MORA:

Embree fair catch/fumbles.

Rosario drops.

Prince interceptions, except as third string mop-up backup.

Pistol mesh.

Pistol "fly" sweeps.

Pistol F backs.

Pistol backs and pistol qbs playing four yards off the line on 4th and short.

Over the wall.

8 yard cushions.

"Seasoned" losers playing over far more talented recruits.

Celebrations before the game is over and we have crushed the other team.

Dbacks who never turn for the fricking ball.

Continue reading this post »

The CBH record has the same scratches every year now.

Only the names change. Powell is Moser or Stanback. Nelson is Gordon. The Wear twins are Nikola doubled. Josh Smith is a new wrinkle, and a bad one, an enigma with at best a lackadaisical attitude. There is no offense, rhythm or flow. We have no real PG but a PG who thinks he's Kobe and plays for the pro foul when he repeatedly over penetrates.

The "team" plays unwatchable basketball. I can only stand it for about five minutes. Then i have to watch something else because the play is as bad or worse than the worst of the Lavin era.

The four letters are a joke now. We can't even make free throws. We lose to an average Stanford team that UCLA should crush by 30 points. But, hey, our great Coach loves winning in the 60s even when he has the horses. So losing by one point short of 60 is a good sign, right? We might have won if we had a timeout saved for crunch time. Doh! I forgot, the brilliant tactician does not believe in that and never has. See metaphor of scratches above.

Continue reading this post »

This is not intended to predict anything. It is just food for thought that an NFL record is a poor predictor, period. I believe the manner in which the coaching search was conducted was a microcosm of the ineptitude of our AD for the past ten years, and that the clueless statement from our Chancellor is emblematic of the horrible culture in our Administration that any head coach we hire must somehow overcome to succeed. We still need regime change at the top.

Mr. Mora, however, is a new Bruin and our Head Coach. He is entrusted with recruiting, developing and coaching our football players with class and dignity. I welcome him to our family. May he live long and prosper. Above all, may he challenge and change our recent culture of mediocrity, meet all of his lofty expectations for himself and our program, man up our historically soft program, never forget 50-0 and return the favor to our arrogant and petty rivals, big time.

Anyway, see if you can guess who these coaches are.

GO BRUINS!

Continue reading this post »

The ugly reality. Hope I'm wrong.

Ask yourself question 1. After Chianti Dan announced that UCLA was ready to pour millions more dollars a year into our football program for coaches and better facilities, has any top tier coach (fill in the blank) stepped forward or hinted in any way that he is the least bit interested?

As far as we know, even in the rumor mill, not one. How can that be? This is fricking UCLA, right, a sleeping giant, right? We know it is, but that doesn't mean others know it.

How can that be? What is the problem? The 800 pound problem in the room is obvious. It is Chianti Dan. This Humpty Dumpty has fallen down and crashed the UCLA football and basketball programs with him. Based on his ten years of non-performance and outright stupidity, nobody wants to work for him or trusts anything he or our Chancellor says about truly committing to the program. So even with millions of filthy lucre on the table for a Head Coach we are begging for any top tier guy to come, and so far none have. And none probably will.

At least as long as the Vespa Clown is still around, which is why the most important thing UCLA can do to get a great next coach is to fire Chianti Dan. Replace him with an interim AD immediately, perhaps someone with a passion bucket and a former football coach, and the message will ring out loud and clear. We are, not we want to be, we are, a football school with a football AD.

Of course, this ain't gonna' happen with Chancellor Blockhead, so the chances of our getting a top tier coach are just about zero.

Continue reading this post »

Share your emails, letters in this thread. Chancellor Block's contact information:  phone: 310-825-2151, email: chancellor@ucla.edu.  Blitz him with your (respectful) thoughts today. If you have fired off your email please share them in this thread. GO BRUINS. - BN Eds.

Dear Chancellor Block:

Allow me to explain why you must fire Athletic Director Dan Guerrero immediately.

I am a 1970 graduate who bleeds Blue and Gold, just like my uncle who graduated from our wonderful school after World War II, my cousins who like me graduated in the 1960s and 1970s, my two sons who graduated from UCLA early this century and my daughter who is a sophomore right now majoring in Biological Sciences. We are all UCLA.

I am not a big donor, a mover or a shaker, but I love my school and its traditions. I am just one of many hundreds of thousands who have graduated and moved on to success and service in our large metropolitan community, always grateful and proud of the school that helped me, for example, to become a Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney now going on 32 years.

Part and parcel of that school experience and lifelong connection to UCLA are our athletics, especially the two major revenue sports, football and basketball. They have been a part of the culture and joy of my life and family ever since I was a small boy, through adulthood and now into my maturity as I near retirement. My family and friends’ lifelong, mutual camaraderie over Bruin Basketball and Football have enriched our lives immeasurably. They are part of our essence at work and at play. My season tickets in football are but a small measure of the depth of our entire families’ love for UCLA sports.

As great as our academics are, it was my wider family’s love of Bruin football and basketball that made us all Bruins for life, that inspired us to matriculate to this great university, to walk the walk on Bruin Walk when our turn came. It is the connection that cements our love and loyalty to the school and even helps endear us to one another. The academics feed our brains, but it is these sports that nourish our hearts on a daily basis. (Which is why we need a campus stadium like our big “sister” Cal.)

Our passion as Bruins is palpable, a real and a major element in the joy and meaning of our lives, even our collective identity. Even now, whenever I talk to my children wherever they may be, the first thing we talk about is the state of our football and basketball programs. It is as basic as breathing.

I write to you now because that state is rotten and has been for over ten years under the bumbling and stumbling, lack of leadership of Athletic Director Dan Guerrero. Both our football and basketball programs have fallen off the cliff. We are now the laughingstock of both college football and basketball, at the same time! Morgan Center now symbolizes a decade long failure of judgment, mediocrity, bureaucratic meddling and fundamental marketing incompetence in almost every aspect. The UCLA brand has been systemically undermined. This has cost the university tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars over a decade. And now it will get worse.

Continue reading this post »

Some people expect us to be crushed in the big game on Saturday, particularly given the pathetic perfomance of our team, especially on offense the last three years under Rick.  We have struggled to score and have even shot ourselves in the foot with playing not to lose and bonehead turnovers.  Yes, if we repeat those efforts, or if Prince plays like he did against Texas or Utah, we are going to get skunked.

Call me a Pollyanna, but I am more optimistic.  I expect the defense to play well in a rivalry game and, for once, I think the offense will do well.  I believe statistics against common opponents bear that out.  Our defense has actually played better than theirs and our offense should be able to score much easier than before.  More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

I only saw the second half of the WSU game, after I discovered streaming video on the Internet while on vacation.  So my judgment is flawed by that omission.  Nevertheless, I consider the victory a hopeful sign for the rest of the season.  

First, the team rallying to a victory shows that the players have no quit in them, which is great, and a sign that the coaches have not lost the team which is, IMO, the only real justification for firing a coach in mid-season.  

Second, Kevin Prince (shame on the boo-birds) and the wide receivers stepped up big time when it counted, as did our offensive coaches in focusing on a big play offense to win the game.  Think about it.  We primarily won the game because we had four drives that ended in touchdowns and not field goals.  And big pass plays were a major factor.  Talk about efficiency.  Most importantly, we played to win.  What a refreshing change.

Third, we overcame substantial adversity due to injuries and still won.  Not only was our secondary very thin, but Brehaut was injured early in the game.  (Was it a clean hit?  I sensed some dirty play by WSU this game, but I did not see the injury.). Our "subs" carried the day for us under tough circumstances.  Look what happened to Ohio State after their starting QB was injured in the third quarter with a huge lead.   They lost.

Fourth, we are using our younger, more talented players more and more.  Abbott, Kendricks and Owa stood out on defense. Evans, Smith and Carroll are more in the mix on offense.  I would like to see more, especially throwing to Fauria as the primary target, but the shift in playing time is welcome.

Fifth, I saw some better tackling in this game.  There were better individual hits and there was more gang tackling from what I saw in the second half.

Continue reading this post »

I recently read two football stories, one from the present and one from the past, that make me wonder.  Do today's college players scrimmage too much?

The present story is one about a rash of injuries to PAC 12 football players as they get ready for the upcoming season.  Many teams already have between four and eight players seriously injured.  For once we have not had that problem.  Knock on wood.

The one from the past is about our own Head Coach Red Sanders.  I found an excellent review of his coaching philosophy, on the Vanderbilt University website, where he was a tremendously successful coach before surprising his friends and colleagues to matriculate to UCLA.  Of course, what he did at UCLA is also the stuff of legend.

Continue reading this post »

Am I the only one who thinks we could beat any one of the Elite Eight teams in the Tournament if Zeke Jones hadn't had to play with just one hand the last two months of the season?  

Maybe we aren't that far from elite in today's college basketball.  Because there really is no elite in this era of "one and dones."

Would any one of our championship teams have a problem with this 2011 Tourney field?  I don't think so, and that includes 1995.

The Big East and the Big 10 are the biggest league busts of the Tournament.  Can you say overrated?

The way Arizona killed Duke and the way Washington played North Carolina, you can say the same about the ACC, too, IMO.

The biggest team bust has to be Louisville, the team I picked to win it all, but I think their star got hurt in the middle of the game.  Can you way bad luck?

Our loss to VCU early in the season doesn't look so bad now, does it?  The Montana loss is still inexplicable.

Continue reading this post »

I was commiserating with a SUC fan and friend about our seasons when, like an epiphany, the difference between the state of our two programs was all too painfully obvious.  It was a three step kick in the pants.  It was made all the worse because it was absolutely unintended and non-malicious. 

By that I mean he's a great guy who would love to see UCLA return to the days when it was the equal of or even the better of SUC.  In fact, as long as both were competing for National Championships he'd be happy to see the two teams go 5-5 against each other in one decade.  Share the wealth in a good way, right?

So after the jump, you can read about the three step kick in the pants.

Continue reading this post »

I just got back from the Rose Bowl after watching the classless clowns of SUC piss on our team and our field with their nauseating victory chants  and putrid two-fingered victory sign and their insipid tweet or toot or whatever.  But I really can't blame them, sorry ingrates that they are.

The blame lies in our administration that somehow tolerates the intolerable and really doesn't care how much more insufferable this coaching staff has become as we lost yet another perfectly winnable game in another pathetic coaching performance.

The only justification for not firing the whole lot of them is that DG has accepted our program as, at best, a bottom feeder in the world of college football.  4-8, 7-6 and 4-8 overall, and 3-6, 3-6 and 2-7 in conference are firing numbers in any outfit worth a grain of salt.  

And blaming everybody, from the players to the assistant coaches, except for the head coach for this three year disaster is simply irrational scapegoating. Worse, it is a lie.  The 800 pound gorilla in the room is that if everybody else is to blame then so is the head coach, except, of course, at UCLA, where it is acceptable to be humiliated on the football field, yet again, in 6 of our 8 losses in one year, and now three years in a row against our arch-rival.

I stayed to the bitter end of the nightmare if only to see if CRN would have the gall to address the crowd once again after another of his typical debacles.  I don't really know whats worse, the fact that he did or the whine in his voice when he promised once again that we would get better?  How is that possible one wonders, unless he honorably resigns?

Because the "data" points are done and they point to the same conclusion.  If he stays another year, we have no reason to expect anything different when we play SUC again or anyone else.  It will be another season where our own coaches play the wrong players, play them out of position, play them with the wrong schemes, hamstring them both offensively and defensively and always, always, play not to lose thus guaranteeing that they will over and over again.

Continue reading this post »

I nearly gagged on my own spittle when I read that Dan Guerrero announced that CRN is returning as head coach next year, presumably no matter what happens at next week's SUC game, even if we get creamed yet again for all the world to see and wind up a disastrous and disgraceful 4-8, 2-7 in the PAC-10 and 9th place in the conference, if we're lucky.

The subtext of this incredibly irresponsible and premature announcement is that the head coach (1) with the worst three year record in the history of UCLA football, (2) whose team has been humiliated and made the laughingstock of college football in at least five Pac-10 blowouts this year alone, (3) who insisted on playing the worst performing passer in all of major college football until he literally blew out his knee and was lost for the season, (4) who squandered the development of a clearly superior passing quarterback for almost a year and a half and (5) who is responsible for the most undisciplined, sloppy tackling, and pathetic defensive team in major college football today is somehow performing at an acceptable level for our Athletic Director.

Continue reading this post »

On this day of rumor mongering by UCLA haters, the real question to be answered is which of our quarterbacks is best suited to make the Pistol go? It seems to me, it is not Prince. So we had better try Bell or Brehaut or both in a hurry or expect to be crushed by Oregon based on past performances.

Why Bell or Brehaut? We know all about Kevin Prince, what he can and cannot do, based upon the approximately 15 of 19 games that he has started. The coaches have no secret advantage on his evalution given what we have seen in games over time.  Whatever the totality of reasons or excuses, his overall  inconsistent performance is apparent after 1 1/2 years, and the worst passing stats in college football this season are such an outlier that the need for a change at the position seems obvious.  If anything, he has seemed to regress this year in his passing efficiency. 

Is there any rational reason to expect Prince to play better against Oregon than he did against SUC and Oregon last year or Stanford and Cal this year? To just play Prince again at Oregon is a concession that we simply can't get better, period, and are unwilling to even try and change when the score, based on what Cal and Stanford did to us, could be 70-7 by the end of the game at Eugene if our offense continues to sputter passing the ball..

Arguments over whether the offensive line and wide receiving corps are at fault, too, really miss the point. You can't expect all of the broken parts to fix themselves magically in the seventh game of the season let alone against the number two team in the nation on the road. But if you replace a wide receiver here that is subpar with, say, Josh Smith, and a lineman there that is subpar and the most critical cog, the quarterback, that is subpar, you just might find a combination that incrementally creates a synergistic effect, a radical improvement in results.
 
The truth is we really don't know what Bell, especially, or Brehaut will do against Oregon, but instead of acting out of fear of the unknown, we should embrace it as an opportunity for improvement.  But which one? 

The easy answer would be to give Brehaut, the number two, another shot. He did well enough against Washington State to show he can run the offense at least as well as Prince. He just might be able to get us the mere 150 yards passing we need to keep the best defenses honest and score 36 points a game, which is what we averaged in the three games we won. If he does, he's most likely your starter the remainder of the season.

The more intriguing option is Bell. He ran this offense for two years at a JC, and very well. Yes, it was a different level of talent, but the players on his side of the ball at UCLA are at a different level, too. He just has to complement them. But Bell offers something neither Prince nor Brehaut does, a true option threat running the ball that puts even more pressure on a defense stacked to stop the run and could create even more opportunities to make the simple, short passes and occasional long passes that could have a devastating effect on an overcommitted run defense. He also has the legs to escape the rush and make things happen. We see it all the time on other teams with running quarterbacks. Certainly, of the three, Bell is most like the prototypical Pistol quarterback.

Can Bell do it? We really don't know because he has never been given the chance. Can Brehaut do it? Maybe. Again, we really don't know.

But then, did we know John Barnes or Norm Dow would beat SUC? No, but they did because they got the chance. That's the beauty of college football, giving young, hard working men who have labored in the shadows, their chance to shine in the light, sometimes in the biggest of games.

I say try Bell first, then Brehaut, both, in the first half, then go with whoever moved the ball best in the second half. Or if one just made the offense click from the start, just stick with him.

Let's not just be relentlessly positive in words. Let's be relentlessly positive with our actions. Let performance dictate quarterback playing time, just like any other position. Isn't competition what a team sport is supposed to be about? Let's be proactive for once, instead of acting out of fear, and just rerunning the same, sad movie over and over again and somehow expecting a different ending.  Frankly, this has been my major criticism of the coaches, being fearful of change instead of embracing true competition.  Isnt it time to really show you believe in your whole team and not just invest all of your hopes in one or two players out of fear of the unknown?

I want our coaches to be successful.  I encourgage them to be more positive in their actions to do exactly that.
 
Can Bell or Brehaut do any worse than 70-7? I don't think so. And they just might, just might, shock the world, because I believe we win any game, I mean any game, that we pass for 150 yards out of the Pistol. And that includes the rubber Duckies, people.

GO BRUINS! BEAT OREGON!

SOME POINTS TO PONDER, FROM THE MINOR TO THE MAJOR.

I actually, personally, like our coaches, want them to succeed and I am sure they are torturing themselves with WTF is going wrong, too, but because I do respect them, I believe they have to be asked some tough questions and be held accountable, just like we all are in our own jobs. The season is only half over and, if we are going to improve, which I still believe we can given our talent, some real soul searching must be done.  Normally, that means looking in the mirror of whoever is in charge.

• Whether it was by our design or because of Cal's defense, the coaches reverted to the losing strategy of trying to pass out of the Pistol to make things go instead of running, running, running.  Given that objectively we have the worst passing attack in major college ball, that was a prescription for disaster.  Yet our coaches pursued it to the bitter end.  Why?

• Once it was obvious the coaches had given up on running the Pistol, they stayed with the now non-running Prince come what may.  It didn't matter how many times he overthrew, under threw, threw behind or into the ground, held the ball too long, fumbled or got intercepted, whatever, he was the horse they rode, just as he has been their one and only horse for the past 1 1/2 years.   Why?

• Did you hear how a coach named Spurrier went for it on fourth down on his own 35 early in the game against number one Alabama to get momentum on his side?  Did you notice that the same South Carolina coach recruited the number two rated running back from high school, some freshman kid named Lattimore, and immediately made him his feature back running him up to thirty times a game?  Did you know who got the number one rated running back, the Gatorade Player of the Year, some freshman kid named Malcolm Jones, and barely plays him because he's too inexperienced and fumbles too much?

• Can anyone tell me how a defense can sleepwalk through the first half and play lights out in the second?  Is the defense just unprepared most every game or are they actually prepared but the coaches can't motivate them?  Or is there some rule that we have to wait until halftime to make adjustments when we are getting run over by the other team the first two quarters?

• Can our coaches on defense make an effort to at least just stop the run, once, please?  Put 7, 8, 9 whatever it takes to just stop the other side from getting 7 yards every time they run the damn ball.  Can't we make their quarterback have to throw the ball more than ten yards to beat us?  Is that asking too much?

• I know we can't demand too much of the coaches in the middle of only their third, fricking year, but is it too much to ask to at least not get embarrassed the entire game when we play a school from northern California?

• Of course, the 800 pound gorilla for all of our offensive problems boils down to two things.  Our brilliant offensive head coach and his guru of Heisman Trophy quarterbacks have failed to develop a single player into a decent, D1 quarterback since they got here.  Then they installed an offense that requires the kind of quarterback they either don't have or simply refuse to even play. 

• I do feel Coach Chow's pain.  Many of his play calls would have worked brilliantly if he actually had a quarterback who could throw the ball accurately.  For example, on Stanford's only interception the UCLA player had his man beat down the sideline for an easy touchdown, only the ball was thrown five yards behind him right into the hands of the defender who was rewarded with an easy pick for his absolute incompetence.

• The other teams seem to always get the ball to their fastest guys.  Can't we?  Why not?

• Are we to believe that Cal and Stanford have superhuman athletes compared to ours?

• Which coaching staff is better?  Ours or Washington State's?  Ours or SUC's?  What do you think Mike Riley, coach of Oregon State could do with our players if he had them for one fall camp?  I refuse to answer on the grounds that to utter the words will make me throw up.

• Have you ever seen so much talent making so much effort, busting their butts every play, only to be so unprepared, out of position and just plain embarrassed?  Have so many coaches ever gotten so little out of such talented players?

• Are you just a little tired with all of the hot air, promises and excuses for the coaches' failure to show consistent, disciplined play by their team?

• We are not trolls.  We are not whiners.  We do not expect miracles, a BCS bowl, 8 or 9 wins or even a winning season every year.  What we do expect is that, in the words that Coach lived by for 99 years, that our players be successful, that is, earn the self-satisfaction of knowing that they have done their best, win or lose.

• That is our number one beef with our coaches.  Our athletes do not come close to playing their best under this coaching staff.  70-7 says it all.  Losing to a KSU team filled with players that could not even make our team says it all.  Having players with the talent to beat a Texas team on the road into submission only to embarrass themselves the next two weeks says it all.

• We are not saying to fire anybody now or in the future.  We are saying it's time for our coaches, with all of their vast years experience, to start walking the walk and stop talking the talk.  Forget about the wins and losses right now.  Simplify the strategy.  Let the kids play.  And just play those kids who block, tackle and play with a fireball in their gut every play, whatever year they are in school or however talented they are.  The sooner you do that, the sooner we will start to live up to our potential.

• Call me crazy, but I think it's the coaches, stupid.

Somebody, please figure it out before I go even more crazy.

GO BRUINS!

Why this was a great win.

First off, let me start off with the obvious positives of this great win, which it was! This was an obvious trap game that we have lost time and again, until today. We were playing with our second string QB in his first start with almost no game experience in the all of last year and the first four games this year. We overcame ridiculous referee calls and voluminous self-inflicted penalties to maintain drive after drive. Our defense put up a ferocious, possibly game-saving goal line stand. And we overcame a team that has been a nightmare for us over the years, and which clearly played it's best game of the year, with a quarterback who also played exceptionally well and had a beautiful touch on his long passes all day. And we came from 8 points behind well into the third quarter. And our passing game was largely in rhythm and very sharp. And we ran the ball for over 400 hundred yards absolutely destroying the third defense we have obliterated in a row.

Why this was a great day.

And Oregon beat Stanford and SUC choked, so we are right in the middle of the PAC 10 race and there is no question in my mind we are going to destroy the Kittens, I mean Kiffens, I mean Trogans on December 4th!

(Four more after the jump.)

Continue reading this post »

Ever since he came up over four years ago all we've heard about is Howie Kendrick's supposed potential and how he is going to be contending for batting titles one day.  He has had more than enough time to prove himself and the verdict is in: he is no more than a middle of the road 2B.  Kendrick is hitting .284 with 2 hr, a .697 OPS so far this year and people are acting like he is the second coming of Charlie Gehringer.  Ten years from now he'll be 36 hitting .280/.290 with no power and Jose Mota and Mark Gubicza will be saying, "Howie is going to win a batting title one day.  He has that type of potential!" 

In the meantime 2B his own age such as Ian Kinsler, Martin Prado and Robinson Cano and Dustin Pedroia have completely surpassed him as a player.  All of these players either have more power, steal more bases, hit for a better avg. or some variation of the three and all play better defense.  Not to mention the obvious ones such as Chase Utley or Brandon Phillips or a bevy of others I have yet to mention.  If you look at all of these players careers stats and what they're doing this year there is no question they are better than Kendrick and that Kendrick is just a middle of the pack 2B.

Lets start with the unheralded ones who aren't too obvious.

Martin Prado 2B of the Braves is 26 same age as Kendrick.  He is a .312 career hitter, hit .311 last year and is at .319 so far this year with an .811 OPS.  Scouts say he is only going to get better.  Across the board this is easily better than Kendrick.

Dan Uggla is someone baseball fans are familiar with if they take more than a cursory look at teams other than the Angels yet he is still a relative unknown.  He has hit 30 hr for 3 straight years and is at .284 6 hr so far this year with an .873 OPS.  If Kendrick had done this since 2007 our announcers and radio hosts would act like he is the reincarnation of Rogers Hornsby.

Now lets get to the obvious ones.

Within our own division is Ian Kinsler.  No one really heard of Ian Kinsler a couple years ago and then in 2008 he hit .319 with 18 hr and last year he went 30/30.  Kendrick will never hit 30 homers or steal 30 bases in a season. 

In 2008 Dustin Pedroia had one of the greatest seasons of a 2B ever and is at .303 with 7 bombs this year.

Of course you got Chase Utley who goes without mentioning and then Robinson Cano and his .325 25 hr last year while playing like Ryne Sandberg in 1984 this year.  Both have way more range and better arms than Kendrick too but that wouldn't be hard.

Oh but I'm not done.  There are more.  I can keep going.

Brandon Phillips is a gold glover who hit 20 hr and 98 rbi last year.  He hit 30 bombs a few years ago and has gone over 20 three times.  He also steals 25/30 bases a year.  Kendrick will win a gold glove the day Hideki Matsui and Vladdy lead the league in stolen bases.

Brian Roberts hit 56 doubles last year and has hit over 50 doubles over three times in his career.  He also stole 30 bags last year and has had seasons of 50 and 40 stolen bases while consistently hitting around .290 and belting out between 13-18 homers.

Oh but there are more

Aaron Hill 2B of the Blue Jays started year on the DL but just got back.  He went .286 36 hr 106 rbi last year.  If Howie did that this year people affiliated with the team would already be putting him in the Hall of Fame next to Eddie Collins.

Kelly Johnson 2B of the DBacks just turned 28 and is entering his prime.  No one has ever talked about him because he wasn't such a big "prospect" like the great Howie Kendrick and Casey Kotchman.  Yet here he his hitting .300 with 10 home runs already.  Kendrick will be lucky to get to 10 home runs by the end of the year.

And 2B just got more crowded with Ryan Theriot of the Cubs moving there today.  He's only hitting .341.  I know, I know, he'll come down to earth and probably finish around his career avg of .292 with no power.  Would someone please tell me how Howie Kendrick is any better than that?  Other than the fact that oh yeah Theriot steals more bases and plays better defense.

Same with Orlando Hudson who is a former all star and gold glove winner with better range than the "eponymous" Howie Kendrick.  Hudson also hits about .290 every year and in the Twins loaded lineup should have a good year.  So far he is hitting .280 with 2 hr.  But Kendrick is at .284 with 2 hr! And worse defense!  Even Rickie Weeks whose been riddled with injuries last few years is healthy this year.  He doesn't hit for the same avg as Kendrick but is .261 5 hr 18 rbi this year and an OPS about 130 points higher than Kendrick.  And he is faster stealing more bases. 

And there is even a 2B with the Padres who is a 2 time World Series winner and and former World Series MVP who is big part of the Padres early season resurgence with key hits.

I could go on listing more 2B who are arguably as good or maybe better or just barely a little worse than Kendrick.  At best Kendrick is 12th-17th best 2B in the league.  He is nothing but a middle of the road 2B yet this myth persists among certain Angels fans, created and perpetuated from the commentators that he is great.

but showed potential in other areas.

http://gallery.me.com/hyselig#100149

Went to the scrimmage and was happy with the nice sized crowd.  I'd guess about 7500 or so, maybe 10000.  The air was festive with the mostly empty Rose Bowl looking surreal as the sun set behind the fans.

The kicking game that started before the scrimmage showed off the spectacular talents of Locke and Forbath.  They are unbelievable.  There were some early muffs by the returners but then they got in the groove and seemed fine.

Either we have a really awesome defense or our offense may still be in trouble.  The D line was by far the best unit, followed closely by the secondary and the linebackers.  The D line ate up the QB numerous times.  The secondary was like glue and made some spectacular interceptions.

The offense may have been hobbled by the "no tackle" and "only touch" the QB rule for the scrimmage.  This made a quick whistle on some "sacks" and made it almost impossible for the QBs to get much when they optioned to keep the ball.  At times I think they would have normally picked up some big yards, but were ruled down just as they were cutting up the field because they were "touched."

Nevertheless, the passing game was weak with some exceptions.  Prince looked harried again, like the SUC game.  He threw one real nice pass downfield to Harkey the TE.  Other than that he was just off most of the time, for instance, barely overthrowing receivers deep a few times.  Brehaut looked better actually, but was still only average.  Actually Crissman looked sharp in comparison.  Even Landers wasn't bad though he must have been playing with "scrubs," I guess.

The wide receivers looked very good to me, especially Fauria and Rosario.  Marvray showed some flash as well as Presley and Carrol.  I think we're fine, really fine here.

The running game was average except for Coleman.  He was the stud today.  Any hole and he goes north and south with tremendous power.  Franklin had some okay runs.  Knox and Thigpen didn't get many touches.  Coleman essentially was the sole creator of the "Prince" touchdown drive.  He ran the ball down the field with power most of the drive and then scored from the five easily.

Our oline was okay, looked better overall, but had problems with blitzes.  Not so good on pass protection.  Fairly good on the run.

I like the Pistol or Revolver.  After a sluggish start you could see the numerous, numerous options and counterplays that can be built in, but the coaches pretty much kept it plain vanilla most of the night.  I especially like that,, as NC recently reminded us, IT IS THE OLD SINGLE WING which was UCLA'S signature formation in its glory days until Billie Barnes went to the T formation in the very early 60s.  Would love to see the Bruins come out serpentine to start a game.

Overall, I was impressed by the dramatic increase in size and speed out there tonight.  Many of the players are simply studs, especially on defense and wide receiver.  Lots of promise.

I think Brehaut narrowed the gap, although Prince is still clearly the coaches guy.  He did not sew it up tonight, unfortunately, with his overall mediocre performance.  Maybe he was going against the 1s and Brehaut the 2s.  It seemed to me the 1s were out there against both for the first half of the scrimmage.  Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

GO BRUINS!

My high school daughter was accepted for the UCLA class of 2014 today!  

She wants to try out for the cheer squad and support the Bruin teams on the field.  She is die-hard Bruin through and through, just like her two brothers who graduated UCLA not too long ago.

I think I owe it to the karma from posting on Bruins Nation.  Plus she's really great!  Does that make it on topic enough to post?

I hope so.  If your son or daughter just made it, too, I invite you to share your good luck right here!

GO BRUINS!

Bumped. This is an uncomfortable question but we can't be afraid to discuss it. The "over the wall" episode puts Neuheisel's ability to lead our program in question. For better or worse Neuheisel did come into Westwood with a reputation of having mentally soft teams. The way the latest incident transpired doesn't make it look good. Neuheisel is doing everything he can to generate excitement around our program and he has injected incredible amount of energy in recruiting. However, if the Bruins choke against Temple on December 29th due to mental mistakes (we have seen this season), the over wall incident will turn out to be a huge strike against CRN, just like the Wyoming became one for Karl Dorrell. GO BRUINS. - N

Photo Credit: dabruins07 (flickr)

The prank of going over the wall and CRN's response to it may be symptomatic of a larger problem.

The coach sets the tone, the attitude, the standards, the mindset.  It sounds like he's set a soft tone with this little prank.  This is IIRC one of the complaints against him at his former college coaching gigs. 

One might argue this is just one minor incident or that such pranks and foolishness are sometimes appropriate, understandable comic relief for team members blowing off steam.

But it does make one wonder.  Can you imagine Coach JW or Red Sanders or Tommy Prothro or CBH allowing an entire team to miss an entire practice?  And then saying it was okay?  Maybe they did and I just don't know.  I sincerely doubt it.

Continue reading this post »

It took Wooden years to get it right.  It may take CBH just as long.  I know no one works harder than he does or bleeds Bruin Blue more than him, but even he is subject to criticism.  And, frankly, I can't take it anymore.  So here goes.

Let's face it, CBH's offense has pretty much stunk ever since he came to UCLA.  Not only has it not been Woodenesque, it has normally been pretty ugly.  But with the record of success that he has compiled who can rightly complain, even if his success has been despite his lousy offense?

Well, after tonight we can complain.  Oh, I know his offense is normally very efficient.  The stats prove it.  But efficiency and effectiveness are two different things.  Yes, when the score is in the low 60s he can keep up with a slow down, take the air out of the ball offense.  He can win a lot of games with it, get to final fours with a tremendous defense, but he will never win the Big Enchilada when he goes up against really talented teams that actually play basketball at tournament time IMO.

I was reminded of this tonight in the Portland game.  Not only was it one of the worst performances in the history of UCLA basketball, not only was it one of the worst coaching jobs by any coach I have ever seen at any level in any sport, it was very reminiscent of the way we have been punked in all of our final four appearances and even Villanova in the second round last year under CBH.  Only this time it wasn't Memphis or Florida.  It was just a well coached mid-Major team playing essentially Mike Montgomery Stanford Basketball from the 1990s.  The loss, in fact, was so Lavinesque that for awhile I thought Steve had left the color booth and taken over CBH's body.

I think it is the understatement of the year to say that CBH has not adapted his coaching to his players yet.  I'm very sure he sees that as well after the Portland disaster.  My fear is that he will decide his team is so bad that he will follow Lavin's brilliant on air suggestion to play even "muckier" basketball, that is, to play an even uglier Big East style slowdown style.

I hope that's not true. I really think that's the wrong answer.  As much as he might like the style, we do not have the makings of a Big East power basketball team with big guards, power forwards or a dominating big man.  It doesn't have the personnel to shut people down on defense alone.  For better or worse we're a generally athletic, but slight team with potentially good shooters and cutters.  Kind of like Wooden's earlier champion teams but of course without a Goodrich or Hazard, duh.  I would love to see a return to the Wooden staples of a high post offense and a zone press.  It may not work, of course, but it's certainly worth a try.  Some of our players might actually develop quite well if they were given a chance to fly.  Could we be any worse?  I don't think that's possible. 

I'm left to wonder just how good the team with Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Darren Collison and Luc Richard, all excellent NBA players now, as well as Mata and Aboya and Shipp, could have been if CBH had let them spread their legs under his tutelage instead of putting the governor on their gas pedal every time they tried to speed things up.  Can you believe a team with those NBA players got creamed in the final four by a team with really just one great player, Derrick Rose?  Well they did, big time because IMO CBH does not let his players play on offense.  He shackles them.

More than winning games this year I would like to see if CBH can actually run an offense that puts points on the board.  They say he did that at Northern Arizona.  Can't he do it here?

Bumped. Thanks to uclahy for taking the time to write up his road trips all this season. GO BRUINS. -N

Went to my last road game of the year at OSU.  Just can't make it up to Washington State.  So all that's left is SUC on the "road" for me.

Sat with my brothers who live up there, about the only group of Bruins in Blue that were there.  There were some others, of course, but not many, understandable given our record:

via gallery.me.com

We suffered through the first three quarters, then were screaming with delight during the miraculous comeback.  All the action was heading right for us.  Rosario's catch and run was monstrous.  All the scores by the Bruins were in our end zone.

We leapt out of our seats as Canfield threw the pick to Verner.  The entire stadium groaned knowing AV was going to walk 15 yards into the house.  Then he dropped it before he had it, the Rodgers brothers tore our defense up and Prince and company just barely ran out of clock before the last feeble pass fell to the ground with time running out.

The good news?  For about 10 minutes we played offensive FOOTBALL.  We moved like the Bruins in the days of, dare I say it, Cade McNown.  Having finally thrown the ball to our wide receivers DOWNFIELD, the whole playing field was stretched and everything, I mean, everything clicked.  Ten more seconds on the clock, I think we score and tie the game and in overtime, who knows?

The bad news?  Why did we wait until then?  Here's my thoughts.

Continue reading this post »

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

I had a unique perspective of the game:

Palcic coaching them up

My seats were on the 35 yard line, about 10 rows up behind our bench.  The bad news, I was one of only a handful of Bruin fans behind them on the sidelines.  The good news was when the crowd was quiet I could take advantage and yell out "Go Blue" and "Go Bruins."  I am sure some of the team heard me.  At least I hope they did.  They played their guts out and were, amazingly, in this game well into the 4th quarter despite the problems we are all much too familiar with by now.

I have a gallery of some pictures I took before, during and after the game if you're curious, here.

If you're interested in my observations, please read on.

Continue reading this post »

I woke up today more than a little disappointed by some posts on BN.  One thing bothered me above all, besides, of course, the frustration of yesterday's game.  People are throwing our players under the bus by calling them out on their ability [no talented playmakers] or questioning their effort [no heart, et cetera.]

I don't think either criticism is true.  I"m not going to name names, but our team is filled with talent on both sides of the ball, some of it truly exceptional.  And I refuse to believe that any of my Bruins dogged it out there in that 90 degree heat or didn't make their best efforts.  I just don't see that, really.

Above all, I support this team and its coaches.  I am disappointed, of course, terribly.  I live and die Bruin football, and it's been a lot of dying in recent years, with few exceptions, since the glory days of Cade McNown and all that.  But I'm going to Arizona next week, and Oregon State after that, and in my own little way I am going to let these players and coaches know that I have their back even after losing three in a row.

I still hope for good things from this team, and I don't mean 6 and 6, but whatever happens I applaud their effort, their talent.  I appreciate they are laying it out on the field every time they put on that fabulous UCLA blue and gold uniform.

I do have some observations about our offense and defense and strategy.  If you want to hear it, read on.  But whatever you do, please stop throwing these players under the bus.

Continue reading this post »

I think the most amazing thing about today's loss is how close we came to staying in a game in which we made some terrible mistakes.  I mean, for crying out loud, we gave up a 100 yard touchdown on the second half kickoff, a gimme touchdown on an interception on our very next series [for two touchdowns in 26 seconds] and fumbled the ball away at midfield the next series to set up Oregon's one and only touchdown against our defense.  [Less than 4 minutes into the second half.] This does not count our failure to score from the one yard line on two successive plays in the first half.  [More on this later]  That's a 28 point spread right there.  The game could not be more gift-wrapped to the other team.  Yet our players never quit and actually made a game of it until the last freaky interception off a bobbles pass.

This is the Good thing to remember from this game.  I truly believe our players were equal to the talent level of Oregon, maybe even better.  The caliber of our players, I believe, is truly excellent overall.  Yes, we can quibble about the quality of certain segments of our squad.  We have issues everywhere.  All teams do.  That's not what i'm talking about.  I'm talking about overall talent and team speed.  We are more than competitive there and it showed today, despite our loss. 

So what's the Bad and the Ugly that are contributing to our losses?  Here's my take

Continue reading this post »

I was at the game and saw the whole turkey unfold. These are my observations, for what it’s worth.

The Defense: The word undisciplined comes to mind, despite flashes of brilliance. We have talent. You can see it. I mean NFL quality talent with Price and Carter and Verner, three layers deep. Price absolutely destroyed his blocker at times. Carter and Bosworth, not sure which one, made some huge hits. Verner came oh so close to a big interception.

BUT, the penalties, egads, and the missed assignments, the loss of containment, the sloppy tackling and the failure to ever make an adjustment to Stanford’s simple unbalanced line (I think designed to foil Price) were maddening. (Was that huge unbalanced line a throwback to single wing power football?) And how do you lose on a fricking flea flicker? Unbelievable. And how much time did Luck have to throw the ball? Yikes. I think back to the drawing boards fellahs. Who do I blame for these problems? While the kids must execute, it’s the coaches who are responsible for teaching the fundamentals, the containment, the assignments. The coaches, people.

The offense: I watched the line play with my binoculars the whole game. Our line was awesome. Our running backs were awesome. Franklin and Thigpen, especially. Question: Why was Thigpen saved for the late 4th quarter? He is amazing. Speed kills. He has it, plenty of it. IMO, Stanford NEVER STOPPED OUR RUNNING GAME. WE STOPPED IT, THAT IS, THE COACHES. I MEAN IT.

This is why we keep getting field goals. This is why Craft was killed in crunch time. Yes, I know the clock is running, but Thigpen was making huge yardage. A toss to him and a run out of bounds is as good as a pass play, especially when Stanford is blitzing Craft like crazy. I am so tired of getting down inside the twenty and then WE STOP RUNNING AND THROW WEAK ASS PASSES ON A SHORT, CROWDED FIELD AND WE HAVE TO SETTLE FOR A FIELD GOAL.

As bad as we played, Stanford won because they score touchdowns not field goals when they get in the red zone. How? They run the damn ball. That’s how. We run the ball great between the twenties and then we stop and play “finesse” football after our line has blown the defense off the ball for fifty yards. I am tired of weak ass, finesse football in the red zone. We scored only because Franklin, in a run, bumped it to the outside on short yardage. He and our other running backs can do that all day IF WE RUN THE BALL IN FOUR DOWN TERRITORY. Am I missing something?

We can win with our cheap, short passing game if we would just run the damn ball in the red zone. At least make the other team stop our run before we stop it ourselves, please, people!

As for our passing game, I am not an expert, but OMG I think on 90% of our plays Stanford was playing one wideout one on one. I mean ALL DAY. AND WE NEVER TOOK ADVANTAGE to go downfield or into the end zone. We never took advantage of our bigger, taller wide outs to go downfield. Never that I can remember. Well, maybe once. I understand that Craft seems incapable of going to a second receiver, but he rarely even looked to these one on ones as his first choice from what I could see. And the one on one mismatch was there almost every play.

I don’t blame Craft. He played an excellent game overall considering his well-recognized limitations. But the coaches put the whole game on him in the end, and Stanford knew it, and they got to him when it counted, finally. Maybe when Prince comes back he can take advantage. I sure hope so.

To our credit, the defense finally sucked it up, but too late. Stanford was set to get 5 to 600 yards entering the 4th quarter, and our D shut them down, and they barely made another 25. To our credit, our offense, which was finally opened up late again, nearly pulled it out.

But a weak-assed finesse offense in the red zone and undisciplined defenses are difficult problems to overcome, especially against a good team like Stanford. Stanford played as a team. They executed as a team. They play power, power, power in the red zone, not between the twenties (remember their one other long pass that set them up?), but in the red zone. I’m not sure they are more talented than we are, really. But they’re coaches out-coached our coaches, pure and simple. It was no contest. In short, gulp, I think our coaches are making the game too complicated. (Remember that trick “wildcat” play we called that screwed up an initial drive early in the game? Yikes.)

MORAL: RICKY AND CHOW AND CHUCK HAVE SOME ‘SPLAININ TO DO. Our players almost pulled out a game they played badly in, but their overall bad playing, IMO, is the coaches’ fault. We need to play more power football in the red zone and more fundamental ball on defense. It’s the coaching, stupid. Will they man up to it?

GO BRUINS.

PS. YES. The officiating was horrible, but I can’t say that’s why we lost the game. The flea flicker was really the dagger. No excuse for that crap to beat us. Other than that, we actually played them pretty even, despite our many problems. This ship can be righted, if the coaches just make these adjustments. Pleaaassseeee! We can still have a great season, people. DO NOT GIVE UP OR THROW IN THE TOWEL. WE LOST TO A VERY GOOD TEAM ON THE ROAD. IT HAPPENS.

Beat Cal and Oregon, yes, finesse, spread Oregon and we will be fine. Stanford will lose at least one road game in the Pac 10. Count on it.

Bumped. Just a fantastic story around UCLA best road win since 2001. GO BRUINS. -N

One thing I want to make clear.  Without a doubt the people and fans of Tennessee, from Nashville to Knoxville, are the most passionate, polite and kind fans I have ever met.  Whether on the street or in hotels or at bars or restaurants, wherever, when almost any local saw me or my family in Bruin regalia they were uniformly kind, gracious, hospitable yet unbelievably passionate about their team, especially so after their loss. 

In fact, after they were going down to defeat and one Tennessee fan cussed UCLA, the crowd around him hushed him and a young mother holding her child next to my wife apologized for his behavior.  We were right smack dab in the middle of hundreds of Tennessee fans:

Tennessee fans were knowledgeable, passionate and tolerant of my equal screaming on behalf of our team during the most heated moments of the game.  We could learn a lot from these fans.  In fact, some of them mentioned how well they were treated by Bruin fans over the years in their trips to the Rose Bowl to play us.

Nashville was a blast.  The honky-tonk bars were fun, cheap and the musicians are fantastic playing everything from country to Bluegrass to Rock and roll hours on end.  Some of the performers were phenomenal including the BB King All Stars at his club on 2d Avenue.

If you want to hear all about the Knoxville experience and Neyland Stadium, read on.

Continue reading this post »

Bumping this back up so folks can use the threads here as an organizing tool for Bruins congregating in Tennessee. GO BRUINS. -N

Not sure where to put his with the new format, but here goes.

As Coach Neuheisel suggested after the game, I am lucky enough to be going to Knoxville this weekend with my family for the once in a lifetime opportunity to put some blue into that sea of orange at Neyland stadium.

I am ready and raring to go see the Bruins kick some Volunteer butt in their home turf, but I don't know the schedule for any events set for those traveling there to share all the fun together before, during and after the game.

Does anyone out there have the details about this stuff?  Please let me know.

I know I will be sick of hearing Rocky Top all day, but I hope when I come home that every time I hear it I'll have a big smile on my face.

GO BRUINS!  LET'S SHAKE DOWN ROCKY TOP!

I am happy for Kevin Love and his future in the NBA.  No criticism or regrets about his effort, spirit or personal contributions.  He was great in every way, but the whole concept of these one and doners leaves a sour taste in my mouth even though K Love's situation was the best possible good example of a one and doner.  He was classy in every way.

But is this what we want as our program, UCLA?  Just keep reloading fantastic one and doners and say, wow, what a great college we have when in fact we're really just a revolving door, minor league player development league for the NBA?

I mean, how many classes does a one and doner have to take before he moves on the pros?  Two quarters worth, maybe?  How many units is that?  20% of what's needed to graduate?  A guy's on campus barely 7 months and he's a "UCLA" legend?  I don't know.

I just don't like it.  To me, it takes the student out of student athlete.  These guys are just marking time, going through the motions.  Yeah, I'm gonna finish my degree.  Of course, I'm gonna make a few million dollars before I get around to doing it, and yeah, I have over three years of classes to take, part time, and I haven't even picked a major yet, but yeah, I'm gonna do that.  Sometime.  Someday.  Really.

Star Trek teaches us that just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do something.  Look what is happening to our "team" and with it the team concept.  

Two players are already gone, two more are on the verge and our only salvation is that we hope our new recruits will be so good we can just reload, throw UCLA on ther shirts, and we have another UCLA "team."  Of course, if they're really good enough to take us back to the Final Four next year they'll all probably be one and done, too.  And we can recruit more "UCLA" one and doners.  Great, right?

And then we can hang a banner high, number 12, that says UCLA for sure, and say we're Number 1, but of what?  Something we still call "college" basketball  when our players don't even stay long enough to get an AA degree?

Funny, in this last tournament, Western Kentucky and Drake and Xavier and all those other mid majors reminded me a lot more of the old John Wooden teams I worshipped than any team that just relies on some big one and doner.  And I don't think the Pyramid of Success includes cutting corners, recruiting hot shot one and doners, and doing whatever it takes to get to the pinnacle.

I remember something about success being the self-satisfaction of knowing you've done your best, as a team and as a person, and not just winning at all costs.  

Call me old fashioned.  Some will call me naive.  College sports is Big Business.  Fine, but the emphasis should still be more on college than money, right?  Can't we win with men that really want a degree?  Or even more important, wouldn't we be prouder if we had teams that really were teams and not just a short stop for some guy on the way to his "one and doner's" road to personal riches and fame?

Can BH or any college coach only win the big one by sacrificing the school's integrity?  We can only win it all with lottery picks?  If so, I'd rather not, thank you.

Just food for thought.

Go Bruins!

Just read this claim by a poster on the "Zone" named JRW.  He makes the claim as part of his criticism of DG for prior non-support of the football program.  Said this happened around the time when DG would not give KD enough money to keep "good" assistant coaches like Cable.  Something else I never heard before.

Anybody who can shed light on these claims?  Taken together they imply DG had such a tight reign on KD that it made it much harder for KD to succeed.  Makes no sense to me at all.  Hard to believe.  If true, does anyone know if it was Carnesale or DG or both?  How could a coach succeed with such non-support and why would an AD ever act like that?  Again, makes no sense to me.  Hard to believe, but if someone knows the truth I would appreciate it.

Yes, it is ancient history now, but it would shed some more light on whether KD was given a fair opportunity to improve his offense as he saw fit.  You all know I love the RN hire.  I just want a "handle" on the truth, whatever it is.

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

While DG and the Chancellor necessarily had to investigate the nature and scope of RN's past NCAA violations and job histories, some are not satisfied. They talk as if RN still has a Scarlet Letter sewn on his suit jacket, like a big C for cheat or F for felon or D for the devil.

I guess they never read the original book, a classic on intolerance.  Or maybe they never heard of the words penitence or redemption.  Or maybe they understand something about the significance of 51 "secondary" violations or the ramifications of betting in a private, friendly March Madness pool that somehow mark someone as especially evil and incorrigible forever.  

And maybe they have a point about RN lying about "talking" with the 49ers.  I'm sure when you're thinking of leaving your own swell job and getting another one somewhere else and leaving your company holding the bag,the first thing you should do is to tell your boss, "Hey, boss, I'm trying to get out of here.  Do you mind?"  But how many of us do, and if we did, how many of us would still be employed as a reward for our honesty?

As someone with some life experience, and who's been a fan of UCLA sports for over 50 years, literally, I think I know RN's biggest problem in the past.  Of course, it's my own speculation and nothing more.  I think he was the "fast track," smarty-pants, new kid on the block who all the good old boys loved to hate.  He was his own worst enemy, making himself the  proverbial "lightning rod" who other coaches wanted to get.  And they did.  And he paid for it, as he should have.

"It was beauty killed the beast," and most likely young hubris that smote RN at Colorado.  At Washington they really had no good cause to fire him as proven by the $4.5 million settlement in his favor.  But hubris is not evil and it is something that people usually grow out of, particularly after they have suffered indignity as a result.  I would say RN has so suffered, both personally and to his reputation, tremendously.  And I trust that both DG and the Chancellor who met with him made that judgement already, too.

I don't know RN personally and most likely never will.  But as a long-time Bruin fan I know his story well, as all of us do, who followed UCLA football in the early 80's.  His tale was almost legendary as a quarterback who came from nowhere to Rose Bowl greatness.  He was a "lock" to replace TD until TD chose Bob Toledo over him to replace Homer Smith as the OC.  When Rick did the honorable thing and went his own way after that, I believe there were many like me who were sorely disappointed at his tremendous success first at Colorado, then Washington.  Because he was supposed to be winning those games at UCLA, not somewhere else.  He was Ricky, our guy, not theirs.  And when he fell, we fell, too, because he was one of us.

I cannot overemphasize how thrilled I am for RN personally and the for the Bruin family in general, that he is back where he belongs.  This is not, as some have falsely claimed, UCLA holding its nose and putting winning ahead of ethics, or worse, copying SUC and PC.  This is a classic case of someone doing the right thing, putting RN's transgressions into proper perspective and looking beyond cheap labels and character assassination into the true substance of a person.

Think about it.  If RN did not want to live up to the highest standards he could have gone elsewhere, either in the pros or college.  SMU of all places supposedly offered him $2 million dollars to be their coach.  Whether it's true or not begs the question.  RN's dream is to be here at UCLA where he faces the most scrutiny possible from not only the Chancellor and DG but the Pac 10 and the NCAA.  What does that tell you?

I am not here to canonize RN.  Some, for example, say his teams get weaker over time or he's too "soft" with his players [playing too much guitar] and loses their respect.  Maybe that's true.  If so, he's certainly older, wiser and humbler now and can avoid those problems with proper focus like any other qualified coach.  

In short, in my opinion, RN has been the best candidate for Head Coach at UCLA for many, many years.  Many of us have hoped for years this day would come.  I believe he can be another Vermeil or Prothro or even, heaven forbid, Red Sanders.  Why, I may even see a National Championship at UCLA before I die!  [That was not a fumble in Miami in '98, damn those refs!  And no, I don't actually remember the one and only in '54.  I was only 5.]

Who knows?  We all will soon enough.  Today, all I can say is, thank goodness RN's time has finally come.  AND THERE IS A GOD!