Talk about throwing the kid to the wolves, and they still have no O line to protect him. Sure at some point ucla will be relevant again, they can't afford not to, but this obsession with USC and how we do it leaves me scratching my head. Do your own thing at your own pace and stop worrying about someone else.An admirable thought, to be sure - namely, that UCLA needs to only accomplish what they believe they can accomplish, regardless of how they perform against their biggest rival?
The only problem? It's a completely ridiculous assertion. College football doesn't work this way. frak even touched on this in the comments:
In fact, the only game that really matters for the bruins next season is against Pete Carroll. Pete Carroll is the driving force behind everything that the bruins do. They don't care about bowl games, or championships. The only thing that matters is beating USC.He's right, of course. Will UCLA football be relevant again? Yes, but right now, the focus has to remain on defeating USC. UCLA could finish 2-10 next year, and so long as one of those wins was against USC, a segment of UCLA's fan base would be happy. Is that kinda' ridiculous? Yes - defining your success based on beating your rival alone is kinda' funny - but that's the reality of the situation. And if often makes you a far better team in the long run.A ucla coach can not hope to keep his job if he is consistently embarrassed by his cross town rival. Neuheisel knows this. Hes read all the press, and hes looked at all the blogs, and he knows just how much USC is a monkey on the bruin's back.
How so? I'll provide Exhibit A of how focusing solely on defeating your cross-town rival makes the biggest of differences:
Ohio State was not a relevant national player until Jim Tressel showed up. Cooper was hated at Ohio State for focusing on Michigan as 'just another game'. Tressel got it. Unless Ohio State beat Michigan on a regular basis, his tenure was not going to be a success. In fact, it was the only way his tenure was going to be a success. To pretend that Ohio State football existed in a vacuum, and there was no need to pay attention to Michigan was ignoring reality.
What does success against your rival bring? One thing, and one thing alone: Recruiting success. And UCLA needs to begin recruiting at a consistent Top-10 level if they're going to be successful in years to come. The only way they can accomplish this task is if they regularly beat Pete Carroll. And the more you beat Pete Carroll at the recruiting game, the more obvious it will become that Pete Carroll is not that much of a genius of a coach.
comments (6) write a comment »
write a new comment
8 months ago
Wow, amazing article. Apparently, all the other teams in the country have no talent because if they did, they would all be having an unprecedented, let me repeat that, unprecedented, six straight eleven win seasons. And they would probably have an unprecedented six straight BCS appearances to go with, you've got it, an unprecedented six straight Pac 10 titles. In case you were wondering, unprecedented means that it's never been done before. Not by Les Miles, not by Urban Meyer. And don't try to pull that "Pac 10 is a weak conference" nonsense. We happen to have had the most players drafted in this year's draft in relation to the number of teams in the conference. I mean, be a UCLA fan if you have to be, but try to be guided by facts and not your own personal opinions. Your article is right on about UCLA having to beat USC to get on the right track, but your comments about Carroll are simply ridiculous. And yes, in case you were wondering, I'm a bit of a USC fan. FIGHT ON! BEAT THE BRUINS!
8 months ago
"College football is not terribly difficult to figure out: recruit well, don't try to invent complex schemes that take four years to learn, and let the athletes out-muscle the weaker, slower, and smaller team."
Did you watch all the upsets this past season?
And what complex scheme takes "four years" to learn? The elite kids play for 2-3 years. Does that mean they never learn these sophisticated schemes?
And I'm also confused about the comparison of Carroll to Richt. Richt has never won a national championship. He's simply not on the same level as Carroll, who is clearly an excellent coach--and much more than just a good recruiter.
You then mention how important execution is. Again, I'm confused, don't coaches play a large role in execution? Don't they teach discipline, etc?
Still trying to figure out what an exotic defense would look like...
8 months ago
sighh... same old westwood inferiority complex
different day
8 months ago
Yeah...go beat Fresno State. HAHAHAAHA. They gonna pummel you.
8 months ago
I do not expect any respectful comments to come out of a ruins mouth, ever. However, Pete Carroll is not only a great coach and motivator, but a great human being. I do not see Slick Rick (a proven crook) or Karl Derail down in South Central helping people. You may beat USC again someday, but you will still be the most pathetic fans in college football.
8 months ago
Oh Pah-leezz. UCLA had everything and more in 1998. They had rolled up 20 straight wins, 8 over SC, NFL talented players, top recruting classes and one game away from the NC game. Bob Toledo had an explosive offense averaging around 40 points a game. Sounds like a Norm Chow offense to me. Then the F'd it all up against Miami.
They had another chance in 2000 with a #3 ranking, 6-0 record and then F'd it all up again against Stanford.
Do it dosen't take a fricken genius to see UCLA has been there but can't handle the success. They F'd it up then and will F it up again.
write a new comment