UCLA Alums Supporting Neuheisel: An Easy Call

by Nestor on Dec 26, 2007 10:01 PM PST in Football

Alright, it's on now.

So, Brian Dohn, a graduate of Rutgers University, who probably never had the grades to get into UC Merced, is now on all out campaign mode to install DeWayne Walker as the head coach of one of the flagships schools of the University of California.

Once upon a time we used to have a lot of respect for Dohn's reporting ability. But I guess when a reporter spends so long at a particular beat, it is natural to become personally close to some of his or her "sources," which compromises that person's ability to offer any kind of objective reporting.

Leading up to Dorrell's firing, Dohn kept serving one excuse after another to keep Dorrell, often offering opinions that were self-contradictory. Now in his quest to preserve the status quo, err, we mean to keep DeWayne within UCLA, Dohn has gone well beyond a reporter's role in covering his beat.

As DumpDorrell.com is reporting tonight, Dohn is now pimping the pro Walker site on his blog and, even worse, he has come and issued an indirect threat to Dan Guerrero if he hires Rick Neuheisel in Westwood. Here is what Dohn put up on his blog tonight, which appears to be an indirect threat against the hiring of Neuheisel:

History Lesson

In light of UCLA interview Rick Neuheisel for a second time last week, I found this quote from a Daily News story written by Billy Witz.
During athletic director Dan Guerrero's press conference announcing he fired Bob Toledo as coach, Guerrero said:

``It's all about having the right environment,'' said Guerrero at an afternoon press conference that was packed with media, football players and athletic department employees. ``I didn't want to create a situation where the first transgression where one of our kids may have, the first bad call that a coach may have, would dredge up some really negative things in this program.
``I felt a change in leadership was necessary.'

Of course, Dohn didn't bother to look up those quotes when Karl Dorrell was bringing a convicted criminal onto his staff (who per DeWayne's supporters will be a big part of his staff) to boost inner city recruiting.

DD has already done this part, basically exposing Brian Dohn as a total hypocrite.

As for us, we will stick to numbers. BruinBlue just emailed us these numbers comparing Walker v. Neuheisel:

Scores don't always tell the whole story. And Walker is just DC, while Neuheisel was HC. But let's look at the points our team gave up in Walker's two years, compared to Neuheisel's four years at Washington, since that's the same conference as ours. We'll only look at Pac-10 games, because otherwise it's unbalanced (since Washington played the likes of Texas and Miami-Florida in OOC or Bowls)

UCLA 2006 169 points in 9 games. 18.8 pts. per game
UCLA 2007 192 points in 9 games. 21.3 pts. per game

Washington 1999 185 points in 8 games. 23.1 points per game
Washington 2000 183 points in 8 games. 22.9 points per game
Washington 2001 237 points in 8 games 29.6 points per game
Washington 2002 165 points in 8 games 20. 6 points per game

Walker's defense did a little better on ppg, but Neuheisel's only had the one bad year in 2001. Otherwise, it's quite close.

Now, let's look at how Neuheisel's teams did on offense in the Pac-10

1999 232 points in 8 games. 29.0 pts. per game
2000 258 points in 8 games. 32.2 pts. per game
2001 227 points in 8 games. 28.4 pts. per game
002 243 points in 8 games. 30.4 pts. per game

Now, what we can easily see here is that Neuheisel's offenses are far better than anything we have had here recently. His defenses are not as quite as good as what we've had, but not far off. The worst we are going to do under Neuheisel is what he did at Washington; here he should get more talent. Even if you believe that Walker, sans the many upperclassmen he has been able to coach in the last two years, will keep the defensive stats as they have been (no sure thing), look what you are giving up in potential offense by hiring Walker and hoping he hires a good offensive coordinator. This should clearly indicate to relatively unbiased observers that you get a lot more capability with Neuheisel than you do with Walker. And note that Neuheisel's Pac-10 records were 6-2, 7-1, 6-2, 4-4.

Note Walker's numbers were based on defenses that were peppered with upperclassmen during the last two years.

Frankly, I find it comical that we have to spend this kind of effort to convince folks that Neuheisel is a better option than Walker. The numbers we should be talking about are those comparing Neuheisel to someone like Leach or a Mendenhall. Those are the candidates who are at the same level.

Walker is a joke. He is a product of a constant campaign of a beat reporting press which has lost its ability to be objective when it comes to reporting on matters related UCLA football, and an entrenched bunch of bureaucratic cronies and football program groupies, who have gotten off from the access the current incompetent coaching staff has provided them over the years. These are the losers who have served us up with excuses year after year, explaining away the underachieving UCLA football seasons, and these are the same losers who will be making the same excuses in the coming years if the UCLA administration is stupid enough to even think about favoring an inexperienced nobody like Walker over Neuheisel. It is absolutely shameful what these bands of access loving, worshippers of mediocrity have done to UCLA football and the expectations around it over the years.

Again, as I have said before, RN is not my number 1 choice. However, given the circumstances, if the choice come down to an unproven nobody with zero years of head coaching experience and Coach Neuheisel, I know who I will want to go with.

Photo Credit: mmbolding.com

We are ready for Neuheisel.

If it came down to Neuheisel v. Walker, there is no question it is Coach Neuheisel who represents a clear break from the rotten culture of mediocrity that has eaten away at the core of UCLA football for the last several years.

As UCLA alums, this should be an easy call for all of us.

GO BRUINS

0 recs | Comment 45 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Why DW at all?

Can we use this as a starting point to explore the possible reasons why DW is still under consideration at all? From my vantage point in Virginia (that does not include the OC Register, or whatever fishwrap it is Dohn writes for) I'm having a real hard time believing his self-marketing campaign is the key. Things I think Chancellor Block may be sensitive to:
> He's a status-quo candidate who would come in for less total $$$ than RN (when coaching staff replacements are factored in).
> He's had a hand in recruiting - but how valid are his "threats" (i.e., if DW goes so do the recruits)?
> He has improved the defense - with an approach that can improve the whole team.

What else is out there other than being politically correct in giving DW the same number of "looks" as RN and Golden?

by East Coast Bruin on Dec 26, 2007 10:38 PM PST 0 recs

Yikes!

"He's a status-quo candidate who would come in for less total $$$ than RN (when coaching staff replacements are factored in)."

That is a statement with ominous portent; it would mean the possible retention of Jay Norvell. Whatever qualms we have about that self-promoting charlatan Walker (and they are considerable), I wonder why so little mention is made about the need to replace Norvell?

(Usual ABW disclaimer, etc.)

by whp68 on Dec 27, 2007 6:28 AM PST up 0 recs

Clean Sweep

Many of us have called for a total clean sweep. I would retain Kezerian and no on else.

It's not just Norvell -- how about the O line coach? And, the receivers coach -- Scott.

We had almost systemic underproduction on both sides of the ball.

We can't forget, we were a team with 25 returning seniors, 20 returning starters, a very favorable schedule -- and we underperformed on both sides of the ball.

Why keep any of them?

And, yes, I am willing to lose some recruits -- but I don't believe we will lose many, if any, if we hire Leach, Jones, or RN.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 27, 2007 6:41 AM PST up 0 recs

Agree

But, somehow, I feel sorry for them. I mean not in the sense that it's a shame to let them go but rather that their ineffectiveness was caused -- at least in some small part -- by Dorrell's inexperience and inability to plan and organize.

One of the raps on Dorrell was that he ran a parade of coaches through during his five seasons, constantly firing and hiring. To me, that would be an indication that he was doomed to fail.

I have been a software developer for almost 40 years and have worked for people who were good managers and for real blockheads. Funny how one's productivity and efforts are usually better when one works for managers with a vision and purpose as opposed to those who just keep swimming towards the light and bumping into walls.

by whp68 on Dec 27, 2007 10:54 AM PST up 0 recs

Working as a consultant,

I was listening to a department head (my manager) complain about the string of bad hires that he had had to endure. Despite impressive qualifications and initial successes, the last several hires, one after the other, had fallen into inadequacy, according to him.

Feeling a confidence that can only come from consultant status, I said "When you have repeated inadequate employees, that's not a failure of employees. That's a failure of management."

The cold stare told me he got the message. The nonrenewal of my contract confirmed it. But, it sure felt great.

by Bruinut on Dec 27, 2007 10:19 PM PST up 0 recs

Unwatchable Bruins

This past season was flat out unwatchable. The offense stunk and reminded me of 3d graders trying to learn football. And, I really didn't know if the defense was going to show up from week to week. The only thing I knew that was consistently good was the tailgating at the Rose Bowl. The only thing worse than watching our shell shocked quarterbacks getting crippled was watching Norvell staring blankly at his clipboard. Did he ever survey the field the entire season? If Walker becomes the HC, expect more of the same. What innovative OC is going to come here to work under DW? We would have to settle for some young, inexperienced assistant who would be willing to do everything DW's way, or worse yet--another horrendous year with the clueless clipboard carrier-Norvell. We have to hire someone who can jump start the offense overnight. UCLA will lose it's fanbase if the offense continues to be a boring work in progress. We need a coach who can implement a system that is going to focus on the individual talents of Osaar Rashaan, Ben Olsen, and Cowens. Frankly, I am very close to giving up on Olsen. Everyone thought Ben was going to save the program when he came in. It's a real mystery why he turned out to be such a stiff, except he got zero coaching from Dorrell and his OC's. I still hope he can be saved, not only for the program--but for himself. I think he needs someone like Mike Leach, June Jones, or Slick Rick to save his career. Walker will end Ben's career and the most we will see of him is sending in the signals from the sidelines. By the way, some on this blog have suggested that the nickname, "Slick Rick" is disrespectful. To the contrary, it is a term of endearment. I think Rick is a great coach and perhaps one of the smartest in the country. I have referred to him as the "Slickster" as well as Slick Rick because of my respect for his intelligence and coaching ability. After all, he's a UCLA grad and a law school grad, someone who can be a real model to the student athletes. What internet website did Walker get his college degree? The bottom line: You can't lose with Leach, Jones and the Slickster--in that order.

by bruin75 on Dec 27, 2007 12:18 AM PST 0 recs

Brian Dohn

If Neuheisel gets the position, you're gonna see Brian suddenly become the biggest Rick fan touting all of his achievements and how great it is to have another former Bruin become the head coach and all sorts of sycophantic nonsense. He's no longer just a beat reporter. Now that he's injected his opinion and campaigning for DeWayne Walker to be the next head coach, he should just quit his job and help run the wewantunprovenwalkerwhocoachedtheteamtoalossinthelasvegasbowl.com

by UCLA4Life on Dec 27, 2007 12:47 AM PST 0 recs

I wonder

what the over/under will be on the number of posts when the coaching decision is announced ? (hopefully soon)

by Offside on Dec 27, 2007 2:43 AM PST 0 recs

The search makes RN look inevitable

That might be by design. Getting turned down by Belotti, Peterson and the others and being left with a choice between Walker and Neuheisel may be part of the strategy to get Neuheisel.

DG can say, "Look, we searched nationwide." And then he can say, "Walker is a great coach and will make a great head coach someday, but we needed to go with head coaching experience this time."

And the fact that the process has been drawn out has given the UW charges to be aired, examined and decisively dismissed. Before the process started, even I thought there was something shady about Neuheisel. But every time the story comes up, so does the 4.5-million-dollar settlement that proves he was exonerated.

Also, faced with terrible alternatives (Walker or Golden), Neuheisel is going to be embraced in a way that he wouldn't have been if DG had just appointed him the day he fired Dorrell. Think of all the carping that we should have gotten an outsider. Or that Neuheisel is dirty (which other coaches would certainly have tried to use in recruiting).

Maybe I'm too optimistic. But, from a political standpoint, the process couldn't have been designed better for Neuheisel. His name gets cleared in this process and we are also left with no reasonable alternative.

Here's my letter to Block, by the way:

Dear Chancellor Block,

Rick Neuheisel isn't my first choice. That would have been someone from outside our woebegone football program. Someone like Peterson, Leach or Jones. But Neuheisel is a proven winner in the Pac-10 and even more important, he knows first hand what it takes to win at UCLA. And you aren't going to see him blaming assistant coaches or, worse, players, if we lose.

Moreover, if three-time Super Bowl winner Troy Aikman is behind him, doesn't it say something about how well he can coach quarterbacks like Olsen, the potential all-star that we already have? To say nothing of being able to continue to recruit them.

Most important of all, Neuheisel, like Howland, isn't going to see coaching UCLA as a stepping stone. It is his dream job. That means that UCLA will be reaping the benefits from other programs' instability as they inevitably go through the turmoil of picking a new head coach every few years.

Sincerely, etc.

by Chandler on Dec 27, 2007 3:38 AM PST 0 recs

Agreed

Here we are getting our blood pressures and anxiety up over the thought of DW possibly getting hired and DG will go and hire RN, an underwhelming choice when this all started, but now a gem of a choice in comparison.

Like I've already written, I am resolved to the fact that RN will be our next coach. While I am dismayed that DG couldn't lure someone like Leach or Petersen, like Nestor I believe RN will bring excitement and a presence back to UCLA football. I have NO PROBLEM with RNs past transgressions. The only issue I have will be if RN decides to keep DW on as DC, because I do see the potential for a devisive atmosphere developing amongst the players and staff. I believe the right move for RN is to let all of KDs staff go, including DW (I'm sure that will be the next topic in the coming days)

I get the feeling we are only hours away of finding out.

"This is not a place for just any coach" Dan Guerrero

by godblesstyus95 on Dec 27, 2007 9:09 AM PST up 0 recs

What to "we want walker" and Dohn have

in common -other than their shameless brown nosing?

They never deal with the numbers, the empirical data, the facts that show that DW is not a great DC and is clerly not prepared to be a HC.

Yes, I admit it -- after reading about the walker hype site, I checked it out. And, every once in a while I click on the Dohn link.

Neither site deals with any data -- they both simply give opinions. Opinions. No factual support.

One of my favorites is the walker site "refutation" of the "allegation" that DW can't deal with the spread. Instead of honestly looking at the numbers, they say "yes he can" and to the extent he hasn't, it's the players' fault.

Yes, the old throw the players under the bus play.

Has anyone ever seen Dohn take the numbers on? He's had years to do so. Instead, he chooses to fan the embers of the Walker campaign -- yes I say embers because I believe the flame is out (he would have been hired, already, if DG really wanted him).

If the academic side of the university is involved in this search, I trust it to do a proper analysis of the empirical data. That's what academics do. And, when they do, they will find DW lacking.

And, Dohn, he will become the next HC's BFFL (Fox, you geezer, that's kid talk for Best Friend for Life). Being a PR flack for those in power is a lot easier than being an honest reporter, and Dohn knows that.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 27, 2007 4:32 AM PST 0 recs

Hey - I know kid talk

I can talk kid talk with the best of 'em. I'm the cat's pajamas. See.

by Fox 71 on Dec 27, 2007 5:08 AM PST up 0 recs

I always knew you were a hepcat!

Daddy-o

by McCloskey on Dec 27, 2007 10:01 AM PST up 0 recs

Insanity

Rick Neuheisel: 66-30 at big-time Division 1 football programs, with 7 bowls in 8 years, including a Rose Bowl Victory.

DeWayne Walker: 0-1 at a fourth tier bowl against a mid-level team from the Mountain West Conference.

Gee, I wonder who is the better choice?

by njbruin on Dec 27, 2007 5:08 AM PST 0 recs

And that's not counting bowl-winning teams...

...he was assistant coach or quarterback for.

Plus, he was one of the first to publicly explain why you can't run the WCO in college. Short version is that it takes 2-3 yeas to teach it in the pros where the players practice full time instead of a max of 20 hours a week.

by Chandler on Dec 27, 2007 6:34 AM PST up 0 recs

Insanity, Part 2

Not just the fact that we lost, but we were UNDERDOGS to a MOUNTAIN WEST team, should be proof enough that we need a complete break from the current coaching staff. What an embarassment!!

by Herschy on Dec 27, 2007 10:51 AM PST up 0 recs

Not to defend Walker, but...

...his numbers would probably have looked better if the defense hadn't been on the field all game, every game. And there were two big breakdowns that there MAY be some reasonable explanation for.

No, I don't think we should hire him as coach, but he may be a better defensive coordinator than we tend to give him credit for around here. Also, assistant coaches and offensive/defensive coordinators play a pretty big role.

So, if Walker were a good defensive coach, a good recruiter and a guy who can inspire his players -- and a case CAN be made that he's all three of those -- all that's left is being able to choose good assistants and to be a good administrator.

by Chandler on Dec 27, 2007 6:41 AM PST 0 recs

No Disrespect Intended

but we have debunked the "defense was on the field too long" myth many times.

Please, do a search and read some of the empirical analysis -- most of it derived from the Drive Charts.

The truth is that in many games the D stunk from the first time it stepped on the field.

You may want to start with "The Defense Apologist Fallacy".

Once more, no disrespect intended, but the facts do not support your post.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 27, 2007 6:45 AM PST up 0 recs

Thanks for not biting my head off.

I missed those discussions. But I'll definitely take your word for it that the too long on the field thing is a myth.

by Chandler on Dec 27, 2007 4:23 PM PST up 0 recs

don't take his word for it

do your own research and come to your own conclusions.

I think its totally BS and part of the whole anti-Walker group think that can't possibly admit he is a very good coordinator for fear that implies he is the best candidate as HC.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Dec 28, 2007 7:00 AM PST up 0 recs

OK -- Here's My Research -- Your turn

Here's the post I put up after the WSU game. Fox did one after another game.

You think it is totally BS?

Prove it with numbers, not rhetoric.

You might want to do Utah, FSU and some of the others.

Look at the stat sites, get the drive charts and do some hard work.

You'll find it a lot harder than the name calling you just did.

"The "Fatigue Factor" is Bogus
This Defense Failed On Its Own

Apologists, particularly those who support DeWayne Walker, continue to laud our defense and blame our offense for our poor defensive showing.

Last night, in another thread I posted our defensive stat's. They were terrible.

Yet, the apologists continue to argue that the defense was not at fault -- that it simply got worn down when forced to play "too much" by our ineffective offense.

That's simply not true -- and the statistics show it.

The defense was on the field because it could not stop WSU. It's that plain and simple. They sucked.

In fact, during WSU's first 4 drives of the game, at a time when our D was "fresh", WSU stayed on the field for 10, 10 and 7 plays. That's on the defense.

In 13 possessions, WSU averaged 8 plays a possession; they had 31 first downs. They converted 44% of their 3rd down attempts.

Here's a point the apologists can't counter: No matter how bad the offense, the defense controls its own fate. If it can force a 3 and out, it's off the field. Rest time. Even if the offense only stays on the field for 3 downs -- the defense gets the same amount of rest that the offense gets.

THE D NEVER FORCED A 3 AND OUT. NOT ONCE! NOT WHEN IT WAS FRESH -- NEVER.

It got tired because it got outplayed and beat down by an inept WSU offense. A team that can't run, gets 275 yards rushing. A doormat gets 545 total yards. A running back who AVERAGES 6 yards a GAME gets 224. That's all on the defense.

Sorry apologists, The Fatigue Factor is Bogus: If we believe the apologists then we have to feel sorry for the WSU offense. For, every play during which our defense was on the field, WSU's offense was on the field. Under the bogus fatigue factor, WSU's center's arm must be falling off, Brink in need of oxygen, and their O line, which beat us up, must be recuperating in the hospital. Somehow, playing the same number of downs as our defense, with the same "rest intervals", the WSU offense got stronger, stayed consistent and got the job done.

The bottom line is that the defense could not stop WSU.

We all know how bad the offense is. That's a given.

But, I'm tired of the apologists refusing to see that DW and his defense also contribute to our losses.

Last night was a total systemic failure. Coaching, offense, defense and special teams. To see it any other way is to fail to look at the reality of the loss.

sjh"

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 28, 2007 8:06 AM PST up 0 recs

Let's look at the numbers.

This year when UCLA scores >7 points, the defense holds oppenents to 9.4 points fewer then their average.

When the offense scores 7 points or less, the defense allows openents 4+ points more than their season average per game.

Those are the real numbers. I also threw in the totals without Oregon, if you don't want to give the d credit for that game because they were using their third and fourth string qbs

Here are his game results:
2007
UCLA Opp. pts avg diff.

27    BYU    17    31.2    -14.2
6    Utah    44    25.5    18.5
6    ND    20    16.4    3.6
16    Oregon    0    36.7    -36.7
40    OSU    14    28.4    -14.4
44    Wash    31    29.2    1.8
7    Wa St    27    25.7    1.3
30    Cal    21    28.3    -7.3
45    Stan    17    19.6    -2.6
27    AZ     34    28    6
20    ASU    24    32.2    -8.2
7    USC    24    31.3    -7.3

all games 273 332.5 -4.96

when UCLA scores >7pts
158 233.6 -9.45

when scoring >7, w/o UO
158 196.9 -5.56

when scoring 7 or less

115 98.9 +4.03

2006
UCLA
31    Utah    10    27.9    -17.9
26    Rice    16    26.9    -10.9
17    ND    20    31    -11
20    Oregon    30    29.5    0.5
25    OSU    7    27.8    -20.8
19    Wash    29    21.8    7.2
15    Wa St    37    24.6    12.4
24    Cal    38    32.8    5.2
31    Stan    0    10.6    -10.6
27    Az     7    16.6    -9.6
24    ASU    12    26.8    -14.8
13    USC    9    30.5    -21.5
27    FSU    44    26.5    17.5

all games 259 333.3 -5.72

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Dec 28, 2007 8:53 AM PST up 0 recs

You are skirting the issue

Chandler said: "...his numbers would probably have looked better if the defense hadn't been on the field all game, every game."

I responded.

Both of us are clearly talking about the fallacy that the D got worn down because it had to spend so much time on the field.

Your numbers have nothing to do with that.

And, I understand why. You cannot win this argument. Look at the WSU drive chart and prove me wrong. You had no trouble calling it BS, now prove it. You had no trouble accusing us of not wanting DW for reasons not related to his term as DC -- now prove it.

What you've done is similar to the other DW supporters' posts I've seen. My favorite took us to task for criticizing DW by pointing out that our D was rated -- now catch this -- 14th in the nation on yards per carry.

Wow, look I found a stat that looks good!

Of course he makes no mention that we were 70th in pass D, around 35th overall?

Your numbers do the same thing. You have not shown, with data, that my WSU post is wrong. Or that Fox's post is wrong. You just called them BS.

You've run away from Chandler's post and my response. I could probably call your post names, but I won't. Your failure to support your name calling speaks for itself.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 28, 2007 9:33 AM PST up 0 recs

I'm not skirting the issue at all

You point to one game (WSU) and consider that conclusive of Walkers 26 games as a DC. I looked at the body of work. Tell me which is a better basis for analyzing his abilities?

the question is does offensive performance correlate with the defense's ability to peform well. The answer is clearly yes. There is a 14 point swing in points given up relative to an oppenents average.

That is evidence. And, I apologize for calling the arguement BS. I probably should have just said I disagree with it. I think its a red herring arguement, because it doesn't address the bigger relevant issue.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Dec 28, 2007 10:22 AM PST up 0 recs

I don't see what point you're trying to make

I have a degree from the finest University on the planet, and two post-graduate degrees. Plus, I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. Nonetheless, I don't understand what point your numbers are supposed to illustrate.

May I suggest you look at some numbers which require no interpretation as a starter.

His overall record (including his stint as HC) is 13-13. That, to me, would qualify as mediocre. Out of 119 D-1 teams, his defense was around 35th in most categories. (I looked this up in the past, and I'm not interested enough to spend the time doing it again. But that's not to say you shouldn't.) 35th or so out of 119 means his defense is worse than roughly a third of every other D-1 school.

Those are numbers. I can't quantify intangibles. But the intangibles I see are guys pounding their chest after a sack, then getting a 15 yard penalty for doing something stupid. I see guys flat quitting (as in the Utah and Wazzou games.) For every brilliant play I see a bonehead play. I see a lack of discipline on the part of the team and on the part of the coach. (In my opinion, calling out players by name as he did is a lack of discipline.)

Finally, to put this in perspective, why is Walker still at UCLA? If he was the hot commodity that some people think he is, why hasn't he been hired by some smart AD to fix his team? Walker and his brother and his press agent (Doh!) have been praising him from the skies for the past month. But it turns out that the people responsible for football programs apparently think they can survive without him. I am not football expert, but from my perspective, we can survive without him, too.

(Silver, I'm glad you didn't toss in the recruiting business as part of your argument. That whole bit is so contrived. Walker has been here for two years. We managed to get good players before he got here, and it seems to me that we have managed to get only one quality player since he started doing his stellar recruiting. I think that issue is a total red herring, but that's for a different debate at a different time.)

by Fox 71 on Dec 28, 2007 2:54 PM PST up 0 recs

Butch Jones -- Central Michigan

As I watched last night's game, I thought of the many perceptive posts on BN who were calling for a search for the next big time coach -- Butch Jones appears to be one of those.

Yes, he's at Central Michigan. But, he comes from the Rodriguez stable. He's also in the hunt at WVU.

I wonder if DG and the search team have turned up his name. Was Golden the product of a deep search or a previous relationship with the chancellor?

Did any of you have Jones on your lists?

sjh

PS. It looks like Bowden with get WVU. What do you think of Jones. All I know about is that one game.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 27, 2007 7:08 AM PST 0 recs

Butch Jones = Unproven

I think that the other candidates you have consistently mentioned (Leach, June Jones, RN) are a notch (or more likely several notches) above Butch Jones. He has only been a HC for one season, after quite a few years as OC at several colleges. Central Michigan went 8-6 in his 1st year as HC, and gave up over 40 points 6 times, including 70 (!) in a loss at Clemson. Ouch. in 2006, Central Michigan went 10-4, so he was taking over a program which was already relatively (within their conference) successful. This is certainly not the situation at UCLA, where we need to turn the ship around.
I would rather go with your top 3 than add Butch as a distant 4th.

by islandbruin on Dec 27, 2007 8:00 AM PST up 0 recs

This is unprecedented

Never before has an assistant coach from a failed regime been given this much consideration for a head coaching job. When the head coach is fired, you indict the entire staff and clean house. Enron didn't promote Andy Fastow to CEO when Skilling stepped down. Companies who file BK get a new CEO from outside the organization. Michigan, Arkansas, keep listing them. Name me one school that fired the head coach and hired his right hand man. Oh, UCLA did that with Lavin? I rest my case.

If Dorrell failed, so did his assistants. No promotions allowed. End of story.

by BruinsRule on Dec 27, 2007 7:50 AM PST 0 recs

Neither one

this is the best UCLA could get? you have to be kidding me. I am still hoping for Leach.

by uclaov1 on Dec 27, 2007 8:14 AM PST 0 recs

Boy, Are We Screwed...

Unbelievable. Amazing. Depressing. Dont know how this happen'd !?

Essentially, IMO, we've been cleaverly positioned into using our energy's and expertise for the "vetting" of RN...

So, instead of keeping the pressure on DG and the media for the candidate of our dreams, we're talking ourselves into how great a candidate Ricky'd be.

We've done what BN does best, found facts in support of the position and then debated the merits of those facts in a rational manner. Our conclusions are sound.

I, for one, am stilling holding out hope against hope for us to get one of our original dream-team of choices. I've said this before..we need to have high expectations, we need to continually communicate those expectations to anyone who will listen and insist that DG meet those expectations.

Settling in on the Skipster may be an adequate choice but, couldn't we do better...please.

by GemCityBruin on Dec 27, 2007 8:18 AM PST 0 recs

This is pretty funny

Rick Neuheisel wants to give you forty dollars

Good morning. I'm here to tell you why I should be the next coach at UCLA, but first, I'd like each of you to look under your seats. Everyone looking?

Yep. That's forty dollars. Forty whole dollars for each of you, amigos. I can't tell you what to do with it, but I do want you all to know that you should take it as a sign of great seriousness and commitment on my part that I came here with forty dollars for each of you, and taped it to the underside of your chairs pre-meeting, and am now telling you: there's plenty more where that came from, amigos, if you're prepared to get serious about this coaching thing.

* * *

Think: it's extra money around town, it's a posh weekend in Vegas, including a hooker! Or something to toss at the old lady when she gets mad at you for blowing all your cash on recruits. That's cool here, right? Just giving the kids a little something for their effort, right? Cool, I'll take the silence as an indicator we're all on the same page.

I could bore you with all the x's and o's, but I'd rather you just focus on the fact that Uncle Ricky's gonna make it rain around here. That's right, I'm down with it. If Pete Carroll's out handing his phone number out to teens shooting craps in the alley...well, I'll be the one running the craps game in the alley, friends.

So consider the resume, friends. Two Jacksons and one proven winner are waiting on you.

It made me smile. Additionally, with Cheaty Petey around, it wouldn't be terrible to have someone with a little bit of a bad streak.

by Odysseus on Dec 27, 2007 8:42 AM PST 0 recs

I must be dense

..I don't get it. What's the $40 in reference to?

by whp68 on Dec 27, 2007 9:30 AM PST up 0 recs

It is funny

I'm picturing him with a preacher-type pompadour haircut and a pink polyester suit on. With lizard boots, of course. He'd drive up in a convertible Cadillac with big fins.

Here's an interesting comment to the original article

You know your once proud football program is irrelevant when...

The coach at Temple is not interested in leaving Philadelphia to be your coach!

OK! OK! Maybe he could read the entrails and see that the golden boy is the choice and this was better PR & career-wise, but it still speaks volumes...

OBTW, wonder what RN (does anyone sense the delicious irony of those initials?) did with the purple speed boat he used to drive to work in at UDub?

by Tommy Bruin on Dec 27, 2007 4:41 PM PST up 0 recs

It would be interesting

to see how strong Dohn's support for Walker would be if HIS career was tied to DWW's performance as HC at UCLA.

I would presume that Dohn plans to keep his job at the DN (unless he's already scoping out Bill Dwyre's job at the LAT, probably with DWW's help...) regardless of DWW's won-loss record at UCLA. But if DWW were to get the job and, unfortunately, blow it, going 5-7 or 6-6 for three years before getting canned, how about the DN publisher firing Dohn and sending him packing back to Newark? (Sorry, njbruin.) There is NO commitment here for Dohn. As pointed out, he's NOT a Bruin - hell, he's not even a local.

Now, if Block or DG were to listen to me (another chapter from Dreamland) and they were insistent on hiring DWW, I would suggest they offer a one-year contract at $750K, with no further financial guarantees. One and done if he doesn't win 10 games with a program that has defined its strengths and demonstrated ongoing growth. No buyout. No golden parachute. Nada. Let's see just HOW committed he is to UCLA. Hell, he's got HIS players (the DWW supporters insist those recruits are HIS), and the argument is that if DWW doesn't get the job all the black players on the squad will transfer and the recruits will bolt. Okay, what's DWW willing to GUARANTEE us? 9 wins? 10 wins? A national championship? I think that if he REALLY wants this job he should be willing to demonstrate his commitment by putting his career on the line.

The 800 pound gorilla lurking behind all this talk about DWW versus RN, or any of the other candidates, is that a white coach CAN'T recruit in South Central, or any ethnic neighborhood. Certainly Walker's other chief supporter, his brother, has trumpeted this belief. This is racism at an insidious level, implying that only black men can reach out to or teach younger black men. This notion is repugnant and would normally be undeserving of any notice. But the raising of this nonissue reflects on the desperation that Dohn and DWW's supporters must be feeling as the search continues. If DWW wants to bridge the gap that exists among members of the Bruin community he would step forward and denounce the remarks that his brother, and others, have made regarding Rick Neuheisel. That, in and of itself, would make me feel much better about the man.

UCLA - the finest public university in the world

by SecondGenBruin on Dec 27, 2007 8:53 AM PST 0 recs

I'm liking RN better as time goes by.

I was (and still am) the biggest Mariucci supporter on this board. That hasn't changed, but it seems that Steve won't be coming here.

That being said, I am fine with Neuheisel. Speaking of RN's "infractions" Washington paid him off to the tune of 4.5 mill and the other stuff at Colorado, that would be a slow morning at $UC, and lets not forgetr there were no problems in the years he was here.\

I'll be happy because

he's got HC experience
He's a winner
He can recruit

and last but certainly not least...

HE WANTS TO BE HERE

This is UCLA, where champions are made.

by dadofgrad06 on Dec 27, 2007 9:27 AM PST 0 recs

Not the ideal, but at this point...

... I'd be willing to do:

(1) RN as Head Coach on a 6-year, $7.5M deal, plus incentives, with a low buyout.

(2) DW as DC/ asst. HC with a bump up from his $350K last year to a $500K/ yr, 3 to 4-year deal.

(3) Norvell and Connelly run out of town on a rail.

(4) Tom Cable as OC/ OL coach at around $450K/ year, on a 2-year deal.

Get me a HC who passionately wants to see the Bruins succeed and kick the Trojans' teeth in; a DC who is hungry for a HC job but willing to stay here while his son plays; and an OC who knows how to teach his OL players to produce and open up running plays.

Enough already.

"Because I'm tired of it. Year after year after year after year having to choose between the lesser of 'Who cares?'"

by Meriones on Dec 27, 2007 9:50 AM PST 0 recs

RN should do a clean sweep --

he would be an absolute fool to keep DW.

Athis best, DW had massive D failures in games we should have won.

And, there are questions as to whether he was really as loyal to KD as he should have been.

If you are the CEO, you pick your subordinates. You will have to live or die with them.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 27, 2007 10:52 AM PST up 0 recs

Coaching package

M, I like it!
We'll call it the Meriones plan!

'66, I don't think RN would put up with DW being anything but completely loyal.

He's a leader - people follow or get outta the way. That's why he's offended some people (Hedges).

I wouldn't force him to keep DW, but don't think it would be a bad choice, if it was his CHOICE.

by BruinFam on Dec 27, 2007 12:03 PM PST up 0 recs

Geez Louise...

I simply cannot believe these are our only two choices.

Why did we not interview Terry Bowden (who was hot for the UCLA job before the WVU one opened up)? Why did we not go after Paul Johnson (before GT nabbed him)? Why have we not gone after Leach or Jones?

And the Bellotti interview was a joke--merely an instance to which Guerrero could point if people accused him of not going after any top coaching prospects.

by mcbruin on Dec 27, 2007 10:11 AM PST 0 recs

With all due respect

we don't know if anything in your post is true.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 27, 2007 10:47 AM PST up 0 recs

What do we KNOW?

How do we KNOW TB was not interviewed, or that we have not gone after ML or JJ? Talk like this has been stated on this board as if it was fact. I didn't see one post from somebody who KNEW Bellotti was being interviewed until it happened.

We have to HOPE DG is still pursuing s top tier coach (and I include RN is this list), and keeping it as quiet as he did with MB.

by BruinFam on Dec 27, 2007 12:08 PM PST up 0 recs

Principals versus sources

Principals: I remember seeing one quote each from the following people: DG (we're looking, in the e-mail to season ticket holders), Belotti ("I'm committed to Oregon"), Peterson "That place" and that's it. I remember quotes attibuted to Neuheisel ("I'm interested in UCLA") and Bowden ("I'm interested in anywhere that would have me, including UCLA") and Golden ("I'm out") and Chow {"I'm out.")

Sources: Aside from three wealthy and influential alumni, not one source has been named, and just about all of the sources channel their spirits through Doh!. The sources have been less than accurate (DyNoMite was being wooed by Wazzou, but did not get an interview, and is being wooed by Washington to stab Willingham in the back - oops, I mean, as DC.)

I automatically assume anything written ("written" chosen instead of "reported" on purpose) by Doh! as being pure fiction and simply geared as part of his pubic relations - oops, I mean public relations love affair with DyNoMite. There are others who quote sources who I actually look at. Dienhart if think is honest and does not just make things up. Some of the others - meh. Who knows.

Bottom line for me is that lots of contributors to the BN offer up candidates and explain why they like them, and try to defend their positions when others in the BN tell them that they and their candidates are both absurd. But with the exception of that guy who dropped in with his sure fire story that three wealthy and influential alumni guaranteed him that CTS would not be fired, nobody makes up Sources (with a capital S) like the MSM does.

Want a source? I say the next HC will be Leach. It came to me in a dream, but I am indeed close to the program as a BN contributor. I am an aluminum (or whatever the singular is.) And I am wealthy, compared with what I was before I was a linoleum. And I know two other college graduates (although not from UCLA.) So there you go. I am a source. You can report "According to a Source (with a capital S), UCLA is set to hire Mike Leach." I told you in my dream that I couldn't tell if it was Mike Leach or Rick Leach, but you don't have to "report" that.

I am convinced that is what the MSM is doing. None of the principals who are still actual candidates are saying anything. (Walker is speaking through Doh! and his brother, making him in my opinion and in my fondest hope not an actual candidate.) When a principal speaks, it will be to accept the job or to take himself out as a candidate.

Thus endeth this rant.

by Fox 71 on Dec 27, 2007 1:27 PM PST up 0 recs

Good Job

Perfectly on point.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 27, 2007 2:46 PM PST up 0 recs

Yes, I concede...

...nobody knew Bellotti was being interviewed until it happened.

And then, EVERYBODY knew.

Had TB, ML, or JJ been interviewed, I assume everybody would know about those interviews, too.

But nobody does, right?

So, while I cannot state it as fact, I think it is pretty safe to assume that those three coaches HAVE NOT been interviewed.

Unless, of course, I subscribed to the theory that DG is not really serious about any of his second interview candidates, and has secretly conducted--or is going to conduct--interviews with one or all three of those coaching candidates.

It is possible that is the case.

I sure hope it is.

Because, unlike you, I do not include RN on my list of top tier coaching candidates.

If SC had hired someone with Neuheisel's past, contributors to this site would be flaying them alive.

Oh. And remind me. How productive has Baltimore's offense been this season?

Wait. That's right. His QB was injured. He couldn't possibly be expected to produce any points with an injured quarterback.

Now...where have I heard that one before?

by mcbruin on Dec 27, 2007 5:01 PM PST up 0 recs

Clean Sweep

If this program were a Pro team, the owner would have fired the whole staff and started from scratch.
As a whole, the coaching staff is horrible.

As far as the DW and his brother harping about the virtues of being a black coach that can relate and get down with the 'young brothers' is tripe and only applicable if this were Grambling.

The NEW coaching staff has to search for local commits from schools like De La Salle, Mater Dei, Long Beach Poly, Oaks Christian, Vista, Newberry Park, then, move the search out of state. Let's be smart and follow efforts that has brought success to that team across town. Not only will these young men have the opportunity to play and develop in a very good program, but to also attend and graduate from an excellent university.

by alfa1 on Dec 27, 2007 10:44 AM PST 0 recs