Bear Down Wildcats

Bosy Billups wrote:I'm would rather not say anything is official, but...

UCLA = UNLV at this point.

There is no revival coming for the foreseeable and unforeseeable future.

How do you revive that mess? It's close to impossible.

That take is...well...terrible

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:I'm would rather not say anything is official, but...

UCLA = UNLV at this point.

There is no revival coming for the foreseeable and unforeseeable future.

How do you revive that mess? It's close to impossible.

That take is...well...terrible

HEH.

Nice win, Zags. It's good that at least one other program out West is making strides.

Bosy Billups wrote:I'm would rather not say anything is official, but...

UCLA = UNLV at this point.

There is no revival coming for the foreseeable and unforeseeable future.

How do you revive that mess? It's close to impossible.

Depends on your definition of revival. Are they ever going to win multiple titles in a short window again? Doubtful. Not even Kentucky with all its talent has managed that. Can they, with the right coach (not this one), capitalize on the heavy saturation of local talent, utilize their Addidas contacts and LA market to draw one or two of the best national players, and make a few Final 4s in a short window? Sure. They've already done it recently. I'd even say they could win a Title here and there.

But the days of even the early 1990s dynasty teams of Duke, NC, UNLV, etc, they are gone because players don't stick around like that outside of the exception of Florida.

Not even Duke now can find sustained success for Final 4s, let alone Titles.

Modern coaches need to have a reasonable 5 year window with a down year, 1 Sweet 16, an Elite 8, a Final 4 or two or better. That's the best anyone will consistently achieve.

Will they do it with Alford? Hell no. It won't matter if Brown is there for a year. Alford is an average coach and tactician, and those types don't win big.

But can they with a legit coach? Prior to Howland burning LA connections to the ground, they already had. So, I'd say they can do it again. Short of a caring fanbase, they have everything a program would want.

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:I'm would rather not say anything is official, but...

UCLA = UNLV at this point.

There is no revival coming for the foreseeable and unforeseeable future.

How do you revive that mess? It's close to impossible.

That take is...well...terrible

Prove me wrong please. Even if you had 5 five stars, you can see there is no chemistry. Alford is in over his head. He is used to coaching at the mid major level, but like Dunk City across the street, has no idea how competitive a major conference is.

Love how CSA congratulated Pangos towards the end of the game. Haven't seem him do that once toward his own team.

Just don't see a revival coming anytime soon.

Do you?

And how?

Minus blinders, you think at age 50+. CSA has something up his sleeve to all of a sudden become a world beater coach and in the talk for elite? Judging his hair and moles (sorry, not fair, but funny), it's not happening.

Bosy Billups wrote: Prove me wrong please. Even if you had 5 five stars, you can see there is no chemistry. Alford is in over his head. He is used to coaching at the mid major level, but like Dunk City across the street, have no idea how competitive a major conference is.

Love how CSA congratulated Pangos towards the end of the game. Haven't seem him do that once toward his own team.

Just don't see a revival coming anytime soon.

Do you?

And how?

You aren't really looking to be proved wrong. If you don't see it, whether you want to or not, that's fine. But basing it off this lost year is silly.

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote: Prove me wrong please. Even if you had 5 five stars, you can see there is no chemistry. Alford is in over his head. He is used to coaching at the mid major level, but like Dunk City across the street, have no idea how competitive a major conference is.

Love how CSA congratulated Pangos towards the end of the game. Haven't seem him do that once toward his own team.

Just don't see a revival coming anytime soon.

Do you?

And how?

You aren't really looking to be proved wrong. If you don't see it, whether you want to or not, that's fine. But basing it off this lost year is silly.

I agree wholeheartedly with Bug. UCLA's grand revival is right around the corner. They'll overtake UK and everyone else shortly, and anyone who predicts otherwise is simply foolish.

HEH! Go Zags!

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote: Prove me wrong please. Even if you had 5 five stars, you can see there is no chemistry. Alford is in over his head. He is used to coaching at the mid major level, but like Dunk City across the street, have no idea how competitive a major conference is.

Love how CSA congratulated Pangos towards the end of the game. Haven't seem him do that once toward his own team.

Just don't see a revival coming anytime soon.

Do you?

And how?

You aren't really looking to be proved wrong. If you don't see it, whether you want to or not, that's fine. But basing it off this lost year is silly.

I want to see it. I want to be wrong. Really, I do. I want UCLA to be picked first for the conference and have everyone try to battle them down. Not that fun of a position, to be honest. Still, forget this year, how do you see it changing, regardless of future recruits.

It's strange, after 1.5 years, I still have no idea what defense he runs. Do you? Zone? Man? Mix?

Second, why does he allow Bryce, the PG, to be the #1 shooter on the team? PS - he will be there next year and the year after.

Third, why does Alford insist on using "Up tempo pace" in every interview, yet keeps losing. He needs to focus more on defense IMO.

Those are just quick objective thoughts. I'd ask the same about Arizona if Alford were the coach. Can you opine?

Bosy Billups wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote: Prove me wrong please. Even if you had 5 five stars, you can see there is no chemistry. Alford is in over his head. He is used to coaching at the mid major level, but like Dunk City across the street, have no idea how competitive a major conference is.

Love how CSA congratulated Pangos towards the end of the game. Haven't seem him do that once toward his own team.

Just don't see a revival coming anytime soon.

Do you?

And how?

You aren't really looking to be proved wrong. If you don't see it, whether you want to or not, that's fine. But basing it off this lost year is silly.

I want to see it. I want to be wrong. Really, I do. I want UCLA to be picked first for the conference and have everyone try to battle them down. Not that fun of a position, to be honest. Still, forget this year, how do you see it changing, regardless of future recruits.

It's strange, after 1.5 years, I still have no idea what defense he runs. Do you? Zone? Man? Mix?

Second, why does he allow Bryce, the PG, to be the #1 shooter on the team? PS - he will be there next year and the year after.

Third, why does Alford insist on using "Up tempo pace" in every interview, yet keeps losing. He needs to focus more on defense IMO.

Those are just quick objective thoughts. I'd ask the same about Arizona if Alford were the coach. Can you opine?

This is gonna be good.

Heh.

Katzenfreund wrote:Traffic must be murderous.

At home, against a top 10 team, and that's all that shows up? yeesh.

Bosy Billups wrote: I want to see it. I want to be wrong. Really, I do. I want UCLA to be picked first for the conference and have everyone try to battle them down. Not that fun of a position, to be honest. Still, forget this year, how do you see it changing, regardless of future recruits.

It's strange, after 1.5 years, I still have no idea what defense he runs. Do you? Zone? Man? Mix?

Second, why does he allow Bryce, the PG, to be the #1 shooter on the team? PS - he will be there next year and the year after.

Third, why does Alford insist on using "Up tempo pace" in every interview, yet keeps losing. He needs to focus more on defense IMO.

Those are just quick objective thoughts. I'd ask the same about Arizona if Alford were the coach. Can you opine?

Your ignorance on UCLA, and your inability to separate the struggles of the team this year, are your undoing. It's obvious Bryce is a weak spot and it's not going to change, but he'll adapt and still improve through his senior year. The biggest problems right now is a lack of any sort of depth on the team and the lack of athletic ability. Outside of a talent influx, there wont be any sort of improvement on D. The team is usually playing hard, but you can't make something be what they aren't. And this team isn't a good defensive team.

PieceOfMeat wrote:

Katzenfreund wrote:Traffic must be murderous.

At home, against a top 10 team, and that's all that shows up? yeesh.

Wow! That picture next to McKale against Gonzaga will be the first slide for Miller's presentation for any SoCal recruit.

Didn't realize that Miller was struggling vs UCLA in Socal recruiting..?

Attendance was 10,006. Must have counted staff as UCLA (and I believe the PAC-12 in general) counts turnstiles.

MrBug708 wrote:Didn't realize that Miller was struggling vs UCLA in Socal recruiting..?

He isn't, and he won't. Not with that kind of fan "support" in Westwood.

But guys, we should give UCLA fans a pass in regards to not showing up for this game. I heard it rained in LA this week.

Chicat wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:Didn't realize that Miller was struggling vs UCLA in Socal recruiting..?

He isn't, and he won't.

No kidding.

Just wait out the Bryce era. It'll get better.

How many extensions does Guerrero give him though?

MrBug708 wrote:How many extensions does Guerrero give him though?

Hopefully no more than 1 a year.

Bruin Nation wanted the anti-Howland. Got it. Worst D in the league, and soft.

3goggles wrote:I'm sorry but why would any recruit would want to play for FUCLA!

Get Jimmy Connors' autograph. Neil Everett behind the Zag bench. Spokane kid.

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote: I want to see it. I want to be wrong. Really, I do. I want UCLA to be picked first for the conference and have everyone try to battle them down. Not that fun of a position, to be honest. Still, forget this year, how do you see it changing, regardless of future recruits.

It's strange, after 1.5 years, I still have no idea what defense he runs. Do you? Zone? Man? Mix?

Second, why does he allow Bryce, the PG, to be the #1 shooter on the team? PS - he will be there next year and the year after.

Third, why does Alford insist on using "Up tempo pace" in every interview, yet keeps losing. He needs to focus more on defense IMO.

Those are just quick objective thoughts. I'd ask the same about Arizona if Alford were the coach. Can you opine?

Your ignorance on UCLA, and your inability to separate the struggles of the team this year, are your undoing. It's obvious Bryce is a weak spot and it's not going to change, but he'll adapt and still improve through his senior year. The biggest problems right now is a lack of any sort of depth on the team and the lack of athletic ability. Outside of a talent influx, there wont be any sort of improvement on D. The team is usually playing hard, but you can't make something be what they aren't. And this team isn't a good defensive team.

I hear you, really, but my question goes back to leadership and coaching. You're talking about the players running the program. I'm talking about Alford and staff. What is his defensive philosophy? Please answer that. Then, let me know how that philosophy will win championships and bring UCLA out of the hole.

Bosy Billups wrote:

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote: I want to see it. I want to be wrong. Really, I do. I want UCLA to be picked first for the conference and have everyone try to battle them down. Not that fun of a position, to be honest. Still, forget this year, how do you see it changing, regardless of future recruits.

It's strange, after 1.5 years, I still have no idea what defense he runs. Do you? Zone? Man? Mix?

Second, why does he allow Bryce, the PG, to be the #1 shooter on the team? PS - he will be there next year and the year after.

Third, why does Alford insist on using "Up tempo pace" in every interview, yet keeps losing. He needs to focus more on defense IMO.

Those are just quick objective thoughts. I'd ask the same about Arizona if Alford were the coach. Can you opine?

Your ignorance on UCLA, and your inability to separate the struggles of the team this year, are your undoing. It's obvious Bryce is a weak spot and it's not going to change, but he'll adapt and still improve through his senior year. The biggest problems right now is a lack of any sort of depth on the team and the lack of athletic ability. Outside of a talent influx, there wont be any sort of improvement on D. The team is usually playing hard, but you can't make something be what they aren't. And this team isn't a good defensive team.

I hear you, really, but my question goes back to leadership and coaching. You're talking about the players running the program. I'm talking about Alford and staff. What is his defensive philosophy? Please answer that. Then, let me know how that philosophy will win championships and bring UCLA out of the hole.

You're going to make poor widdle Bug's head explode, BB.

I wonder if UCLA can stay within 30 of UK next weekend.

HEH!

Bosy Billups wrote: I hear you, really, but my question goes back to leadership and coaching. You're talking about the players running the program. I'm talking about Alford and staff. What is his defensive philosophy? Please answer that. Then, let me know how that philosophy will win championships and bring UCLA out of the hole.

You mean does he want to stop the other team? I'd imagine so, but I can tell that Powell is already sick of Bryce and even he isn't trying much anymore. Last year he was pretty solid and his Sophomore year, he was really trying on defense, but this team is just so poorly constructed that anything they try just pretty much fails. It's hard to tell if Bryce can't play defense or doesnt want to. I suspect it's more the former but sometimes it looks that way. Isaac Hamilton has totally changed his style of play, but he's just not athletic enough to play in anything but a zone. Just need to work through this year and hope that Bryce makes some strides and once he's an upperclassmen, most of the kids coming in already know the deal with Alford's kid and will probably be more "understanding" about nepotism. I'd say right now Alford is adjusting his scheme to personnel. He has the ability to adjust his style to his team. His defense is bad, mostly because the team just isn't that good right now. He's trying to make style of play as attractive as he can, hence the AAU style, because that's the best way to get talent in right now.

Seriously Bug what do you think about Alford? Can he actually build a program or will he just be getting pit stop talent like Zimmerman or what Adidas funnels him?

I'd say he's probably not the answer. We would have had more of a picture had he been able to get Octeus and Bolden or if Bryce was 3 inches taller

MrBug708 wrote:We would have had more of a picture had he been able to get Octeus and Bolden or if Bryce was 3 inches taller

And we would have won the national title if Ashley hadn't gotten injured. And UCLA would've won every single tourney in the 80s if they'd cloned Wooden.

HEH!

MrBug708 wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote: I hear you, really, but my question goes back to leadership and coaching. You're talking about the players running the program. I'm talking about Alford and staff. What is his defensive philosophy? Please answer that. Then, let me know how that philosophy will win championships and bring UCLA out of the hole.

You mean does he want to stop the other team? I'd imagine so, but I can tell that Powell is already sick of Bryce and even he isn't trying much anymore. Last year he was pretty solid and his Sophomore year, he was really trying on defense, but this team is just so poorly constructed that anything they try just pretty much fails. It's hard to tell if Bryce can't play defense or doesnt want to. I suspect it's more the former but sometimes it looks that way. Isaac Hamilton has totally changed his style of play, but he's just not athletic enough to play in anything but a zone. Just need to work through this year and hope that Bryce makes some strides and once he's an upperclassmen, most of the kids coming in already know the deal with Alford's kid and will probably be more "understanding" about nepotism. I'd say right now Alford is adjusting his scheme to personnel. He has the ability to adjust his style to his team. His defense is bad, mostly because the team just isn't that good right now. He's trying to make style of play as attractive as he can, hence the AAU style, because that's the best way to get talent in right now.

Truthfully, hiding their names and faces, I don't see much difference between Alford and Pastner. Except, Alford has the ability to discipline and be respected, but my gut tells me he's more concerned about being liked by his players. Which may be inaccurate, but that's the only reason why I can fathom why he would want to play AAU ball against the top bball programs in the nation...they will eat that shit up.

FTR, Bryce is good, great shooter, quick, nice stroke. He's also cocky and can be a punk to his peers at times. Maybe he's a less talented version of nigel gross, but for this team, you need an upper class boss. Seriously, someone like Momo Jones, to grab the jerseys of the players and get them playing hard.

This year's a pass, but for Alford and UCLA's sake, hope CSA gets back to what made him successful at UNM and worry less about being Mr. Uptempo.

PS - It's fine if CSA will play zone with his hand picked players, it works for Cuse. As long as it's practiced and disciplined, it can be effective. Maybe I'm just too used to Miller, because he used his system and Man to Man, even without the right players, even though that cost us games, and even though that ended the NCAA tourney streak. He didn't care, because he knew for the future, the best choice was to become very good at the pack line defense, and practice over and over, until you get good.

PPS - Back to AAU ball, may be the best way to get talent in right now, but may not be the talent you want. The cream of the crop want to become the best and get tough love from their coach. Howland was brilliant in his prime.

gumby wrote:Bruin Nation wanted the anti-Howland. Got it. Worst D in the league, and soft.

Granted I've only been surfing Bruins Nation since early this past year, but man, do those guys have it out for Alford and the AD. No filter at all.

Found a post back when Alford was hired, where the BN staff recruited Iowa's main blogger to introduce Alford to the Bruin fanbase on pretty bitter terms.

CatsbyAZ wrote:

gumby wrote:Bruin Nation wanted the anti-Howland. Got it. Worst D in the league, and soft.

Granted I've only been surfing Bruins Nation since early this past year, but man, do those guys have it out for Alford and the AD. No filter at all.

Found a post back when Alford was hired, where the BN staff recruited Iowa's main blogger to introduce Alford to the Bruin fanbase on pretty bitter terms.

So what's the stance over there on attendance? If you could fire fans, they'd be gone. As it is, looks like they resigned.

What does it say that in the interim between Olson and Miller that UA still led the PAC in attendance? I mean, there is one major freeway in Tucson, and I know traffic is a pain...so...what is uCla's excuse?

I can't believe how the fan base has changed. I have a buddy who is a uCla grad and huge supporter of them, and he hasn't been interested in basketball at all for the past 3 years. Pretty sad.

Olsondogg wrote:What does it say that in the interim between Olson and Miller that UA still led the PAC in attendance? I mean, there is one major freeway in Tucson, and I know traffic is a pain...so...what is uCla's excuse?

I can't believe how the fan base has changed. I have a buddy who is a uCla grad and huge supporter of them, and he hasn't been interested in basketball at all for the past 3 years. Pretty sad.

Interest has been higher in UCLA football the past two seasons than at any time during Howland's three FF seasons.

Olsondogg wrote:What does it say that in the interim between Olson and Miller that UA still led the PAC in attendance? I mean, there is one major freeway in Tucson, and I know traffic is a pain...so...what is uCla's excuse?

I can't believe how the fan base has changed. I have a buddy who is a uCla grad and huge supporter of them, and he hasn't been interested in basketball at all for the past 3 years. Pretty sad.

That was impressive to still have that fanfare. But that is 100% a result of Lute and his 20 year dominance. It became habit. Yes, having a college town helps, but that was Lute Olson's doing for keeping the Cats the show in town for over 2 decades.

Attendance was an issue with the media when Miller for started. Not a huge issue, but think we were around the 12,000-13,000 range? We also sucked, but that was a fun time.

The story we heard during the Howland years was that all those empty seats were some form of protest against the direction of the program and an effort to get Howland fired. Mission accomplished. But then why haven't those protesters come back now that they got what they wanted?

^
Bingo! That was what Walton, among others, claimed.

Chicat wrote: But then why haven't those protesters come back now that they got what they wanted?

Because no one gives a sh*t about UCLA basketball. I'm not sure why this is so difficult to recognize.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Chicat wrote: But then why haven't those protesters come back now that they got what they wanted?

Because no one gives a sh*t about UCLA basketball. I'm not sure why this is so difficult to recognize.

"Most active topic for this poster." One-third of all posts.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Chicat wrote: But then why haven't those protesters come back now that they got what they wanted?

Because no one gives a sh*t about UCLA basketball. I'm not sure why this is so difficult to recognize.

Hilarious coming from you.

SCCat wrote:So UCLA's next two games are at home against Gonzaga and in Chicago against Kentucky.

The game is to guess how much UCLA loses the two games by in total. My guess is 35 points (about a ten point loss to the Zags and a 25 point loss to UK).

So with a 13 point loss to the Zags we just need a nice 22 point Kentucky beatdown (spread is -14.5) to hit the guess on the nose.

THANKS, ADIDAS looking forward to seeing the new UCLA ANTEATERS warmups this season!

Kentucky looks like an NBA team.

UCLA like a junior high squad.

This game is going even better than I had hoped.

77HoyaCat4Ever wrote:Kentucky looks like an NBA team.

UCLA like a junior high squad.

16-0 start is

Don't look Ethel.

Mercy rule!

Bruins not used to playing in front of a crowd

UCLA is an embarrassment to the Pac-12.

freshman vs varsity. BRO threads should be funny

Embarrassing. Alford may take the worst shots in all of NCAAB

This is the most embarrassing game I've ever seen. The question is will UCLA score at all.

I assume that was a historic start. Other team scores 24 before UCLA scores their first point? UCLA misses 17 shots to start a game?

My assumption is neither of those things have ever happened before.

Hey guys, which freeway do you think is the best one for me to walk across blindfolded?