With all the flea-flickers and rb passes, when are we going to see OR to do his highly anticipated WR pass?
Well, you and every other defensive coordinator is waiting for that. That is one of the reasons I thought Breazell throwing the ball was a good move. Plus, Rasshan needs to get on the field before he can make a play.

Your colleague Scott Wolf has often alluded to recent "bad blood" between the USC and UCLA football coaching staffs. Can you offer your perspective on that relationship? Friendly rivals, or is there real animosity between the two staffs?
There is some animosity there, mostly stemming from recruiting. When you are vying for the same kids in the ugly, dirty game of recruiting, it is bound to ruffle feathers. There’s some other things that I haven’t written about, but I may do that during the season.

Any more news on Golden, Stevens, and Mobley? Did Reuland's dad give any indication that UCLA would be his leading choice
Golden was at the game last week and had a good discussion with defensive coordinator DeWayne Walker. Stevens and Mobley are status quo. What you read from Reuland’s dad is all I am comfortable saying. I do think the process will take some time to sort out.

I was thinking would'nt the offense be great if UCLA put Cowan in that Spread option offense,ala Tebow,Locker, Dixon it seems that would be the the way to utilize his talents?
I don’t think Cowan has the escapability to run the spread offense. Guys you are talking about in Tebow, Locker, Dixon are incredible, elite level athletes. I think Cowan is a good Pac-10 backup quarterback.

Any feedback on the J'Mison Morgan visit?
It went very well. Kevin Love talked up UCLA big time, and all the players were on board with trying to recruit him and hanging out with him. UCLA coach Ben Howland is expected to go visit with him next week. Then again, who was the last recruit to take a trip and say things did not go well?

From various accounts, the team seems to be galvanized around Pat Cowan more so than Ben Olson even though it is not necessarily because of anything that Olson is doing wrong. Do you perceive this trend and if so, is it just a matter of Olson needing to make plays to get everyone excited or is there more to it than that?
I think it is the excitement factor of knowing Cowan will run around and get out of the pocket that makes it seem as if the team is galvanized by him. When it comes down to it, UCLA looked galvanized when Olson was throwing five TDs at Stanford.

What if anything have the coaches and players done to try to cut down on the rather large number of big plays the secondary has given up through the air?
Some changes were made in the starting lineup, but it is more just coaching and staying on the players to not blow assignments.

How much of the much improved offensive line play in the second half against Washington was attributed to focus and aggression rather than the Husky line perhaps starting to feel the after-effects of having played a physical Ohio State team the previous week?
I think part of UCLA’s success was its aggressive nature, and a determination to run the ball better and stay on blocks. And I think part of it is Washington isn’t very good up front.

Rumor has it that there was a great sigh of relief over at the Morgan Center. Do you believe that this was due to the idea that if KD did not win the Washington game that there would be increased pressure to fire KD? Also, do you believe that KD is actually changing the culture of UCLA football and is that what the other coaches feel is happening?
If UCLA did not beat Washington, there would be more people showing their disapproval. I am told the Utah loss made for an uncomfortable week for Guerrero, and the Bruins needed a solid effort in response. The culture has changed in that UCLA players now work year-round and there is very little off-the-field trouble, as opposed to the Bob Toledo era. As for the other coaches, are you talking about in the athletic department or on UCLA’s football staff?