Changes needed?

I don't think CBH needs to change his style to win a NC. Let's not lose sight of the fact that 3 consecutive Final Fours is a HUGE achievement. I know that we don't hang banners for Final Fours, and I know that a NC is and should be the goal of the UCLA basketball program every year. But to say that there is something about CBH that needs to be changed would be, in my opinion, hasty.

UCLA has lost to two teams in Florida (x2) and Memphis that were much more athletic than they were; Florida down low and Memphis in the backcourt. It sounds like CBH is starting to attract and sign more athletic players and there doesn't appear to be any reason CBH can't mold them into players that not only are athletic but also play his style of basketball.

In short, and with all due respect and love to the UCLA players past and present, CBH has done a lot with some really good, not necessarily great, athletes. Once he gets the elite, top level, athletes, I can see him winning multiple NCs with his style of coaching.

I don't think they're are many changes Ben needs to make in order to win a national championship. In the tournament, especially in the Final Four, it's all about match-ups. Unfortunately, for us we've run into teams that we don't really match up well against-- long and athletic-- with the likes of Florida and Memphis. But honestly how many teams out there have the personnel that they do? Maybe only a handful of teams, with Kansas being another. Had we drawn UNC in the semis, I'm sure we would have prevailed better. You also have to remember it really hurt us not having the shooting capabilities of a Michael Roll. Had he been available, that may have open up the middle for Love (Memphis clogged the middle by double teaming Love), and it would have give Collison or Westbrook someone to kick out to. All in all, I think Ben should continue with what's working. Three Final Fours is still a major accomplishment regardless of what other's say. He'll win one soon. Maybe in 2010 when we have Reeves Nelson and hopefully Renardo Sidney.

I don't think they're are many changes Ben needs to make in order to win a national championship. In the tournament, especially in the Final Four, it's all about match-ups. Unfortunately, for us we've run into teams that we don't really match up well against-- long and athletic-- with the likes of Florida and Memphis. But honestly how many teams out there have the personnel that they do? Maybe only a handful of teams, with Kansas being another. Had we drawn UNC in the semis, I'm sure we would have prevailed better. You also have to remember it really hurt us not having the shooting capabilities of a Michael Roll. Had he been available, that may have open up the middle for Love (Memphis clogged the middle by double teaming Love), and it would have give Collison or Westbrook someone to kick out to. All in all, I think Ben should continue with what's working. Three Final Fours is still a major accomplishment regardless of what other's say. He'll win one soon. Maybe in 2010 when we have Reeves Nelson and hopefully Renardo Sidney.

No, I think were we a player away from winning it this year. If Love comes back with either Collison and or Westbrook I think we will win NC next year. It's the system that gets us to the final 4 for but the talent wins the NC and we did not have it.

In previous years it was the lack of an inside presence... this year it was the lack of an outside shot... had me made a few of those open looks that could have opened it up down low for Love. We saw yesterday what happened to Memphis once the pressure was put on them, they cracked...that could have been our team putting that pressure on them...Lack of outside shooting killed us...

The game plan would have worked had we had a solid outside shooter. In previous years it was the lack of an inside presence... this year it was the lack of an outside shot... had we made a few of those open looks that could have opened it up down low for Love. We saw yesterday what happened to Memphis once the pressure was put on them, they cracked...that could have been our team putting that pressure on them...Lack of outside shooting killed us...

I think it was Bruinsnation that put a fitting quote from Einstein: "Insanity is doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results." So i think Howland does need to change a few things to eventually win the NC, but within his system. The worst thing a coach can do is give into pressure and follow advice from ill-advised sources, especially internet blogs and comments. There's a reason why UCLA's paying him millions of dollars a year.. Howland's a great coach... i'm confident that he'll figure how the changes he needs to make without abandoning what he believes in.

Let's not forget, location aside, Howland's teams have beaten two #1 seeds, and came close to beating a #2 even at NAU. He can and will win with is system.

It's obvious he needs to change something. All I've heard is that Memphis, Kansas, UNC all had "better, more athletic" players this season. Yet, every year Howland's recruiting class is at or near the top of the charts. Do the names Love, Collison, Westbrook, Shipp sound familiar? All are projected to be high draft picks, some lottery picks. You can't tell me that every player on Memphis was more athletic than UCLA's players. The coach did more with his team than Howland did and adjusted better. That means he was out-coached. He failed to win the Big Game again this season. Getting to 3 straight Final Fours is empty if he can't even get into the Monday Night game and then win it - nobody remembers who finished 2nd, 3rd or 4th in the NCAA's ever year. Why work so hard every year to get so far and then get worked over in the end? Like players, coaches need to live and learn, too.

Ironically I wonder if this year's team would have done better against the Florida teams from the last two years and if last year's team (with Afflalo vs Rose and Roll available and Shipp playing like Shipp) might have been better against Memphis. I think the talent level is fine. Talent alone doesn't always win tournament games - I could point to lots of games in the tourney where teams won that didn't necessarily have better talent than the other team. Talent will get you a 32-3 record and a #1 seed, but won't necessarily take you the rest of the way. The NC game is a good example - one free throw and Memphis is NC, but they didn't make one - does that make Kansas a better team? ...a more talented team? ...Self a better coach? Point is (as someone else mentioned) that matchups (and a little luck) are an important part of the tournament, and the way talent is distributed around the NCAA I don't think it's possible anymore to have a team that can deal with all matchup possibilities perfectly. It is important to be flexible as a coach - to be able to address matchups as they come up and not just hope you don't run into a matchup problem in the tourney - I'd love it if Howland would teach a zone to use in certain matchup situations or if foul problems dictate it, for example, but all in all I think we are pretty well off. I think the biggest "adjustment" he needs to make is going from a post-oriented offense to a more guard oriented offense next year. If he can make that adjustment I think the talent is there to make another run and, depending on the matchups (and luck) in the tourney we could hang a banner next year.

There is nothing wrong with Howland's approach to the game.

Florida had too many guns.

Memphis was completely beatable.

UCLA lost to the Tigers because:

1) Love was mugged continually and got no calls; he was exhausted in the second half.

The Bruins' inability to hit open shots allowed the double-teaming inside and that also limited Love.

2) Collison couldn't stop his man; his "Matador Defense" boosted the Tigers' confidence and broke the Bruin defense.

It must have disheartened the team.

3) But for a few instances with Love, Mbah a Moute, and Westbrook, the team lacked its usual aggression. They were out-worked by their opponent.

4) Once finding an effective line-up, Coach Howland quickly abandoned it.

Just after Collison got his fourth foul, UCLA had on the floor Love, Mbah a Moute, Keefe, Shipp, and Westbrook. This group finally shut Memphis down. Instead of driving for dunks and circus shots, Rose stayed out on the perimeter.

Inexplicably, the coach brought Collison back into the game after only a few moments.

The only thing Coach Howland should do differently is avoid staying with someone who isn't getting the job done. If anything, he's guilty of believing in his players.

There is nothing wrong with Howland's approach to the game.

Florida had too many guns.

Memphis was completely beatable.

UCLA lost to the Tigers because:

1) Love was mugged continually and got no calls; he was exhausted in the second half.

The Bruins' inability to hit open shots allowed the double-teaming inside and that also limited Love.

2) Collison couldn't stop his man; his "Matador Defense" boosted the Tigers' confidence and broke the Bruin defense.

It must have disheartened the team.

3) But for a few instances with Love, Mbah a Moute, and Westbrook, the team lacked its usual aggression. They were out-worked by their opponent.

4) Once finding an effective line-up, Coach Howland quickly abandoned it.

Just after Collison got his fourth foul, UCLA had on the floor Love, Mbah a Moute, Keefe, Shipp, and Westbrook. This group finally shut Memphis down. Instead of driving for dunks and circus shots, Rose stayed out on the perimeter.

Inexplicably, the coach brought Collison back into the game after only a few moments.

The only thing Coach Howland should do differently is avoid staying with someone who isn't getting the job done. If anything, he's guilty of believing in his players.

Yet, every year Howland's recruiting class is at or near the top of the charts. Do the names Love, Collison, Westbrook, Shipp sound familiar?

These sentences are self contradictory. Love was the only high school all-American of that group. Collison wasn't even in the top 100 for some services. In his class at UCLA, he was considered the third best recruit, if that. He was choosing between UCLA and SDSU. Shipp was recruited regionally. Westbrook was a mid-major type recruit. Both Collison and Westbrook have FAR outperformed what critics expected.

The incoming class for next year will be Howland's first top ranked class. The Farmar class was ranked 5th (by Rivals). Those are his only top 10 classes. Last year was hurt by numbers. Generally classes with two kids don't get highly ranked. The Westbrook and Keefe class wasn't even ranked in the top 25.

That said, Howland doesn't need to change anything, except maybe buying a rabbit's foot.

Sorry 'bout the double-post; the page took forever to refresh.

timing is so important - add Jrue Holiday to this year's team or Kevin Love to next year's and you likely have a NC. Without them, each of those has a critical element missing.

With little if any consistent outside shooting ability from the 2, 3 and 4 positions, it seems to me there was no other approach Coach Howland could have taken that would have been nearly as successful as we were the last three years. It will be fascinating to see how he approaches NEXT year, especially if Kevin Love leaves for the NBA, as he'll have no center inside but some very GOOD shooters around the perimeter.

That said, I'd like to see the coach, more in the model of John Wooden, teach more and call plays less. I'd like to see players prepared to recognize and figure out how to respond to challenges on the court with occasinoal direction from their coach as opposed to having the coach call every play every time up or down court. Several times this year, Collison had the ball stolen from him while he was focused on his coach waiting to be told what to do next. To me that's a weakness that shows up in huge games when everything's on the line- just as I think it was an advantage that Coach Wooden's teams had 'way back when

The Memphis game was the Bruin's worst-case scenario...it was almost a replay of the two losses at Pauley except when we made the adjustment to our offense a la Texas A&M, Collison couldn't get it done. It seems like DC and Westbrook have flip-flopped with their draft values...actually, Russell will turn out to be the better pro since he's stronger than DC and can take the night-in and night-out pounding of the Association...the Bruins' defense will continue to be their offense as it will create TOs and fast-break baskets. The one thing that is disheartening is the pattern the last three seasons:
'06: Lost in Finals
'07: Lost in Semis to eventual champ
'08: Lost in Semis to runner-up
Here's to stemming the tide in '09

Couple of points here:

1. Coach Howland is the real deal and, as I've said before, there will be championships in his future. I hope he retires from UCLA after a 20+ year HoF career here.

2. We've been to a trio of FF with very good athletes but no team that was loaded with lottery picks; obviously coaching had a lot to do with our success. Perhaps great coaching and a lucky break or two can win it all but I would prefer more 5 star players.

3. Academic restrictions and Coach Howland's defense first strategy narrows down the number of players he can or will recruit. We all suspect that Kevin will be one and done, but he was on the academic honor roll his first Q and has a solid B average at one of the best universities in the world. No offense to these folks in particular but I wonder what the GPAs are of OJ, Davon, Rose, Gordon, Beasley, to name a few. Aboya is graduating in June after 3 years, what is CDR's academic status as a junior?

4. The defense first strategy clearly does win games. Here is where I would tweak the Howland approach a bit. Perhaps hire an up and coming young offensive minded guy and let him work most of one practice a week on the offensive set, maybe occasionally doing away with 25 seconds of dribbling followed by 10 seconds of scrambling. We had a big man this year, everyone focused on getting Kevin the ball yet he often had less than 10 shots a game (excluding FTs) while others, Josh, Collison, Russell, Luc often had more. IMHO if say J'Rue Holiday is going to be the main offense next year (or RW for that matter) the team should simulate a game environment where the shooter gets 20 shots in practice and the team focuses on feeding that player specifically instead of spreading the ball around as much as the team does now.

5. I don't think that Coach Howland gives a darn what I say but other, more sage watchers of the Bruins also suggest that a little more offense to go with the great defense might be the trick.

On to next year, hope he finds a big down under!

Going to the final four without a championship is the equivalent of going to the Rose Bowl on a non-championship year.

Three consecutive years of that and I'd be thrilled. Wouldn't you?

You know, at first, albeit out of anger, I thought Howland absolutely needs be more wavering in his approaches. I feel like he has too much conviction in what he believes in, it hurts him by manifesting itself as arrogance. Too arrogant to admit to himself that the match-up problems can and will cause serious problems. There are other defensive remedies to use i.e.: zone and we lost because he refuses to explore the idea of implementing them.

I mean, lets be real. Multiple zone sets would have forced Memphis to beat us from the outside and plugged the hole for the easy penetration (which they got all day against our smaller guards). Too many points in the paint=loss and that's what happened.

However, being a little more rational now, I will say that we could have won with his style of play. We just didn't make the plays when we needed and a lot of plays just didn't go our way. Looking back, there were three 3pt shots that went in and out. At the juncture where Keefe missed his three, had we made all of them, the game would have been tied and the complexion of the game would have been completely different. So, should BH change? I think he should consider it but I don't think he necessarily has to. How do you argue with his success as a coach with really a bunch of over achieving kids (except for Love of course).

Looking towards next year, lets assume we lose Aboya along with Love and Mata. You mean to tell me that the best defensive scheme is going to be to play man? Zone sets are allowed at these levels to bring parity to the table. Without zone, Love would have averaged 27 points and 12 RB’s. Next year, we’ll only have two guys available at PF/C and one guy at 6’9”. You can’t ask two big men (one of which is a Frosh) to stay out of foul trouble the whole game going up against R. Lopez, Jordan Hill and R. Anderson (maybe). Inevitably we will be forced to slide Shipp to PF and Luc to C in certain in-game situations. Man defense absolutely will not be the best way to utilize our talents (or lack of). It’ll be interesting to see how BH has learned from this experience and see how it carries over to next season.

A change in coaching style does NOT bring a program from the Final Four level to the National Championship level. The only thing a coach can do is to keep putting his team in position for a CHANCE at the national championship.

Anyone who thinks that the formula for going to the FF vs. winning it all are different just doesn't understand how much chance and good fortune is involved in winning the NC.

What if Tyus Edney doesn't make that miraculous length of court run for a layup at the end of the Missouri game? Does that mean Harrick did something wrong? Was his coaching style off?

With that said, Coach Howland's style has consistently given our basketball program a chance to win it all the past three years. Simply put, he is without a doubt, our best coach since Wooden. He inherited a program that was in its worst state since World War II and in three years contended for the national championship.

Sorry, but Howland shouldn't change a thing. Those of you who think he should try to 'improve' upon the Pac-10's most efficient offense (yes, I'm talking about UCLA's offense per Pomeroy) don't know what you're talking about. Howland's grind-it-out style of offense goes hand in hand with his defensive style. Change the offense and you lose what he's trying to accomplish on the defensive end.

Howland's record speaks for itself. I'm not saying he's above reproach and never makes mistakes. A few tweaks here and there would be fine, but saying he should change his style (on offense or defense) is akin to saying that we need a different coach. This is the style in which Coach Howland can best coach our hoops program and this is how I hope he continues doing so.

Ben needed to recruit big men and big men that can actually score on offense. Other than K Love Ben hasn't landed any 4's or 5's that can make a 10-15 ft jumper.

Ben under recruited bigs the last couple of seasons and like in football last year at QB and RB we had to resort to walk-ons because of our lack of depth...we might have to do the same in B-Ball next season with our lack of depth at PF & C.

Keefe and Gordon are the only PF & C players we have on the roster if Luc and Aboya leave. Things look so bad at PF that Nikola and Chace might have to each put on 10-15 lbs and play PF to fill the void next season.

A) Mixing in an occasional match up zone could've slowed Memphis.

B) On offensive Ben needs to loosen his choke-hold to lets his players play. Over the last 3 final fours the only time a player in Ben’s system played well was when they went outside of his offense and created their own shots. Josh 2 years ago and Westbrook this year are the only players that did well in a final four game….no thank to Ben’s slow motion set offense.

If you don't think UCLA's recruiting classes have been ranked near the top every year since Howland arrived, you are fooling yourself.

Also, none of the Final Four teams were "loaded with lottery pick" talent as some are saying in this blog. That's just pure horsebleep. UNC's best player is a guy who WON'T be a lottery pick, while UCLA has Love and Westbrook and Collison, each of whom is predicted by some to go in this year's NBA Lottery. That adds up to bad coaching.

Next season with Aboya, Keefe, Gordon & Luc at PF & C = only a 20 win season.

None of these guys can make a 10-15 footer with regularity.

Next season with Aboya, Keefe, Gordon & Luc at PF & C = only a 20 win season.

None of these guys can make a 10-15 footer with regularity.

UCLA's classes have NOT been at the top of rankings, why don't you just spend the time to look it up instead of making clueless statements. Team ranking the last 4 years according to scout and rivals:
2007: 12, 11
2006: 21, Not in top 25
2005: 13, 18
2004: 5, 5

Not bad, but also not comparable to the other top programs in the country that are top 10 every year. Howland has gotten the most out of the players he has recruited good players who were not well known. We'll see over the next few years how Howland does with teams that consist entirely of the top recruits.

I have come over from the LA Times Bruin Blog after learning about their merging of the SC and UCLA blogs. This is my 1st post.

Howland is a great coach and only needs to make minor tweaks based upon his personnel.

Let's look at the obvious, he took a floudering program and immediately turned it around.

As far as losing to Memphis - Memphis got a once in a lifetime player to come (Rose) that most coaches will never have in their program. He's just like a Carmelo or K. Durant impact player. Timing is everything. Rose also came along at a time when most of Memphis' line-up was returning.

Yes, he probably could have ran some zone defense to combat the physical differences, but you can't employ a zone when you've never run one.

Keep up the good work Coach Howland - you are awesome!!

AW - Bruin for Life

BH can not go and shoot for Shipp, also NO Mike Roll final caught up with UCLA...I would rather have the kids BH puts on the court than the some of the teams that have "the whose who of the penal system on them"

does BH need to change his coaching style to win a NC?

no. it will come.

should he change something anyways?

YES!!

it seems obvious that if he kept everything the same but added a more dynamic, high octane offense (and we will have the players to run it) then the program would be even more successful.

*sigh* but also, ill be the one to say it, his style is BORING! its fricken BORING! yes, i want NCs, but does it have to be achieved in the most deliberate and maliciously calculatedly boring fashion humanly possible??? his insane pattern of calling timeouts should provoke a clever ncaa rule change of some sort to discourage breaking the action up to a stuttering crawl. his slow paced run the shot clock down to 1 just for the sake of it offense is....BOOOORING! i think i saw clark kellogg yawn at least a couple times. this would be fine in a place like, oh like wisconsin or something... but this is LA/Hollywood man! our short socal ADD attention spans cannot deal with this! change it!

there i said it.

i dont think BH is at the absolute top of the class in the X's & O's of offense, and he may not be the absolute best coach of the upper top few, but the others will not come to ucla cuz theyre probably entrenched where they already are. i will say that i think the way BH carries himself with class and dignity, and is always respectful of other teams and coaches does fit well in wooden's westwood. but please change something so that the offensive talents of all our players would also flourish.

I have complete confidence in Coach Howland.

I do, though, think there has been 3 consistent problems over the last 3 years in the final four:

* Depth: we might have as good of a starting 5 as Memphis but we did not have as good of a bench. Especially in terms of offense.
* Scoring BIG men: against Florida we really had none. Against Memphis we had one and they built a game plan to take him out. We needed another BIG man to take pressure off him.
* Outside shooting: We were not consistent for 3 years -- nevermind the final four. But, and it is a big but, I think Howland went into the year believing he had 4 guys who could shot from the outside: Collison, Shipp, Roll and Dragovic. Collison and Shipp did not have it against Memphis. I attribute that partially to the fact they had to play so many minutes throughout the season -- they might have benefitted from more pine time earlier in the season. Who knows. But it is not Howland's fault that the 2 three point specialists were unable to play their roll because of injury and/or hernias (or whatever in Dragovic's case).

IF he keeps stepping up with better and better players he will get there.

Yes Zone might have helped...but a few shots go in and the game would have been completely different.

He's doing a fine job! He'll figure it out. He's only in his 5th season. Self was in his 5th season, but inherited a team from Williams that had won 2 Big12 Championships and was in the Championship game the year before and the Final4 the year before that. Calipari is in his 8th year at Memphis (and still hasn't won the crown). Donovan didn't win it all at Florida until his 9th & 10 years. Howland will reach the Pinnacle sooner rather than later.

He's just a good shooting, athletic wing player away from winning it all this year. Last year, he needed a great post player. Shows one how difficult it is to win it all.

If he changes anything, it would have to be on the offensive end--we need to score more--however that gets accomplished . . . I suppose by getting more scoring athletes that can play defense as well.

Also, I noticed that his defense didn't work well at all against Memphis or Florida, but has been superb otherwise.

He's doing a fine job! He'll figure it out. He's only in his 5th season. Self was in his 5th season, but inherited a team from Williams that had won 2 Big12 Championships and was in the Championship game the year before and the Final4 the year before that. Calipari is in his 8th year at Memphis (and still hasn't won the crown). Donovan didn't win it all at Florida until his 9th & 10 years. Howland will reach the Pinnacle sooner rather than later.

He's just a good shooting, athletic wing player away from winning it all this year. Last year, he needed a great post player. Shows one how difficult it is to win it all.

If he changes anything, it would have to be on the offensive end--we need to score more--however that gets accomplished . . . I suppose by getting more scoring athletes that can play defense as well.

Also, I noticed that his defense didn't work well at all against Memphis or Florida, but has been superb otherwise.

He's doing a fine job! He'll figure it out. He's only in his 5th season. Self was in his 5th season, but inherited a team from Williams that had won 2 Big12 Championships and was in the Championship game the year before and the Final4 the year before that. Calipari is in his 8th year at Memphis (and still hasn't won the crown). Donovan didn't win it all at Florida until his 9th & 10 years. Howland will reach the Pinnacle sooner rather than later.

He's just a good shooting, athletic wing player away from winning it all this year. Last year, he needed a great post player. Shows one how difficult it is to win it all.

If he changes anything, it would have to be on the offensive end--we need to score more--however that gets accomplished . . . I suppose by getting more scoring athletes that can play defense as well.

Also, I noticed that his defense didn't work well at all against Memphis or Florida, but has been superb otherwise.

Gee etrain, I wasn't aware that Howland recruited such marginal athletes - at least in your eyes, that is.

The point I was making is, Love, Collison, Westbrook (and maybe even Shipp) may all wind up being Lottery Picks.

Maybe if you read my post (instead of spending your time Google-ing so much) for content, then you might understand what I was trying to say.

Sheesh ... go have a beer and chill out, dude.