Answers, Part III

Here is the third set:

From what you know did issues with finances factor into Neuheisel promoting Bullough?
Nope. I was told from the get-go that it would probably by Bullough because Neuheisel wanted to keep continuity on his staff. Unless you are suggesting Neuheisel could had someone, but the school wouldn’t pay $1 million per season, then money was not an issue.

Carrol mentioned recently to ESPN that he was surprised UCLA wasn’t recruiting him harder. Are we really not laying out the red carpet for this guy? If not, why the heck not?
UCLA is recruiting him hard. From what I understand, he said he wanted Neuheisel to come visit him at home again, but that would be a violation since Neuheisel already used his in-home visit.

Last week I posted a question asking if you would recues yourself from reporting on a football or basketball game between UCLA and Rutgers. You didn’t post or respond to the question. The question was not intended to impugn your professionalism. Just curious why you didn’t respond.
There were so many questions last week I elected to stay solely with UCLA questions. I didn’t take offense. But I do know that if UCLA and Rutgers played, I am professional enough to remove the emotion and cover the game. I have worries about that.

Are we recruiting Carroll as a WR or a CB? Will that affect whether or not we get him? In other words does he really want to play one over the other?
UCLA is recruiting him as a receiver, which is where he wants to play.

Do you think the referee-ing in the UW game was emblematic as to the very low quality of refs in the Pac 10? If so why doesn’t anyone complain or do something about it?
Who says someone doesn’t complain. Coaches fill out evaluations all the time after games, and those evaluations are sent to the Pac-10. I’ve always felt the Pac-10 refs needed to improve, and I still feel that way. But I don’t think the foul-shooting disparity should be blamed on the refs. I think UCLA was beaten soundly on the perimeter, and that is why the free throws were so unbalanced.

Do you feel that the football culture is changing? Or will UCLA forever be a “Basketball” school?
Yes, the culture is changing, but I think it will take an awful lot for UCLA to change it totally. And I don’t think UCLA will be known as anything but a basketball school for a long, long time.

In YOUR OPINION since you were at the game, why did we lose to UDub? Coach Howland rotated a lot of guys in and out so they apparently weren’t gassed. Was it effort or ??? Did you wear your chucks during losses to ASU and UW?
It wasn’t effort. It wasn’t the rotation. It wasn’t fatigue. UCLA lost because Washington had better players on the court. Washington has strength inside, length with Pondexter and quickness at the guard position. For some reason, Washington is a much better home team than on the road. The Huskies have a lot of talent.
And, I wore crocs for both losses.

It seems Malcolm Lee is a solid defender and one of the only players that can actually get from the arc to the lane.So why is he getting a few min’s a game?
I talked to coach Ben Howland about that last week, and the issue is where would Lee’s minutes come from? He’s not about to take them from Darren Collison, so that limits how much Lee will play.

Share this post:Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • Anonymous

    “UCLA was beaten soundly on the perimeter, and that is why the free throws were so unbalanced.”

    I think you meant to say UCLA was beaten soundly inside…

  • mightybruin

    Dohn was correct. The defense was broken down by the guards which cause for late rotations and led to fouls.

  • Brian Dohn

    No, UCLA was beaten on the perimeter, which allowed Washington’s guards to get inside the defense and get fouled.