Answers, Part XXV
Folks, here is the final set of answers for this week. I will posting a poll Monday to see if I should limit the number of questions each week. Not that I don't appreciate them all, but my goodness, more than 200 responses per week is an awful lot.
Check back for recruiting news this weekend, and also for the in-game chat during the USC-UCLA hoops game.
Now, here is the final set of answers this week:
Should we expect Gordon to be the starting center next year? Is he comfortable playing that position?
I think that is a good bet. I asked him about playing center this week, and he said he would do it, but he really wants to play power forward. However, who else is going to play center if it is not him?
Do you think Josh Shipp's big game against Oregon is an aberration or something we can expect more of?
I'm going to reserve judgment on that until I see Shipp do it on a consistent basis.
Do you think Howland's satisfied if at least Shipp or Roll is shooting well from outside during a particular game? Do you seem him taking any steps to get them more time on the floor together?
He will get them on the floor more together when it doesn't impact UCLA's defense. To me, those game will be few and far between. But, if you've noticed, Roll is playing more than Shipp.
It may just be my bleary-eyed 6:30 am observation, but it doesn't seem to me like UCLA gets many (or any) of the big stars from Mater Dei--FB or hoops. What's Neuhesial doing to establish a recruiting pipeline and how is Howland's relationship with MD?
Neuheisel is talking to the school, but I always viewed it as a USC school because of the coach, when it came to football. As far as basketball, I don't know what UCLA can do about it.
Was poor Jay Norvell channeling the worst of his Karl Dorrel memories when Oklahoma couldn't finish those 2 drives inside the 10-yard line?
Was Norvell calling the plays?
What made Dorrel's version of the West Coast offense so complicated and how come he never realized it and tried to simplify?
It was more pass-oriented and not as much based on the run. The quarterbacks were often confused because the terminology was so complex, and it took forever for them to spit a play out. I think Dorrell is a true believer in the system, and his downfall was not realizing the time limits on college kids would adversely affect their ability to learn the system.
Do you see Neuheisal and Chow developing into a good offensive tandem? Also, Chow's not getting any younger--does he still have what it takes to stay on the forefront of college football offensive schemes?
I think Neuheisel and Chow work well together. Chow is allowed to do what he wants, and Neuheisel throws an opinion or two in the mix every now and again. And I think Chow is competitive enough to make sure he stays up to date on the schemes. He's in his 60s, but he has great drive and is very competitive.
11 Comments
Leave a comment
About Inside UCLA
This is Brian Dohn's sixth season covering UCLA after spending 4 1/2 years covering the Dodgers for the Daily News and other Los Angeles Newspaper Group papers. He graduated from Rutgers, where the first college football game was played in 1869. Sure, the Scarlet Knights suffered for a long time, but now RU is doing what Jerseyans always thought was possible. Winning at Rutgers also proves winning is possible everywhere else in the nation, so underachieving coaches better be careful. Now, if only men's hoops can turn it around.
first 100 questions get answered, that seems really fair. 200 plus is too much for him to have to do. Plus his chat sessions become an extension of Q&A as it is, and he gladly answers. Lets show Dohn some love
I could support a Q&A limit if it resulted in better quality questions. You can tell that as the questions mount the answers become shorter and more acerbic.
Set a limit and make it for registered users to assure it's only one per person.
That's my opinion anyway.
About that last question... with Harbaugh going the NFL, how soon will Norm Chow be moving to Palo Alto?
Brian- do you feel that having so many questions to answer takes away at all from your ability to do your job? If it does, then definitely cut it down, but if it doesn't, then I absolutely love all the questions, even the bad ones (so I can see you flash that rapier wit).
The thing is that the more questions and answers, the more people look at the blog. If Brian cuts the number of questions, it'll cut some of the traffic produced from people looking for the 50 sets of answers. So, it's up to Brian if it's worth it to him to answer more questions or not.
That's an interesting point, Anon. I wonder if the UCLA blog is the most popular Daily News blog because the Q&A is spread out across multiple pages (25 different pages in this week's edition, for example) and it's therefore getting 25 times more hits recorded than if all of the answers were displayed on a single page. It seems that would unfairly skew the stats.
Q&A suggestion: no duplicate questions...period. If Brian has already answered the question for that week, then he reserves the right not to acknowledge it, no matter how it is re-phrased...
Do you people actually think he gets paid per hit?
Yeah, I heard Brian gets 1 cent per hit...NOT. No one said Brian is getting paid per hit, but the Daily News does make money from advertising on this blog which is related to the amount of traffic. If Brian cuts the questions down, the traffic will go down somewhat so he needs to decide if it's worth his time to have more traffic or not. To Mario, it doesn't unfairly skew the stats to put the answers over 25 pages because the whole point is to generate traffic which generates revenue from advertising and putting the answers over 25 pages creates real traffic and is fair to count stat-wise.
Part of the above comment was directed to CrouchingBruin and not Mario.