Neuheisel ON: Part 2
On the young players still needing work:
"Sometimes we move along scheme-wise and try to take what we see are opportunities, but are we ready to execute that stuff? Sometimes when you've had more experience, you can point to a time earlier in a guy's career. Now, we don't have that luxury. At the end of the day, it's always about execution."
On Sheldon Price and Aaron Hester:
"Sheldon did some really good things in the game. I know he wishes he'd gotten the guy down, because he had certain position to get him down, he's getting better. It's nice to have competition. Aaron Hester will probably be ready to start participating a week from now, and I know Courtney Viney is chomping at the bit to get back there."
On the locker room at halftime:
"It wasn't a ghost town. There was some frustration in it because we thought that we played well. But as a young team, we have to understand we have to play 60 minutes. We can't come in at halftime and be frustrated. When everybody wants something so badly and it doesn't seem to happen, there is a level of frustration."
On the decision to play Richard Brehaut:
"I've been pretty clear that I want to keep looking to get Richard in the game. Kevin was not at his best. We weren't moving the ball. Sometimes just a change of pace is a good thing. It looked to me like a great spot to get Richard the chance. I'm not trying to create this controversy. I know it's a favorite of your profession, but no, Kevin Prince is the guy we chose, and we'll get Kevin Prince the chance to play this week. But I still want to keep Richard on the come."
Play Brehaut - he's the future. Anyone who was there on Saturday could see that he has a great arm. His ball gets there in a hurry - he can put the ball on a line 30-40 yards downfield, can clearly stretch the field and bring back a deep threat. Gone is the time for our QB to 'Manage' the game. Play all the young kids!
Any news on a pass attack sighting? Tip: Not in Westwood,
Who says Prince is not the future? Brehaut played really well, and I do not believe we have seen Prince at his best. They are both going to be good and I am excited for where the program is headed. Leaps and bounds ahead of where we were last season.
Sometimes I think you people would eat your young if you were hungry enough.
What happened to all the Prince love when Craft was playing QB? Didn't we, as Bruin fans, hypothetically peg us at getting a W if we had our "starting QB" for the Stanford game? Give Prince a chance before you start calling the shots out of blind ignorance. He's a redshirt freshman, and I've seen enough from him, to know that we'll get W's if he plays up to his OWN standards. Thanks.
i fear for the health of our QB's, due to the OLine being still a work in progress, our QB's are taking a lot of big hits, poor brehaut got a taste of that. just for that i'd say keep brehaut out for now till next yr before he gets seriously hurt, there are only so many massive hits a young kid like that can take while he's just learning the ropes
Hw did Brehaut play really well? He had 0 pocket awareness and got sacked cuz he just stood there for an hour looking around for someone to throw to.
So why hasn't Viney been playing? Is he still in the Doghouse following suspension?
This is sad because a five (5) win loss and no bowl is the most likely scenario when you review the rest of the games and locations.
All you Bruins fans already saying "Wait 'til next year"?? A few facts:
- Next year's PAC-10 and Non-Conf Schedule is brutal and includes games where we rarely win (Eugene, Berkeley, among others).
- Most of the experience on defense will be gone, especially the heart and soul - Bosworths, ATV, Reggie Carter, likely Price.
Basically it should be "Wait until 2011!" when there is a small possibility that the stars will align to have a good offense and respectable defense, and even that is far from certain.
Honestly ask yourself when the last time UCLA was good on both sides of the ball was? Early part of this decade, defense wasn't bad (Robert Thomas, Ball Bros etc) but O stunk. 2005 was all about Olson/MJD/Marcedes and the O but D wasn't very good (remember the spankings at U of A and $uc?).
Now go back to the late 90's with Cade and the juggernaut O, but the D stunk...almost lost mutiple games during the 20 Game streak (remember the goal line fumble vs Stanford) and gave up a ridiculous amount of yards on the ground to James at Miami and Ron Dayne in the RB, among others who had field days.
You might have to go back over 20 years to 1988 to find a solid team on O and D. Seriously.
It's like the coaches can only focus on one side of the football at a time, really sad.
I'm a UCLA fan, but a realistic one, and the next 1.5 seasons aren't a "buy".
Our beloved Bruin football program is in jeopardy for some time to come. We must admit this and just recruit, recruit, recruit players who can really play the game.
Umm, I hate to be captain obvious here, but how many teams in the nation can consistently put a good offense and defense on the field year after year? Maybe a handful.
How many teams go through the same cycles hoping and praying that things align and they are able to have a year or two of experience on both sides of the ball? EVERYONE ELSE.
This is what makes college athletics unique. If you can't understand that, or can't handle the emotional tax of knowing that rebuilding literally takes years, please schedule your weekend events for Saturdays and watch your football on Sundays.