[Oasis]

As "except-when-they-play-Stanford" UCLA fans, my son and I groaned through the worst performance I have seen from them all year.  Is this the same team that played us off our feet? 

If they're going to be that awful, I wish they'd do it when they play us.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/fo...562.column

[Oasis]

As "except-when-they-play-Stanford" UCLA fans, my son and I groaned through the worst performance I have seen from them all year.  Is this the same team that played us off our feet? 

If they're going to be that awful, I wish they'd do it when they play us.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/fo...562.column

[OutsiderFan]

Well, Stanford did smack UCLA 35-17 (and would have been more if not for a few penalties), which is only five points less of a beating than they took from Baylor.  And don't forget, that same UCLA team lost 43-17 to freaking Cal.

What was really surprising to me was that UCLA hardly ever threw the swing pass they ran so effectively against Stanford, against Baylor.  Perhaps Baylor not playing a 3-4 and having smaller (faster) defenders made UCLA think the swing passes wouldn't be as effective, and they could run up the middle on them more.

What was revealing to me was how Baylor, a terrible defense all year, racked up 50% of their previous season sack total last night, and shut down Franklin and UCLA's running game, after it plowed Stanford in the Pac-12 CG.  The OL injuries UCLA suffered last night demonstrates how critical OL depth is.  They lost two OL in the game and it was over.  Of course, UCLA's defense was bad too, but Baylor's offense is pretty incredible and very tough to stop. 

[OutsiderFan]

Well, Stanford did smack UCLA 35-17 (and would have been more if not for a few penalties), which is only five points less of a beating than they took from Baylor.  And don't forget, that same UCLA team lost 43-17 to freaking Cal.

What was really surprising to me was that UCLA hardly ever threw the swing pass they ran so effectively against Stanford, against Baylor.  Perhaps Baylor not playing a 3-4 and having smaller (faster) defenders made UCLA think the swing passes wouldn't be as effective, and they could run up the middle on them more.

What was revealing to me was how Baylor, a terrible defense all year, racked up 50% of their previous season sack total last night, and shut down Franklin and UCLA's running game, after it plowed Stanford in the Pac-12 CG.  The OL injuries UCLA suffered last night demonstrates how critical OL depth is.  They lost two OL in the game and it was over.  Of course, UCLA's defense was bad too, but Baylor's offense is pretty incredible and very tough to stop. 

[Redrum]

I regularly check the LA Times during football season to see Under Stanford Control and UCLA from a local perspective.  Watching the Times'  T.J. Simers work over Rick Neuheisel and UCLA last season was the equivalent of crack schadenfreude.  Mmmmmm. What a rush.  But now I've come to a new understanding.  T.J. Simers is to hometown football at UCLA  what  Jon Wilner is to Stanford: a man with a perpetual (pardon me) hard on for the local team.    We should pair them together in the Home Town Hostility Bowl to see who can really bring the self-loathing under pressure.

Check out Simers' account of UCLA's face-plant against Baylor.    Sure, it's not like the Bruins didn't ask for it,  but if you read a bit more carefully,  Simers is making a more global case against UCLA,  UCLA's athletic director Dan Guerrero, Mora and the players.  It's just a continuation of what I read for the past three years about UCLA and Neuheisel.  For UCLA,  Simers' coverage must seem like being relentlessly pursued by Orcs.


http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/football/la-sp-1228-simers-ucla-20121228,0,242562.column

http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/fo...562.column

[Redrum]

I regularly check the LA Times during football season to see Under Stanford Control and UCLA from a local perspective.  Watching the Times'  T.J. Simers work over Rick Neuheisel and UCLA last season was the equivalent of crack schadenfreude.  Mmmmmm. What a rush.  But now I've come to a new understanding.  T.J. Simers is to hometown football at UCLA  what  Jon Wilner is to Stanford: a man with a perpetual (pardon me) hard on for the local team.    We should pair them together in the Home Town Hostility Bowl to see who can really bring the self-loathing under pressure.

Check out Simers' account of UCLA's face-plant against Baylor.    Sure, it's not like the Bruins didn't ask for it,  but if you read a bit more carefully,  Simers is making a more global case against UCLA,  UCLA's athletic director Dan Guerrero, Mora and the players.  It's just a continuation of what I read for the past three years about UCLA and Neuheisel.  For UCLA,  Simers' coverage must seem like being relentlessly pursued by Orcs.


http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/football/la-sp-1228-simers-ucla-20121228,0,242562.column

http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/fo...562.column

[BigAppleBucky]

.  .  .
What was really surprising to me was that UCLA hardly ever threw the swing pass they ran so effectively against Stanford, against Baylor.  Perhaps Baylor not playing a 3-4 and having smaller (faster) defenders made UCLA think the swing passes wouldn't be as effective, and they could run up the middle on them more. . . .

Matt Canada (Wisconsin OC) on why the Wisconsin didn't play the same offense all season that the Badgers did in the Big Ten title game:
“Every game is different,” he said. “Certain teams give you an ability to do this. Why didn’t he run this play more? It worked last game. Because it wouldn’t work this game. Because people have different schemes, different players, different strengths.”

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/184957071.html

Injuries also had an effect. The team was at its healthiest (except for missing starting QB,  Stave) at the end of the season.

[BigAppleBucky]

.  .  .
What was really surprising to me was that UCLA hardly ever threw the swing pass they ran so effectively against Stanford, against Baylor.  Perhaps Baylor not playing a 3-4 and having smaller (faster) defenders made UCLA think the swing passes wouldn't be as effective, and they could run up the middle on them more. . . .

Matt Canada (Wisconsin OC) on why the Wisconsin didn't play the same offense all season that the Badgers did in the Big Ten title game:
“Every game is different,” he said. “Certain teams give you an ability to do this. Why didn’t he run this play more? It worked last game. Because it wouldn’t work this game. Because people have different schemes, different players, different strengths.”

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/184957071.html

Injuries also had an effect. The team was at its healthiest (except for missing starting QB,  Stave) at the end of the season.