Don't know why we should expect anything other than a loss. And surprisingly Rutgers is good now? They are 4-2 this year, and their program seems to be trending up
Rutgers has fit this pattern for a few years now - start fairly well against meh non-conference and/or lower tier competition but once they play anyone good - like Wisconsin last Saturday losing 42-7, let alone the elites - they get drilled and end up 5-7 or 6-6.
Oh I don't disagree with that - I was just responding to a question about whether Rutgers is actually good... if this match-up was at the Rose Bowl then I'd give us a reasonable shot but I have no expectations with the game back east at 9am bodyclock time
i don't think the distance matters all that much. We put up a decent fight against PSU and the distance is virtually the same. So we are starting a few hours early, big deal. Surely both are factors, but not disqualifying by themselves. The reason we have no chance to win is because we are UCLA football.
DD, the earth has moved for you. After Penn St, it was, "I still believe Garbers gives the team the best chance to win," whereas now, "(Foster's) continued trust in a quarterback providing subpar play boggles the mind."
Either way, to quote our TMB sage mgibby, "Martin Jarmond is a clown!"
That's a fair point, I think only defense there is that I still think a healthy Ethan Garbers is the best quarterback option on the roster. It's hard to say he's healthy right now, with an ankle injury that kept him out of one game and by definition limits his mobility. He ends up having to try and compensate for that injury and leads to bad outcomes.
The other part of it is that I don't know what Justyn Martin looks like against an opponent that has tape on him. Part of the success against Penn State just came down to element of surprise, but would he have the same output against another opponent now? It's like how we would often lament the tradition of UCLA making backup quarterbacks look like Heisman contenders; it works for one week but may not be sustainable over a longer period. I think I'd like to see more of Martin at this point, because you can at least sell the future on that.
Thanks for your comments. You're too thoughtful and considerate for my snark.
I similarly thought that the "unknown factor" was partly responsible for Justyn's success.
Given all of the deficiencies in Bruin play and absence of Coaching 101 basics that you have noted, face it: it should not be about who gives them the best chance to win, but it should be about developing Justyn this year for next year.
I don't disagree that the element of the unknown and a ultra-conservative/simplified game plan were likely factors in Martin's favor at Penn State but not only would I like to see more of him in a lost season to see what he may be, I was most impressed watching at Penn State with how the game and moment in front of 110,000 against a Top 5 team wasn't too big for him (even if he threw off his back foot more often than he should have) while it seems moments have been for Garbers at many times this season even when was healthy - which is all the more mystifying considering how experienced he is.
He is subpar, lacks vision, indecisive, ill prepared, clueless, never should have been a candidate for hire to begin with. At the time of the coaching search, that he even made the initial list calls into question the judgement of the person who compiled that list. Was his stint as Ohio State assistant AD that blindingly attractive ?
Bravo ! Bravo ! You did emerge from your foxhole as I predicted. I knew you would. You can't say I was the #1 person calling for your idol's dismissal. There were many others who knew he could not live up to the hype and expectation of him, besides me. Any backup plan for his replacement is the AD's jurisdiction, not the fans'. What you said is synonymous to a movie producer complaining about movie fans trashing his movie by asking these fans if they would know how to produce a better movie, since they dislike the one he produced. What a ludicrous question indeed.
My only quibble with praise for the defense - which has been better than expected given the losses from last year - would be pointing out that we are dead last in the nation in 3rd Down stops - allowing a staggering 57% of opponents to convert against us... For a team with a bad/stagnant & badly coached offense as you so correctly point out, continually failing to get the opponent off the field is also a major problem.
I get that, and I do agree it's a problem (Minnesota converted on 53% of their third downs which is technically below the season average but still not great). I think it's mostly a result in the defensive gameplan which is trying to limit mistakes on their own end and wait for the opponent to make a mistake of their own. It's not a bad strategy given the personnel (though not one I am personally a fan of, as I appreciate a defense that chooses to create havoc more).
Initially I thought it was because we couldn’t generate a pass rush.
With Schweshinger and Oladejo starting to come on it might be time to take more chances and bring more heat on 3rd downs instead of just rushing four or simulated pressures.
I miss Karl Dorrell. He never should've been fired imo. Kelly was awful from the start no matter what you think of his offensive ideas. Especially given that the OSU offense cost them the win against Oregon last weekend.
Now that you are saying Dorrell was fine, your words may be enough to lure whatyoumightcallit to emerge from his foxhole again and sing praises of Kelly too. LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dorrell never won less than 6 games. he never finished more than a game under .500. Never a sub .500 conference record. He was bowl eligible every year. He was even ranked once. This season is historically catastrophic.
This chat has hammered Guerrero for 5+ years and now Jarmond. I’m no apologist for either but it’s time to point the blame on the staffs who “own “ their teams. Maybe both ADs were/are too slow to make changes but with a mountain of debt and no inclination to invest university dollars in the program, what do you expect? I’m wondering what ever happened to the Wasserman/Aikman group that was coming to UCLA’s rescue by investing time and money in the program to restore greatness? Why are we hearing nothing from them??
Dimitri, not to pile on but I see no changes forthcoming. In fact, I’d wager a tall sum Foster will be retained in ‘25. Why? Because Jarmond will claim Foster was thrust in to the role out of necessity and needs time to install his own culture and recruit “his kind of player”. He’ll claim that 1 season is not a fair assessment and the coaching staff needs more time for thorough evaluation. But what he won’t say is that he’s cheap and there is no larger plan for committing to football. Lastly is the reality of the situation- who else would you hire if you could? Who wants to take on this challenge and who’s going to be available? Someone who was fired from another program? Why invest in someone else’s rejection? If there was a real brain trust involved, I’d advise them to scrape up every penny they could find and shake every donor tree to lure Chris Peterson out of the booth and back on the field. One of the best HC in the business, knows the university, knows the recruiting landscape of the West Coast and knows how to win. My second choice would be Mark Helfrich, who got a raw deal by Oregon despite an outstanding record of success.
I agree with most of what you said. The problem is these clowns gave Foster a 5 year deal with a buyout. I don't think Peterson is the right pick. When we inevitably move on from Foster, we need someone who has demonstrated NIL success. Recruiting no longer matters like it once did, so knowledge of the west coast recruiting landscape is not helpful. The kids follow the money (as they should). Any coach who prioritizes high school recruiting over the transfer portal will lose. We need a robust NIL operation so we can pounce during the annual free agency rush. BUT, we also need a coach who can execute once the roster is assembled. That's not Foster. He was a fine RB coach.
Losing tomorrow to Rutgers would be a program low.
Don't know why we should expect anything other than a loss. And surprisingly Rutgers is good now? They are 4-2 this year, and their program seems to be trending up
Rutgers has fit this pattern for a few years now - start fairly well against meh non-conference and/or lower tier competition but once they play anyone good - like Wisconsin last Saturday losing 42-7, let alone the elites - they get drilled and end up 5-7 or 6-6.
UCLA has zero chance to win a game that starts at 9am pst and involves 3200 miles of travel. It will be ugly and it will end badly.
Oh I don't disagree with that - I was just responding to a question about whether Rutgers is actually good... if this match-up was at the Rose Bowl then I'd give us a reasonable shot but I have no expectations with the game back east at 9am bodyclock time
i don't think the distance matters all that much. We put up a decent fight against PSU and the distance is virtually the same. So we are starting a few hours early, big deal. Surely both are factors, but not disqualifying by themselves. The reason we have no chance to win is because we are UCLA football.
Well, looks like UCLA proved us all wrong :)
"The reason we have no chance to win is because we are UCLA football."
Why are you even here?
DD, the earth has moved for you. After Penn St, it was, "I still believe Garbers gives the team the best chance to win," whereas now, "(Foster's) continued trust in a quarterback providing subpar play boggles the mind."
Either way, to quote our TMB sage mgibby, "Martin Jarmond is a clown!"
That's a fair point, I think only defense there is that I still think a healthy Ethan Garbers is the best quarterback option on the roster. It's hard to say he's healthy right now, with an ankle injury that kept him out of one game and by definition limits his mobility. He ends up having to try and compensate for that injury and leads to bad outcomes.
The other part of it is that I don't know what Justyn Martin looks like against an opponent that has tape on him. Part of the success against Penn State just came down to element of surprise, but would he have the same output against another opponent now? It's like how we would often lament the tradition of UCLA making backup quarterbacks look like Heisman contenders; it works for one week but may not be sustainable over a longer period. I think I'd like to see more of Martin at this point, because you can at least sell the future on that.
Thanks for your comments. You're too thoughtful and considerate for my snark.
I similarly thought that the "unknown factor" was partly responsible for Justyn's success.
Given all of the deficiencies in Bruin play and absence of Coaching 101 basics that you have noted, face it: it should not be about who gives them the best chance to win, but it should be about developing Justyn this year for next year.
I don't disagree that the element of the unknown and a ultra-conservative/simplified game plan were likely factors in Martin's favor at Penn State but not only would I like to see more of him in a lost season to see what he may be, I was most impressed watching at Penn State with how the game and moment in front of 110,000 against a Top 5 team wasn't too big for him (even if he threw off his back foot more often than he should have) while it seems moments have been for Garbers at many times this season even when was healthy - which is all the more mystifying considering how experienced he is.
He is subpar, lacks vision, indecisive, ill prepared, clueless, never should have been a candidate for hire to begin with. At the time of the coaching search, that he even made the initial list calls into question the judgement of the person who compiled that list. Was his stint as Ohio State assistant AD that blindingly attractive ?
weren't you like the #1 cheerleader to fire Chip Kelly? Without a backup plan?
Bravo ! Bravo ! You did emerge from your foxhole as I predicted. I knew you would. You can't say I was the #1 person calling for your idol's dismissal. There were many others who knew he could not live up to the hype and expectation of him, besides me. Any backup plan for his replacement is the AD's jurisdiction, not the fans'. What you said is synonymous to a movie producer complaining about movie fans trashing his movie by asking these fans if they would know how to produce a better movie, since they dislike the one he produced. What a ludicrous question indeed.
There's our favorite keyboard warrior!
Nooooooo .... I tell it like it is. Keyboard warrior ? What does that mean ????? Are you still stuck in elementary school mode ?
My only quibble with praise for the defense - which has been better than expected given the losses from last year - would be pointing out that we are dead last in the nation in 3rd Down stops - allowing a staggering 57% of opponents to convert against us... For a team with a bad/stagnant & badly coached offense as you so correctly point out, continually failing to get the opponent off the field is also a major problem.
I get that, and I do agree it's a problem (Minnesota converted on 53% of their third downs which is technically below the season average but still not great). I think it's mostly a result in the defensive gameplan which is trying to limit mistakes on their own end and wait for the opponent to make a mistake of their own. It's not a bad strategy given the personnel (though not one I am personally a fan of, as I appreciate a defense that chooses to create havoc more).
Initially I thought it was because we couldn’t generate a pass rush.
With Schweshinger and Oladejo starting to come on it might be time to take more chances and bring more heat on 3rd downs instead of just rushing four or simulated pressures.
I miss Karl Dorrell. He never should've been fired imo. Kelly was awful from the start no matter what you think of his offensive ideas. Especially given that the OSU offense cost them the win against Oregon last weekend.
Now that you are saying Dorrell was fine, your words may be enough to lure whatyoumightcallit to emerge from his foxhole again and sing praises of Kelly too. LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is Dorrell 2.0 and without any signature wins
Dorrell never won less than 6 games. he never finished more than a game under .500. Never a sub .500 conference record. He was bowl eligible every year. He was even ranked once. This season is historically catastrophic.
Martin Jarmond looks to be Guerrero 2.0. Excellence is hard to replicate whereas mediocrity is contagious.
This chat has hammered Guerrero for 5+ years and now Jarmond. I’m no apologist for either but it’s time to point the blame on the staffs who “own “ their teams. Maybe both ADs were/are too slow to make changes but with a mountain of debt and no inclination to invest university dollars in the program, what do you expect? I’m wondering what ever happened to the Wasserman/Aikman group that was coming to UCLA’s rescue by investing time and money in the program to restore greatness? Why are we hearing nothing from them??
welcome to BN.
Dimitri, not to pile on but I see no changes forthcoming. In fact, I’d wager a tall sum Foster will be retained in ‘25. Why? Because Jarmond will claim Foster was thrust in to the role out of necessity and needs time to install his own culture and recruit “his kind of player”. He’ll claim that 1 season is not a fair assessment and the coaching staff needs more time for thorough evaluation. But what he won’t say is that he’s cheap and there is no larger plan for committing to football. Lastly is the reality of the situation- who else would you hire if you could? Who wants to take on this challenge and who’s going to be available? Someone who was fired from another program? Why invest in someone else’s rejection? If there was a real brain trust involved, I’d advise them to scrape up every penny they could find and shake every donor tree to lure Chris Peterson out of the booth and back on the field. One of the best HC in the business, knows the university, knows the recruiting landscape of the West Coast and knows how to win. My second choice would be Mark Helfrich, who got a raw deal by Oregon despite an outstanding record of success.
I agree with most of what you said. The problem is these clowns gave Foster a 5 year deal with a buyout. I don't think Peterson is the right pick. When we inevitably move on from Foster, we need someone who has demonstrated NIL success. Recruiting no longer matters like it once did, so knowledge of the west coast recruiting landscape is not helpful. The kids follow the money (as they should). Any coach who prioritizes high school recruiting over the transfer portal will lose. We need a robust NIL operation so we can pounce during the annual free agency rush. BUT, we also need a coach who can execute once the roster is assembled. That's not Foster. He was a fine RB coach.