The Eye Test: UCLA Finally Puts A Good Game Together to Beat Wounded Rutgers
Not all wins are created equal, but it did feel good to get another one on the board.
The Eye Test can be a bit frustrating at times. I’m a big proponent of process over results for developing teams (see: UCLA basketball last season, my preseason expectations for this year) but the Eye Test is more results-oriented than I’d like. It is even worse because football has a much smaller sample size, meaning we have to try and figure out in real time whether an improvement of play is the result of growth or a momentary blip (and similarly whether a bad outing is the result of a bad process or just a bad day).
This leads into this game against Rutgers, where I am of two minds after seeing the results. The first was that UCLA got a decent amount of improved play from a few positions and the best offensive game plan of the year, which made a huge difference and showed real growth. The second is that Rutgers is ravaged by injuries on defense, which created an advantage for UCLA that may not exist in the future. I think both of those things can be true at the same time, which is why I am unsure of how much you can realistically take from this game long-term. I think UCLA showed some improvement that has eluded them to this point, but a good amount of that can be attributed to Rutgers in general.
But you can only play the teams in front of you, so that won’t factor into the grades. Just don’t extrapolate anything from them for the rest of the season.
Let’s get into it.
Offense
Quarterback: A+
The term “legacy game” usually gets thrown out for a quarterback who puts up major numbers in an important game, so I would not qualify this as the Ethan Garbers Legacy Game (that was the Southern Cal game from last year). What this game was, however, was the clearest example yet of how Ethan Garbers is the best quarterback on the roster currently, and in this game Garbers showed what he can do when given a game plan designed to highlight his ability. Garbers threw for a career-high in yards with 383, ran for a career-best 48 yards (56 before the kneel-downs at the end), and accounted for a career-best five touchdowns (four passing and one rushing). The game plan was simplified for Garbers in this game, which is something that should have happened weeks ago to account for the subpar offensive line play UCLA has received all year, but Garbers took advantage of it with gusto, hitting short and medium repeatedly and finishing 32 for 38 on his passing attempts. There was a deep ball that eluded him a bit in this one, but when you’re getting this level of performance from the quarterback, you can quibble regarding a small part of the game.
Running Backs: C+
As actual running backs, this group is not very good. The group accounted for 53 yards on 19 carries, almost getting outrushed by Garbers in one run alone (and Garbers did outrush this group when you throw out the final kneel-downs). Part of this comes back to the offensive line, which is improved but still really bad in many ways, but this group is not doing a good job of making something out of nothing and grinding out extra yards.
Where they excel is as pass-catching options out of the backfield, as they’re all good to great in the open field. Each running back had a receiving touchdown in this game, and each had to make a man miss in the open field to complete their run. That’s how you end up with a grade slightly above average.
Tight Ends: A-
Moliki Matavao had himself a game, repeatedly finding the open space in the second level to the tune of six catches for 104 yards. Bryce Pierre similarly had his best game since transferring in, with three catches for 20 yards. I wish this group was better at blocking, but this was exactly the kind of output you want to see from this offense, with Matavao filling the Travis Kelce role fairly well.
Offensive Line: D+
Look, they can’t run block, so you’re always going to start with a C as the ceiling, and while the pass blocking was the best it has been, there were still breakdowns, especially late in the game. There was at least a recognition by the coaching staff that this group should not be asked to block longer than two seconds, as there was a bevy of quick passes and moving pockets, but that just speaks to the general lack of faith in this group to do its job properly.
Overall: A-
Even putting aside the failures of the offensive line, the rest of the offense operated at such a high level that it negated the play of that unit for most of the afternoon, thus leading to a high grade. Do I think this is sustainable? Probably not - UCLA isn’t going to face a defense that hurt on the defensive line for the rest of the season, and the poor rushing offense still feels like a canary in the coal mine for this group going forward. But for this game at least, it got the job done.
Defense
Overall: C-
Maybe it was just a matter of time before the wheels came off this defense, but this was not a good outing. Athan Kaliakmanis was able to dink and dunk his way throughout the game, with the secondary in particular having a rough time tackling. The Rutgers rushing attack was also effective throughout, with Kyle Monangai eclipsing the 100-yard mark en route to three touchdowns and a 5.6 YPC on the day. On a day when the UCLA offense looked as good as it did, Rutgers's defense actually played a better game; what saves this grade and the game for UCLA is that the defense did ultimately get enough stops to force some poor decisions from Greg Schiano. Rutgers only got to third down eight times in the game, a pretty low number that speaks to the success they were finding on first and second down, but of those eight they were only able to convert three of them for first downs. It was good enough to get the win here, but given the opponent and how this side of the ball has played this season, it feels like a massive disappointment.
Special Teams
Overall: D
Keegan Jones Stop Running Out the Kickoff Challenge update: You’ll never guess what happened the one time Jones decided to run back the kick.
Outside of the continued adventures of Keegan Jones, however, the special teams were subpar, though I think a lot of this came down to coaching decisions. The field goal unit took two delay of game penalties, one on a point after attempt that did not noticeably affect the kick, but the second one came as the Bruins were lining up for a 50-yard field goal. Marteen Bhagani made the kick from that distance but missed it from 55 yards away following the penalty. This was a major coaching mistake, and an instance where Deshaun Foster should have called timeout but just didn’t. Luck was clearly on his side that day because Greg Schiano was determined to give UCLA the victory, but it was these kinds of decisions that lost the Bruins the game against Minnesota.
Brody Richter only had one punt in this game, but his singular kick was outgained by Ethan Garbers’s punt. This isn’t great considering Garbers’s kick only went 41 yards, so not a particularly good day for Richter.
Coaching
Offensive Gameplan: B+
Again, this is the best gameplan Eric Bieniemy has put together this season, eschewing running the ball in favor of short, quick passes that only required the offensive line to be an obstacle for a few seconds, or utilizing their ineptitude and running screen plays for positive yards. It also led to an improvement in the run game in the first half, as Rutgers had to respect the pass so much that it was putting fewer defenders in the box, allowing for more successful run opportunities as a result.
This grade is lower though because, as you would expect at this point, even Rutgers was able to make adjustments and hold down the UCLA offense in the second half. The Bruins only managed 178 yards in the second half compared to 300 in the first half, and part of that was an increase of run plays. Efficiency was way down, and if you take away Keegan Jones’s 67-yard touchdown run off a screen, the Bruins only gained 3.7 YPP in the half (they actually finished at 5.7 YPP for the half, a testament to how an explosive play can swing the numbers).
As I’ve mentioned before, I don’t know how much of this game you can reasonably expect to take going forward, especially given the opponent, but there were some clear positives in the playcalling that should be celebrated.
Defensive Gameplan: D+
On the flip side, I think the defensive gameplan was much too conservative and basic in this game. I get the idea - Ikaika Malloe believed he had a talent advantage against the Rutgers defense and went into some of the basic plans we saw last year - but at this point, Malloe should be wary of changing things because of one good week. UCLA struggled to pressure Athan Kaliakmanis with any consistency, while the defensive backs mostly played in a shell, giving Kaliakmanis plenty of easy completions to establish a rhythm. This is another case of not knowing how much we can take forward from this game, given how much of an outlier this defensive performance feels compared to other weeks, but it is again something to keep an eye on.
Overall: B-
The best thing Deshaun Foster did in this game was not be Greg Schiano. I promise this is a compliment because Schiano coached this game from a typical NFL conservative mentality, punting the ball on a 4th and short at midfield and trying to play the field position game whenever possible. Foster, meanwhile, seemingly learned after getting bullied following the Minnesota game, as the Bruins went for a 4th and short in their own territory early and got the conversion, ultimately turning that drive into a touchdown. I think he got a little too cute and conservative later in the first half when the Bruins elected to pooch punt on a 4th down instead of either going for the conversion or bringing the actual punter out, but that feels like a lesser quibble.
The more worrying trend was that UCLA continued their trend of playing conservatively when it gets a lead. UCLA’s offense switched its playcalling balance around in the second half, opting for more run plays to chew the clock, while the defense was in more of a shell to prevent the big play and make Rutgers march for every yard. The irony here is that, by going away from what had worked in the first half, UCLA let Rutgers back into the game and needed to field an onside kick attempt to ice things. Had UCLA simply continued playing the way they did in the first half instead of making conservative adjustments, they likely would not have been in that position in the first place. I have repeatedly mentioned that, beyond wins and losses, how UCLA chooses to approach the game will be more important this year, and the second half continued the worrying trend of a coaching staff that lacks a killer instinct or ability to play to win the game.
Trend
Trending: Up
It’s the second win of the year, of course, this is an upward trend. But I thought about adding the question mark to this one because I can’t shake the feeling this was UCLA facing an outmanned opponent and taking advantage (it did not help that I watched Southern Cal do the same thing to Rutgers last Friday). You have to appreciate that UCLA has it together enough to take advantage of the situation, but the question that will be answered is how much of this will be transferrable for the rest of the season.
Final Composite
Offense grade: A- (3.7)
Defense grade: C- (1.7)
Special Teams grade: D (1.0)
Coaching grade: B- (2.7)
Trending: Up
Final grade for Rutgers Scarlet Knights: C+ (2.3)
And as a reminder, here are the scores from other games this year:
Hawai’i Rainbow Warriors: C (1.9)
Indiana Hoosiers: F (0.6)
LSU Tigers: C (1.9)
Oregon Ducks: D+ (1.3)
Penn State Nittany Lions: C+ (2.2)
Minnesota Golden Gophers: C- (1.75)
I feel it is pretty appropriate that UCLA’s best win still only graded out to a C+. The offense might have figured something out, but the defense and special teams backslid in a way that almost cost the team the game. And given the opponent, we can’t be sure how much of this game is even real or just a momentary blip. That’s the beauty and curse of small sample size.
The Bruins are off to Nebraska this week after a bye. Honestly, if you had told me prior to the season that the team would be 2-5 heading into this game, I would have believed you. But getting the win going into the bye is a much better proposition than going into it with a loss, and maybe that confidence can build over two weeks and give the team a fighting chance.
Meanwhile, I’ll just be sitting here staring at the Nebraska sideline and wondering what-if.
Go Bruins!
Thanks again for supporting The Mighty Bruin. Your paid subscriptions make this site possible. Questions, comments, story ideas, angry missives and more can be sent to @TheMightyBruin on Twitter.
The quick pass is going to be critical against Nebraska. This o-line can't hold up for more than about 2 seconds...
How was the overall grade for LSU an F when none of the individual grades were?