The Eye Test: Systemic Failures Doom UCLA Against Arizona

Turns out talent accumulation is still really important!

UCLA played a dejecting game on Saturday. (Photo credit: Scott Chandler/uclabruins.com)

---

Oh, this will be fun.

Truth be told, I’ve had the kid gloves on a bit when it comes to this team. For one, the vibes were good (that’s why I added the Vibe Check in the first place!) and when the vibes are good, you don’t really want to be the one to rock the boat. On another level, while I talked about more macro issues in various articles, I’ve avoided them in this series because the focus should be on the individual game and not really on what it means for the rest of the season or future seasons.

And then UCLA lost to Arizona, and now the gloves are coming off.

There will be talk of individual failures, sure, but UCLA’s loss in this game was one that occurred on the macro level, with systemic failures in talent acquisition and coaching finally merging to deliver UCLA one of the more consequential losses in the past 20 years. UCLA lost this game because it was simply not built to handle any sort of speed on either offense or defense; we saw this against Oregon, but it was easier to rationalize because the Ducks have been the best at talent acquisition in the Pac-12 for a while now. Arizona has not been at that same level, and this was a program that won a grand total of one game between 2020 and 2021. That said, Jedd Fisch and his staff have been smart about bringing in talent, doing a good job with high school recruitment and bringing in solid transfer talent, with the goal being to raise the overall speed and athleticism of the program. Arizona is still not good - their defense still grades as one of the worse ones in the country - but there is speed now, and the offense is sneakily one of the better ones in the conference. In hindsight, the warning lights should have been going berserk, but that’s what happens when you’re riding the high of a winning season.

This game is going to draw comparisons to 2005, but for me, the circumstances are much different. That 2005 team was a case of UCLA vastly overperforming relative to their talent level, and finally having their luck against an inferior opponent run out. This team has shown it can be elite on offense and can attempt passable defense, but it had some fatal flaws that most of the teams on the schedule could not take advantage of. Utah is not known for its speed, and Washington has some talent but is still building back up. Arizona had the right kind of talent to give this team fits, and the more concerning part is the UCLA coaching staff either did not recognize that fact or did recognize it and decided they could still handle it. It makes this loss more frustrating than most in recent memory.

I’m going to try and avoid long-term macro looks at why this happened down below, but it should be fairly obvious where the problems lie.

Offense

Quarterback: C-

If there’s one guy I’m going to give a little of a pass to, it’s Dorian Thompson-Robinson.

Yes, he was not good in this game, and you can contribute a healthy amount of the offensive problems to his play, but Thompson-Robinson was equally hurt by a gameplan that made little sense considering what the relative strengths and weaknesses of Arizona’s defense were. That said, he really struggled, missing on a variety of throws and holding on to the ball way too long considering the struggles of the offensive line. The usual bravado was gone, instead replaced by the tentative DTR of 2018-2019, the one that was always concerned about not making a mistake to the point that he would inevitably make one.

But like I said, I also feel like giving him a bit of a pass here, because Thompson-Robinson has been so good for the Bruins this year, but also because this game really highlighted how important it has been for him to shine in that way. UCLA’s abysmal defense has created a situation where DTR has to be excellent in every game for the Bruins to win (with a few exceptions). This was a game where he really needed the rest of the team to step up and carry him the way he had been carrying them for weeks, and they were simply unable to.

Offensive Line: D

The only other real position of note here on offense was the line, which is continuing a bad stretch against what should have been inferior opponents. Tackle play has been the biggest cause of concern, as opposing defensive ends have been able to get pressure on almost every passing attempt at this point. Garrett DiGiorgio is having an extremely rough go of it, which is to be expected in his first full season as a starter, but having Raiqwon O’Neal be just as bad on the opposite side of the line is starting to make things untenable. The interior has been fine by comparison, but even they are starting to get compromised by the poor tackle play, which is starting to allow more pressure up the middle.

This was always the major concern about the offense coming into 2022. The Bruins were set at every skill position, but the quality of the offensive line was a huge question mark. They had been serviceable to good for most of the season, but are starting to fade in a major way down the stretch. The group will need a major turnaround this week, as Southern Cal boasts a front seven with much more talent than any team they’ve faced since Oregon.

Overall: C-

There was an interesting dichotomy among Bruin fans in the aftermath of this game. Some blamed the offense for not scoring more points against an inferior defense, while others blamed the defense for being a trash fire. Both sides are valid, though I do lean a bit more toward blaming the offense in the micro and the defense in the macro.

In the micro, the offense was fine (465 yards) but routinely came up short when it mattered. A team that averaged 6.1 YPP should have scored more than 28 points, and a unit that normally executes at a solid clip just failed too many times. But also: they scored 28 points. That should have realistically been enough to win. Just not in this game.

Defense

Overall: F

I mean, what do you want me to say here?

The Bruins lack speed. They also lack talent, but specifically, they lack speed at all levels. This is most readily apparent in the linebackers, who struggle to cover anyone and get thrown off if an offensive player even considers changing direction. The defensive line is not much better in this regard - they can get upfield on the pass rush, but if the quarterback is mobile, then they’re completely unable to contain him. The sacks UCLA got in this game were less due to the performance of the defense and more due to Jayden de Laura being the most chaotic quarterback in the conference.

Maybe the most surprising aspect is that the secondary was ok? Not good, but barely adequate. Part of that has to do with the scheme, where they were trying to keep everything in front of them, but this was the only group that could consistently tackle.

Here’s where I run into issues in grading this game. The failure of the defense is a double-edge sword, with both the players and the coaching equally to blame. I think the scheme was miserable, but at some point someone needed to step up and make a play, and no one was able to do so all game.

Special Teams

Overall: C-

Speaking of systemic issues leading to faults here, Nicholas Barr-Mira is fine, but at this point it feels obvious that he is not the high-level kicker that UCLA has been accustomed to in the past. In this game, he missed a 45-yard field goal due to a bad angle on the kick, and those three points would have changed a lot of things down the stretch. He’s very much a coin-flip kicker at this point in his career, which you should expect from a walk-on, but speaks to the poor ability of Chip Kelly to properly build a roster that can compete at the highest level. Oh yeah, and he handles punts because, again, Chip Kelly is bad at roster construction.

Coaching

Offensive Gameplan: F

This should have been an easy game to call on offense. Even if you are under the impression that UCLA was holding some things back with Southern Cal coming up, there are still very basic things that UCLA could have and should have done that would have made things easier.

For example: RUN THE BALL. UCLA had a near 50-50 run-pass split in this game (actual numbers: 37-39 but including sacks as passing plays would be 34-42) but considering the Bruins were averaging 5.9 yards per carry and that the offensive line was struggling when it comes to pass protection, the Bruins should have relied on their run game way more. UCLA had eight explosive runs in this game, which means almost one out of every four rushing attempts was going for 10+ yards. This should not have been that difficult of a decision to make.

For multiple games now, UCLA has come out looking to establish the pass, and I’m starting to wonder why. Yes, Dorian Thompson-Robinson has been good, but not good enough to be the focal point of the offense. That should (rightfully) be Zach Charbonnet and the rushing attack. But instead of establishing the run early, the Bruins have repeatedly thrown away early possessions in some vain attempt to pass the ball. The UCLA passing attack is at its best utilizing play action, and even that is rarely seen in those opening drives. It’s just baffling stuff from a guy who I have spent most of this year calling an offensive genius.

Defensive Gameplan: F

Look, any time you can stick your unathletic linebackers on a hyper-athletic slot receiver you have to do it. That’s just the rules.

It’s hard to know how much of the defensive performance has to do with Bill McGovern being out and playcalling duties allegedly being handed over to defensive analyst Clancy Pendergast. I’m not saying McGovern’s defense was great, but he did a decent job of putting players in a spot that they could find the most amount of success. Pendergast, through three games….really has not. It just feels like the aggression that characterized the earlier games has gone, replaced by a more passive defense that leaves players helpless as they try to defend in space.

UCLA is in an interesting spot here with its coordinator position. Rumors are that McGovern will not be available for the rest of the season, which means Pendergast will likely call plays the rest of the way. If that’s the case, as cruel as it sounds, the Bruins need to officially make Pendergast the defensive coordinator so he can interact with the players and get them to better understand what he wants. Right now by rule he cannot do that, so he has to watch practices without participating.

Or, you know, they could instead not trust the guy who spent the last few years of his career watching his defenses get cooked and instead trust one of the other former defensive coordinators they have on staff. I’d personally go with Ken Norton here, as his NFL experience likely lines up closest to what McGovern was doing before, and because he is probably the most aware of what the shortcomings of the defense are (and also because I don’t trust Brian Norwood at this point).

Overall: F

If you’re looking for one moment that illustrated the failures by the coaching staff in this game, look to the fourth quarter. UCLA had a second and eight around midfield, and as they were setting up the play, you could tell the Bruins looked discombobulated. Still, there were 20 seconds on the playclock remaining, so plenty of time to figure things out, and in the grand scheme of things even taking a delay of game penalty in that situation was not the end of the world. Instead, Chip Kelly called timeout, depriving himself one for late in the game. Worse still, the Bruins came out of the timeout and still looked lost, with the ultimate play ending up as a hurried incomplete.

Why do I highlight this sequence? Because it was emblematic of a game that never felt as if the coaching staff was taking things seriously, instead going through the motions and experimenting when common sense would have won them the day. I have lauded the staff this year for showing a bit of understanding what their flaws are and scheming around them, but I am starting to think that was more blind luck and a schedule that was exceptionally kind to the Bruins. UCLA does not have the talent to sleepwalk through games, especially on the defensive end, and coaching in a conservative manner is exactly how you lose games you should have won. Even if UCLA wasn’t getting outtalented by Arizona of all places, this still would have been a close game because one coaching staff took things seriously and the other didn’t.

Vibes

Vibe check: The football has been pulled

A bit of honesty: I rarely read the game threads here. Not that I don’t find the use for them, but I’m usually at the game or covering it and don’t have time to devote to multiple things. But I persued the thread when I got back after this game and saw reader E2148 had given me a shout-out by stating “Hey Dimitri…if you’re reading this…THIS was the Lucy moment.”

They’re not wrong.

When I wrote that article, I said the following:

Much like Charlie Brown, I know at some point the ball is going to be pulled away. It could be this weekend, it could be in a few weeks against Oregon. It could wait until the end of the season against Southern Cal for maximum hurt, or it could even make it all the way into the postseason. But at some point in the future, that ball will be pulled away, and I’ll be laying in the grass asking why I chose to believe.

The Oregon game was a loss, but not a true Lucy moment like this game was. You could rationalize that Oregon loss. This is much harder to do, because everything said UCLA should have won this game. The chance that this could be a special season, suddenly out of the window.

Ball pulled. Back in the grass.

Final Composite

Offense grade: C- (1.7)

Defense grade: F (0.0)

Special Teams grade: C- (1.7)

Coaching grade: F (0.0)

Vibe check: The football has been pulled

Final grade for Arizona Wildcats: D- (0.73)

A reminder of the previous grades:

Bowling Green Falcons: B- (2.76)

Alabama State Hornets: B+ (3.47)

South Alabama Jaguars: C (1.91)

Colorado Buffaloes: B+ (3.38)

Washington Huskies: A- (3.71)

Utah Utes: A- (3.70)

Oregon Ducks: C- (1.67)

Stanford Cardinal: B+ (3.20)

Arizona State Sun Devils: B+ (3.24)

---

I don’t have anything else to say, really. UCLA, and Chip Kelly in particular, could really use a victory over Southern Cal this week. Not just for all the usual reasons that the Bruins would like to beat the Trojans either.

Because if they don’t win this year, it’s hard to see this ever working out.

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.