I'm with you on this one, DD. In a year like this, if we focus only on W's and L's, we're doomed to be disappointed. What players and coaches do, as opposed to many fans, is focus on getting better. Granted, this program has a myriad of areas that need to get better, but there should be a degree of encouragement after today.
While I expect Garbers will be back when he is healthy, Martin to me has an enormously higher ceiling and should be starting going forward. His arm is way better. His vision of the field is better. His decisions seemed better. He needs to work on his footwork as he threw off his back foot too much but given the consistent pressure our QBs face, you understand his lack of confidence in the pocket.
And a lot of the QB/offense play was dependent on the OC. When the play called for a short drop and quick read and throw, it was effective. Conversely, when the play called for a 5 step drop and long developing pass routes, the O Line just can't hold up long enough, and neither Martin nor Garbers will stand a chance in those situations (screens work great in these circumstances, Bieniemy, by the way...). I don't know if EB intentionally simplified things for Martin today but that approach made UCLA's undermanned/undertalented offense able to make some plays today. It wasn't enough on the road v #7 in the country, but it might make things competitive v Rutgers or Minn or Fresno, and that's progress for this year while this roster is hopefully getting restocked with talent and depth.
Being pleased and being satisfied are two very different things, and it's possible to be pleased (in some areas) with what we saw today while still being wholly dissatisfied with the overall state of things. That's how I'm taking things this year - while not forgetting those who put us in this hole in the first place.
You hope players and coaches focus as you describe because that has not been true at UCLA for a long time. Since they're not going to be very competitive this year and Garbers is not part of their future, they should be getting Martin experience and make recruiting offensive lineman their top priority. That's how you focus on getting better, not playing Garbers.
I thought Martin did fine against that defense in that environment. With our OL, any QB is best on the move; the pocket is ok for short throws, but anything more is dicey. There were times when the D looked pretty solid, but third downs, even long, remain a challenge. A better take-away from this game than Oregon.
I'll call this glass half empty. We played our best game but lost by two scores. We're very close to bowl elimination. Good news we probably won't see Ethan again as a Bruin. Martin looked excellent running reminded me a bit like Brett Hundley. Next loss vs. Minnesota at the Rose Bowl.
Thanks,Dmitri. I'm surprised how much gas was still in the D in the Fourth. Overall PSU was more competent and better coached. We know we don't have the horses. Martin's gotta learn he doesn't have th luxury of hiding in the pocket. He proved he could be quick.
If you go with Martin, you're just building for the future and not trying to win. In this day and age, building for the future doesn't work when players move so often.
kind of a moot point at this point in the season. if he transfers, he just gets replaced. if he's not good enough to win the job against whoever we bring in, he'll transfer unless he is ok being a backup. everyone is on a one year contract. sad state of affairs.
Losing guys to the transfer portal used to suck. It was kind of like losing a top prospect. Someone who could help you in a year or two. Now it often means you are already set at his position. If a guy is not good enough to help you now (or is blocked by a starter) he's basically gone.
USC just lost to an unranked Minnesota. At least our losses have come against top 15 teams.
I think our coaches can script a good offense and defense going into the game. We always look competent early on. It’s when the opposing team start making adjustments that the wheels fall off for us. Foster, Bienemy, and Malloe don’t seem to adapt as the game goes on.
Miami faced a larger deficit against Cal than we did against PSU and fought back to take the lead. FSU against Clemson faced a larger 4th quarter deficit than we did and was able to cut the lead to 10 before ultimately losing. Watching ucla play, it felt like they conceded the game before halftime when they refused to try for a FG on the last play and they definitely conceded the game in the fourth quarter by going on a longer drive that took a lot of time off the clock. If the coaches don’t believe the team can win, how can we expect the players to believe and play accordingly?
I am mixed on this one. Did I think that the Bruins should be playing for the win? On one hand I'd always want them playing for the win on principle, so I totally hear you on that, Chenalex. But I also see the value in approaching the big second half deficits as real time scrimmage opportunities and to play their offense, run the ball, control possession, and work on the things that will make us better down the road. I never thought they were coming back against Penn St, but if those second half possessions get them ready for the Minnesotas and Nebraskas and Fresnos and Rutgers to come, then I see the value in it. Is it a quitting attitude? Maybe right now it is, yeah, but it's not like we're ready to complete right now either. This program is a 2-3 year project at a minimum, so last Saturday's 4th quarter was just one small part of a longer journey.
The narrative for UCLA football hasn't changed in the 30 years since I've been a Bruin- that is let's focus on getting better. That hasn't gotten us and will not get us anywhere. It's a doomed approach. That said, the issue for me is the lack of investment in our football program and administratiive leadership. Without a strong NIL program, we are going no where fast. One only needs to look back at an Oregon program that went from average to where it is now. One only needs to look at a Washington team that went from good to excellent in a couple of years...Until UCLA admin recognizes football programs build brands, garner attention, drive revenue, then UCLA football will be nothing more than an outstanding JC-level football program.
So is it time for all of us to relax and finally accept this? The administration has not been and is not fully committed for a program to compete at the highest national level. So why would anyone now make any significant contribution to NIL, which is an absolute must if you are going to compete at that level? I'm reconsidering mine. Admission to the Ivy League would make my Saturdays much less stressful!
I'm with you on this one, DD. In a year like this, if we focus only on W's and L's, we're doomed to be disappointed. What players and coaches do, as opposed to many fans, is focus on getting better. Granted, this program has a myriad of areas that need to get better, but there should be a degree of encouragement after today.
While I expect Garbers will be back when he is healthy, Martin to me has an enormously higher ceiling and should be starting going forward. His arm is way better. His vision of the field is better. His decisions seemed better. He needs to work on his footwork as he threw off his back foot too much but given the consistent pressure our QBs face, you understand his lack of confidence in the pocket.
And a lot of the QB/offense play was dependent on the OC. When the play called for a short drop and quick read and throw, it was effective. Conversely, when the play called for a 5 step drop and long developing pass routes, the O Line just can't hold up long enough, and neither Martin nor Garbers will stand a chance in those situations (screens work great in these circumstances, Bieniemy, by the way...). I don't know if EB intentionally simplified things for Martin today but that approach made UCLA's undermanned/undertalented offense able to make some plays today. It wasn't enough on the road v #7 in the country, but it might make things competitive v Rutgers or Minn or Fresno, and that's progress for this year while this roster is hopefully getting restocked with talent and depth.
Being pleased and being satisfied are two very different things, and it's possible to be pleased (in some areas) with what we saw today while still being wholly dissatisfied with the overall state of things. That's how I'm taking things this year - while not forgetting those who put us in this hole in the first place.
You hope players and coaches focus as you describe because that has not been true at UCLA for a long time. Since they're not going to be very competitive this year and Garbers is not part of their future, they should be getting Martin experience and make recruiting offensive lineman their top priority. That's how you focus on getting better, not playing Garbers.
One thousand percent agree, RJ. Line wins games, and that needs to be priorities 1, 2, and 3.
As usual, you are spot on Greg. Agree that Justyn should start from this point on. That gives him great experience going into next year.
Given that Martin shows a greater upside, stronger arm and better judgement, why should Garbers start?
I worry the staff won't take Garber's job due to an injury, but I'd go with Martin from here on..
With this offensive line, chances are we will need both of them.
I thought Martin did fine against that defense in that environment. With our OL, any QB is best on the move; the pocket is ok for short throws, but anything more is dicey. There were times when the D looked pretty solid, but third downs, even long, remain a challenge. A better take-away from this game than Oregon.
And Logan Loya lives! Now, where the heck is J. Michael?
My call was 28 points, so we barely covered but cover we did.
We lost by 16? Covered by a good amount.
I'll call this glass half empty. We played our best game but lost by two scores. We're very close to bowl elimination. Good news we probably won't see Ethan again as a Bruin. Martin looked excellent running reminded me a bit like Brett Hundley. Next loss vs. Minnesota at the Rose Bowl.
I saw some Vince Young and then one of the Fox broadcasters said also.
And here I thought JMart wasn’t mobile. Would love to sprinkle in some option if that’s the case
Thanks,Dmitri. I'm surprised how much gas was still in the D in the Fourth. Overall PSU was more competent and better coached. We know we don't have the horses. Martin's gotta learn he doesn't have th luxury of hiding in the pocket. He proved he could be quick.
Well, that ends our run of four games against five straight ranked opponents.
Problem is with the way the other teams on our schedule are playing, I don’t think it gets that much easier…
If you go with Martin, you're just building for the future and not trying to win. In this day and age, building for the future doesn't work when players move so often.
If you're worried about losing players, play Martin. He could leave if you don't.
kind of a moot point at this point in the season. if he transfers, he just gets replaced. if he's not good enough to win the job against whoever we bring in, he'll transfer unless he is ok being a backup. everyone is on a one year contract. sad state of affairs.
Losing guys to the transfer portal used to suck. It was kind of like losing a top prospect. Someone who could help you in a year or two. Now it often means you are already set at his position. If a guy is not good enough to help you now (or is blocked by a starter) he's basically gone.
USC just lost to an unranked Minnesota. At least our losses have come against top 15 teams.
I think our coaches can script a good offense and defense going into the game. We always look competent early on. It’s when the opposing team start making adjustments that the wheels fall off for us. Foster, Bienemy, and Malloe don’t seem to adapt as the game goes on.
Talk about not quitting while you’re down.
Miami faced a larger deficit against Cal than we did against PSU and fought back to take the lead. FSU against Clemson faced a larger 4th quarter deficit than we did and was able to cut the lead to 10 before ultimately losing. Watching ucla play, it felt like they conceded the game before halftime when they refused to try for a FG on the last play and they definitely conceded the game in the fourth quarter by going on a longer drive that took a lot of time off the clock. If the coaches don’t believe the team can win, how can we expect the players to believe and play accordingly?
True dat….. looking forward to the basketball season. Hoping the Bruins & Cronin can teach these midwesterners a little something about basketball!!
I am mixed on this one. Did I think that the Bruins should be playing for the win? On one hand I'd always want them playing for the win on principle, so I totally hear you on that, Chenalex. But I also see the value in approaching the big second half deficits as real time scrimmage opportunities and to play their offense, run the ball, control possession, and work on the things that will make us better down the road. I never thought they were coming back against Penn St, but if those second half possessions get them ready for the Minnesotas and Nebraskas and Fresnos and Rutgers to come, then I see the value in it. Is it a quitting attitude? Maybe right now it is, yeah, but it's not like we're ready to complete right now either. This program is a 2-3 year project at a minimum, so last Saturday's 4th quarter was just one small part of a longer journey.
The narrative for UCLA football hasn't changed in the 30 years since I've been a Bruin- that is let's focus on getting better. That hasn't gotten us and will not get us anywhere. It's a doomed approach. That said, the issue for me is the lack of investment in our football program and administratiive leadership. Without a strong NIL program, we are going no where fast. One only needs to look back at an Oregon program that went from average to where it is now. One only needs to look at a Washington team that went from good to excellent in a couple of years...Until UCLA admin recognizes football programs build brands, garner attention, drive revenue, then UCLA football will be nothing more than an outstanding JC-level football program.
So is it time for all of us to relax and finally accept this? The administration has not been and is not fully committed for a program to compete at the highest national level. So why would anyone now make any significant contribution to NIL, which is an absolute must if you are going to compete at that level? I'm reconsidering mine. Admission to the Ivy League would make my Saturdays much less stressful!