Not sure how many Bruins Nation readers are NBA fans, but ...

Achilles is definitely an NBA fan.

I don't have a favorite team really, but I do watch games all the time. I root for teams that have players I like, but mostly I just like to watch the best players in the world play basketball.

I'm in SoCal, so I see the Lakers, mostly, and the Clippers sometimes. But I look at TNT (love Charles Barkley and Reggie Miller, too), ESPN and even NBA Channel sometimes.

It's even better now that there are so many UCLA guys in the league, many from the Ben Howland era.

With that in mind, I'm wondering what NBA teams you plan to follow this year, that you wouldn't ordinarily follow. (See, I'm trying to figure a way around all the Lakers fans just putting Lakers, even though they are following them because they are Lakers fans, not Jordan Farmar/Trevor Ariza fans.)

Just answer the way you want -- the poll isn't scientific or anything -- we're just curious.

Feel free to add any thoughts in the comments below.

(BTW -- Do you think that Luc and Gad ever sit around talking about the food at Ackerman or anything like that? It's weird -- their UCLA era were so different and so far apart, it's like they played for different programs. Same with Russell and Earl, I guess.)

I got to get a few things off my chest about Cal.

Let me start with:

Why do Cal fans hate UCLA so much?

There was a thread on their blog and one on ours a few months or a year ago and basically they went off on why they hate UCLA so much and we sort of responded. (If someone has the link, post, it, because I can't find it.)

I don't get it.

Confession: I sort of like Cal, as much as you can like a school that isn't your school. I have Cal friends, I'll root for Cal when UCLA isn't playing.

I've always seen Cal as the admittedly better academic school, while UCLA was the better athletic school. I'm a Southern California person all the way, so I've always preferred UCLA's campus and locaton, but I like going up to Berkeley and the Bay Area and always thought that Cal's campus was cool and the neighborhoods nearby were perfectly fun to visit.

Even more than that, I always felt their was a kinship between UCLA and Cal -- a kinship that ran a little deeper than the fact that they are both part of the same University of California.

Let's face it, a lot of people who went to Cal also were admitted to Berkeley and a lot of people who went to UCLA also were admitted to Cal. I'll concede that the numbers favor Cal. (Personal note: I applied only to UCLA and probably couldn't have gotten into Cal, but then again, I don't like hirsute women, so I wasn't going to Cal no matter what) But underlying that, I always thought there was a similarity between a set of really bright and interesting students who preferred the public school setting offered by both universities. If you want to leave the state, I've always sort of thought Michigan and Texas were cool, too, in the same "top public university" sort of way.

To me, whatever sports rivalry existed between Cal and UCLA was sort of a fun rivalry. Here's an analogy. UCLA-USC is more like a soccer rivalry, where the fans just don't like each other much and really don't want to associate with each other. But UCLA-Cal was more like a rugby rivarly, where you try to beat each other on the field, but after the game, you go to the pub and get drunk together.

And, let;'s be honest, I'm mostly being generous when I say there is a sports rivalry between UCLA and Cal. C'mon Cal fans, you don't have to have a higher SAT score to do that math on this one.

So, why do Cal fans hate UCLA so much?

If I recall correctly ...

1 - They don't like the fact that we "stole" their fight song.

Well, I don't like the fact that we stole their fight song either, because our fight song is weak. So, is Cal's. I've always thought it was a weak ass fight song. If fight songs are your thing, you really should have gone to a Big Ten school. (For the record, both of UCLA's fight songs sort of suck.)

2 - We stole the name, because Bruins is just another word for Bears.

Really? This bothers you?

I mean, there are bears in California. So, the first University of California nicknamed itself the Bears. So, the next school in the system ended up with Bruins. Is this a big deal? Besides, there are people upset about this who were born 30 years after the schools were named -- or 50 years after. I mean, this is silly. The Boston Bruins aren't mad at us and the Chicago Bears aren't mad at you ... how many school nicknames are there? Do you know how many teams are called Cougars? I don't know either, but there's a bunch of 'em.

This is no reason to get mad.

Then, there is the football rivalry thing.

Let me go on record as saying that Jeff Tedford is a top coach and Cal's football program is as good as its ever been in my memory. At this exact moment in time, Cal has the better record and has this decade basically had the better team.

But, it really takes a short memory to think that historically Cal has had a better football program than UCLA. It hasn't. Saying that Cal has traditionally had the better football team than UCLA is as dumb and misinformed as someone trying to prove that UCLA has had better academics over the years. It hasn't.

It's not clear why otherwise really smart Cal folks are so myopic when it comes to football.

Why can't UCLA and Cal compete and have a fun, friendly rivalry and save our mutual hate for USC.

I'll tell you what Cal fans, I don't really care about Stanford, but I'll hate them just for you.

~~~

This week's video:

Someone I don't want to mention wanted me to go with a Counting Crows song.

Because their lead singer is a Cal grad or something.

But, earth to you know who: Counting Crows are lame. They're lamer than our fight song. Sorry. I don't care if the guy did date Courteney Cox and Jennifer Aniston. I mean, Courteney Cox married an Arquette and Jennifer Aniston dates John Mayer -- clearly they're into some weak-ass dudes.

Then, I thought about going with a video of the band playing the fight song, just to piss off the Cal folks, but ... naaah ...

Instead I'll just go with this:

Creedence Clearwater Revival- Midnight Special (via luvzCCR)

~~~

This week's guesses:

1 - True or false: UCLA will score a touchdown on offense of 20 yards or more

2 - Name a Bruin with an interception

3 - Which team will rush for more yards, Cal or UCLA?

Put your guesses in the subject line. Guessing ends before the kickoff.

I'll have the Cal guessing game up in a couple of hours

In the meantime, here are the results for Oregon and Stanford.

In case anyone cares, the bonus question for Stanford regarding the video went like this:

White Punks on Dope is one of those songs the Stanford band is known for playing. The Tubes are a Bay Area band ... oh, forget it. The answer was: It was a song played by the Stanford band. No one got it, but one person was close so if I ever get to the totals, I'll give that person an extra point.

Here is Stanford:

Here is Oregon:

There is a story up on the Rivals site that asks says:

Is Lute Retiring? Lute Olson Stepping Down

Word is that Dick Vitale talked about the story on ESPN this morning.

In addition, a usually impeccable source within the UCLA basketball community has confirmed to Bruins Nation that, in fact, Hall of Fame Arizona Head Basketball Coach Lute Olson is stepping down, most likely tomorrow.

Assistant coach Mike Dunlap, formerly of Metro State in Denver, Colorado will reportedly be the "interim" head coach and the school will conduct a proper, national search for Olson's replacement (though it is perfectly possible they already have their man in Dunlap.)

~~~

While I've rooted hard against Lute Olson's teams over the years, I've great respect for what he accomplished. Arizona was not a basketball powerhouse when he went there, but he turned them into one. At their peak, Arizona teams played exciting, uptempo basketball. Olson also deserves respect as a top recruiter with an eye for talent.

More than anything else, it is sort of sad to see him go out the way he is now. Try and find his most recent press appearances on an Arizona site or YouTube. He's become practically incoherent and appears to be in poor health.

I'll personally prefer to remember him as a fiery, rival coach, prowling the sidelines for some really great UCLA-Arizona match-ups.

~~~

One recruiting note:

Arizona has a commitment from top prep point guard Abdul Gaddy. Gaddy chose Arizona over UCLA. You can expect UCLA coaches to get in touch with Gaddy to gauge how the Olson retirement will impact him.

Gaddy, in case you didn' t know, is young for his class and will be a two year college player at minimum, as he won't be old enough to declare for the draft after his freshman season.

UPDATE (A): ESPN now has this story.

There are also reports on the Scout network that Abdul Gaddy is telling people that the Olson retirement does affect his recruitment.

UPDATE II (A):

Fox has the story now, thought keep in mind, Arizona sources in some of these links are still denying it.

UPDATE III (A): The Arizona Daily Wildcat has a story up now that includes a denial of the Olson retirement story. It says:

ESPN.com reported that sources told Dick Vitale of the would-be retirement, but UA sports information director Tom Duddleston said the news is not true.

"Dick Vitale is wrong right now," Duddleston said in a phone interview with the Daily Wildcat.

When asked if there is any indication that any of the reports may be true, Duddleston said no.

If more news emerges, we'll keep updating the story.

UPDATE IV (N): The Arizona Daily Star has a story up "confirming" that  Lute is gone:

Lute Olson will step down as head basketball coach of the Arizona Wildcats, according to the fathers of two top UA recruits who said they were informed by the assistant coaches this morning.

Abdul Gaddy, Sr., father of Top 10 point guard Abdul Gaddy, said Olson’s impending departure was confirmed by assistants Reggie Geary and Mike Dunlap. Meanwhile, Solomon Crawford, father of forward Solomon Hill, said Geary told him the news this morning.

"He just told me it was official — that Lute was out, that (associate head coach Mike) Dunlap was interim," Crawford said.

It also includes the following note re. Gaddy and UCLA (confirming what A wrote above):

“We’re wondering what’s next,” Gaddy Sr. said. “I know my son is concerned now. I told him that after school, we would come down and decide as a family what to do.”

Gaddy Sr. said his son is “definitely not happy with what’s going on at the university” and would probably re-open his recruitment. He said he has already heard from several schools interested in re-recruiting his son, including Washington, Memphis and UCLA.

Keep in mind before committing to Zona, UCLA was one of his two finalists. Bruin coaches had been recruiting him hard (following his intial decommit from Zona earlier in the year IIRC). So they have an advantage in terms of build in relationships. This also will make recruiting options interesting for Inland Empire guard Michael Snaer, who will have to keep an eye on Gaddy, in terms of the last available scholie (as of right now) from UCLA in this year's class. If Snaer or Gaddy wants to become Bruins and join with one of the elite programs in the country, they will not have a lot of time (IMHO) to snatch up that last scholarship. GO BRUINS

UPDATE V (N): It's now official. From Arizona's official site:

Lute Olson announced today that he will retire as head coach of The University of Arizona men's basketball team, effective immediately.

UA Athletics Director Jim Livengood announced that a national search will begin soon to find a permanent replacement.

Rest of the press release is here. Good luck to Lute.

GO BRUINS.

There are a few reasons:

1 - Kevin Craft is relatively weak at throwing the deep pass. He just doesn't have a big arm. Consequently, defenses play relatively tight against the Bruins' offense and don't worry too much about Craft going over the top.

This makes it more difficult for Craft to operate in the short game most of the time.

But, the two minute offense can coincide with the defense dropping back a bit. Stanford (and Tennessee, if I recall correctly) were concerned that an end of game deep ball could beat them, so they played deep. This opened up the shorter passes for Craft.

2 - Craft throws pretty well on the move, both on designed roll outs and when he improvises. In the two minute offense, when defenses rush fewer guys, he either has time or he has the room to move around:

So, the combination of facing defenses dropping back and also rushing fewer guys makes the two minute offense suited to Craft.

The more I watch him, I think Craft is a tough, heady kid with some physical limitations. If he had Cowan or Olson's arm, he's really be a good quarterback. As it is, he's getting better.

As a fan, I'm starting to really warm up to him.

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Work has been a six-ten, 280 bummer this week, I feel like I've been sacked seven times and thrown three picks.

But I wanted to get this up in advance of tomorrow's game, so here goes.

Hmmm ...

I already wrote the Stanford is a must win thing, so I'm covered on game thoughts.

I think it's a must win.

What about a video?

What video says Stanford?

I was thinking about some Grateful Dead / Bay Area tie-n, but that would be so obvious.

I hate obvious.

Okay, this is about as not-obvious as I can get on short notice:

The Tubes doing White Punks On Dope (via idflux)

I'll give a bonus point to the first guesser who gets the video tie in.

Here are the questions, and I'm doing this fast so don't laugh if the questions are lame:

1 - Name a Bruin with at least four receptions.

2 - Name a Bruin with a rushing touchdown.

3 - True or false, Stanford will run for less than 160 yards.

Thanks for being cool on the brevity this week. I'll total last week and this week next week.

Put your answers in the subject head and this ends 11:30 tomorrow.

Late ...

My feeling is that this week's game against Stanford is a "must win" for the Bruins.

Here is why:

1 - Stanford does not have "better athletes" than UCLA does.

Don't misunderstand, Stanford has some good players. If the two teams were combined, they definitely have some of the better players who would start for a combined team. But watching them play, you don't ask yourself "Man, how are we going to match up with their speed and their athleticism?"

2 - It's a home game.

Winning on the road is something that occurs after you learn how to win games. It's not just playing in front of a hostile crowd -- playing on the road forces a change of routine, a change of scenery that subliminally creates an air of discomfort. Teams that expect to win turn that discomfort into a challenge and winning programs thrive on big road wins.

UCLA isn't there yet. UCLA is far from ready to relish the road.

On the other hand, we must protect the home field. This week it is Stanford that must cope with the unfamiliar and UCLA's young and inexperienced team needs to turn their home comfort into confidence.

3 - It's one of the more winnable game left on the schedule/

Okay, the game at Washington might be the easiest if it were played on a neutral field, but it isn't, it's going to be played in Husky Stadium. And that Washington team only lost to BYU (the same 0-59 BYU) by one and that was partly due to Jake Locker's dumb celebration penalty at the end of the game. In other words, that game won't be easy for a team that gets road sick.

The other two home games are Oregon State and USC. One of those teams already upset the current number-four team in the nation and the other is the current number-four team in the nation.

Cal and Arizona State are the other, remaining road games.

In my opinion, Stanford-at-home is the most winnable game left on the schedule.

4 - This team has a little bit of momentum

No, I'm not crazy.

Yes, I know the team is coming off a loss to Oregon.

But the offense actually did some nice things in that game and maybe there were some questionable decisions that contributed to the loss. (Not saying there were any glaring coaching errors, not at all, just some decisions combined with less than perfect execution that ultimately figured into the final tally.

If the defense can hold Stanford close, perhaps the offense can build on the last three games (31 vs Fresno State, 28 vs Washington State, 24 vs Oregon) and do some damage.

5 - Speaking of the defense, Stanford is the type of team that DeWayne Walker has been able to scheme well against. They aren't a spread team. They don't posssess a plethora of great athletes who make match-ups a nightmare. It's more like they come right at you out of a pro set and try to just execute their plays. They execute well, but this is the type of team that Walker has schemed well against.

None of this should suggest that Stanford will be an easy win. Stanford is a good team with good players and a good coach in Jim Harbaugh. Harbaugh seems to have good game plans and he seems to get the most out of his team. (He might have to, too, Stanford's starting quarterback Tavita Pitchard is questionable at the moment.)

Still, with that acknowledgment respectfully made, the Stanford game is a must win for UCLA.. This is a season where progress will ultimately be assessed beyond the final won-loss record. But, there is too much that suggests the game is very winnable and this team can not afford to pass up an opportunity like this.

I don't think that the NFL draft and making an NFL roster is the only way to measure a college football team or a college football program.

There are very good and very effective college players who -- for whatever reason -- are not cut out for the NFL.

I also don't think that producing NFL level talent is meaningress when assessing a program either. It may not be the be all and end all, but I don't think it's too far afield to suggest that the teams consistently producing pro football players are the best teams, by and large.

~~~

I was watching the Jacksonville Jaguars yesterday on television. One of my kids is a big Jags fan because he followed Maurice Jones-Drew to the NFL. He also likes Marcedes Lewis, of course. And now, he's a fan of the whole team and he likes Fred Taylor and David Garrard and the whole squad.

While we were watching the game, he asked me what other UCLA running backs were in the NFL. (He might have asked because the Jags were momentarily losing and he was looking around for another team. He did put on his MoJoDrew jersey at halftime and Jax ended up beating the Broncos in Denver, so the search for a new team never got going).

The thing is, I couldn't think of a single UCLA running back in the league right now, other than Jones-Drew. That doesn't mean there aren't any -- is DeShaun Foster playing anywhere? -- but it probably means that none of them are getting any significant minutes.

Furthermore, who are the UCLA quarterbacks in the league or for that matter the UCLA wide receivers in the league? Okay, Matthew Slater is on the Patriots, but I really consider him more of a special teams star and he might be playing defense for them anyway.

So, are there any UCLA skill position guys in the NFL other than Maurice Jones-Drew and Marcedes Lewis? If there are, are any making an impact? I mean, I'm not talking about Drew Olson playing for some practice squad, if he even is playing for a practice squad (and Matt Moore doesn't count). I'm talking about guys who get consistent hand offs or balls thrown their way or who are on the two-deep at quarterback.

As far as I can tell, only the two Jaquars are serious impact players in the NFL.

It's a little different on the defensive side of the ball. Depending what game I watch, I'm always hearing UCLA guys called on defense. Ricky Manning, Jr. had a sack yesterday (I was watching the highlights, I think he's with the Rams.) Chris Horton is starting. Jarrad Page was playing for the Chiefs last gime I watched the Chiefs. Brandon Chillar gets his name called. Travis Kirscke is with Pittsburgh, I'm pretty sure. (As an aside, NFL Sunday Ticket is great, but watching parts of ten different games can lead the names to start running together.)

~~~

Instead of using google to find a couple of guys I neglected to mention, consider this:

What does it say about our program that so few of our skill position players are impact players in the NFL?

Even if there are a couple of guys I'm not thinking of, is it safe to say that UCLA is not consistenly producing NFL skill players -- which is another way of saying that UCLA has not really had elite runners, catchers or throwers in recent seasons.

Our star receivers and runners have been at best marginal pros, with a few exceptions that include the two Jags and DeShaun Foster.

Is there something to be gleaned from this observation? Maybe, maybe not.

I realize some will come back to what I wrote at the top, that NFL success is not the definition of a great college player.

But while I accept that, I'd still argue that UCLA has not recently recruited the best of the best athletes at the skill positions and that those we have recruited have not taken their game to the NFL level under the tutelage of our past coaches.

~~~

Let's look at this team.

Are there any skill position players who you see making an impact in the NFL?

With all due respect, no way Kevin Craft looks like a pro quarterback. He's the only qb we really use, so I can't say that any of the others has NFL potential and the one guy you'd have thought would have that potential -- Ben Olson -- has never shown he's that kind of quarterback.

At running back, well I'm no scout but I really don't see Khalil Bell or any of those guys tearing up the league. Aundre Dean does have a great reputation and has been hurt, so maybe he does, but he hasn't shown anything yet.

At receiver, Terrence Austin has been our best guy. He might be a pro, maybe, but I think he's a kick returner before he's a starting receiver. Taylor Embree is playing well, but he's very young -- let's be generous and say he has a chance, but nothing definite. Marcus Everett is coming back hopefully soon, but he doesn't seem much different than all the other receivers we've had here who were semi-pros at best.

(I have to say, I thought Logan Paulsen might have pro potential, but he needed to show it this year -- we'll find out next year, most likely).

Finally,and while I don't want to take this in a whole new direction -- who were the last few offensive lineman from UCLA to make an impact in the pros? Maybe there are some that I'm not thinking of, but I'm just not hearing their names called on Sundays.

~~~

What think you all of this phenomenon or lack thereof?

(A little business first: The results for Washington State and the re-calculated results for BYU are here in this FanPost.)

The good news is, the Bruins ride into Eugene on a winning streak. The bad news is,the last time the Bruins took a winning streak on the road, they lost 1617-0 to BYU. 

~~~

Have you ever been to Eugene?

I have ... once.

Went to visit a buddy who was going to school there -- we mostly hung out, drank beer, and saw shows at WOW Hall (sort of like The Troubadour or The Roxy of Eugene.) I think we saw 10,000 Maniacs open up for Camper Van Beethoven one night -- this was 1985 ... a year you should all remember as the last year UCLA won the Rose Bowl.

Speaking of 10,000 Maniacs, the Ducks' student section should be in fine form for a night game at Autzen Stadium.

This week's video was a tough decision.

I almost went with a John Belushi / Animal House sequence -- because the movie was filmed up there. I thought about a Pixies video, because Frank Black lives up there now. I sorted through a couple of young bands I liked, but decided against it, mostly to protect my own anonymity.

Then it hit me ... Eugene, getting drunk, frat parties (which basically sums up Oregon football games) ... I present to you. Eugen's own, The Kingsmen:

The Kingsmen - Louie Louie (rare 1965 clip) (via Sixtiesalltheway)

~~~

So, what about the game?

I'm tempted to test everyone's loyalty by asking "True or False, UCLA will beat Oregon," but for some reason that seems perverse.

I'm many things, but none of them are particularly perverse.

So, what should I ask?

Hmmm????

Okay ... here goes:

1 - Yes or no, will UCLA cover the 19.5 spread? (This is the spread on Yahoo at the time I'm writing this post)

2 - True or false, Kevin Craft will attempt 30 or more passes?

3 - Name a Bruin who will score a touchdown. It could be on offense, defense or special teams. Just name a Bruin who will get a touchdown.

~~~

As always, leave your guesses in the subject line of your response. Guessing ends 30 minutes before kickoff tomorrow.

Here are the results for Washington State and BYU. Next will be a running total through the Oregon game.

Washington State:

BYU: