Continuing on with the Pac-10 roundtable discussions, today’s focus is UCLA!

HydroTech: Does Dorrell like the spotlight?  Because he’s certainly in it.  It’s already been harped on many times by the media, but UCLA looks to be a solid Pac-10 champion contender… on paper.  They have tons of starters coming back, a good but inconsistent defense, a decent runningback in Chris Markey, and well… not much else besides attractive cheerleaders.  So lots of people think that they’re going to be good because they knocked off hated rival U$C last year, but then again they also got trashed by a lousy Florida State team in their bowl game.  So what’s it going to be UCLA?  Rose Bowl or bust?  I’m sayin bust.  Even though 3 out of their 6 losses were by 10 points or less last year, I think their inconsistency will keep them drowning in the middle of the Pac. 

And don’t let their early season record fool you though.  Anybody seen their first four opponents?  Furd, BYU, Utah and UW.  UCLA could easily be 4-0 before going up to Corvallis to fight the Beavs.  By that time UCLA will also probably be ranked in the Top 25 somewhere and be getting tons of respect.  A lot of unwarranted respect.  As soon as the pastel wearin baby blue bears enter the heart of the schedule, I’m thinking that’s where they start gettin popped in the chin. 

TwistNHook: I am happy that Cal starts out with such a huge game like Tennessee.  Because a common refrain I am seeing whilst roundtabling all these other teams is that they start out with these incredibly easy schedules.  Then, they appear to be better than they really are and get knocked back to reality.

As HydroTech noted, UCLA is no different.  But after their first four games, they have OSU, ND, Cal, and WSU.  Could they go 4-0 and then 0-4 after that?  It certainly seems possible.

It’s really weird, bc if you read the national media they LOVE UCLA.  But if you read other blogs, like Bruins Nation, filled with passionate UCLA fans, they are not so high on the team.

Plus, now it looks like Cowan is injured with an apparent hamstring tear. They are all over the place with their QB situation there.  Having Cowan get injured, given the injury history of Olson, could leave McLeod Bethel-Thompson as their starting QB.  Dudes first name is McLeod.  What? That’s a last name.  The only last name that’s a good first name is Tedford.  And that’s just because that sounds perfect no matter what.  In fact, I’m legally changing my name to Tedford Tedford Tedford, The
Tedford.

Either way, it looks like Dorrell might have to burn a red-shirt year for one of his QB recruits.  This is not a promising situation for UCLA.  We saw just 2 years ago that the backup QB position can be crucial to any team and literally make or break a season.  Will this McLeod McAyoob it up?  Only time will tell.

YellowFever: I read a good cautionary note this week about rankings teams highly just because they did fairly well the year before and returned most of their starters.  Take a look at 2005 Purdue - highly ranked because they returned something 20/22 starters from the year before, and they didn’t have Michigan or Ohio State on their schedule.  Expected to do great things, they fell on their face.  I guess having all the starters from a mediocre team isn’t such a great thing sometimes.  (Did anyone have any idea Kyle Orton could possibly be that valuable?)  And could the same thing happen with 2007 UCLA?  It sounds like the guys at Bruins Nation are almost counting on it.

That gets into a chicken and the egg argument.  You could make the case tha a team can only return 20/22 starters if they had 20 underclassmen starters the year before, so what was up with their seniors?  And while it’s usually a pretty safe assumption that players improve from year to year, it’s no sure thing.  And if they were good enough to hold USC to 9 points in a win, then how come they got torn apart by Florida State for 44 points in the Emerald Bowl?  Lots of questions.  Just thinking about UCLA gets me going around in circles, without leading anywhere.  A metaphor for Dorrell’s entire tenure, really.

TwistNHook: Yknow what you are right?  The Bruins Nation guys are going crazy over UCLA this year.  I was just thinking about their hatred of Dorrell.

But look at this link: http://www.bruinsnation.com/story/2007/5/12/173728/991

They predict UCLA goes 11-1 this year, losing only to Wazzu.  And I think that they have that Wazzu loss in there basically because "UCLA has to lose at least one game for these predictions to seem reasonable, right?" This is what they say about the Cal game:

"Cal (w): Yes Tedford is a very good football coach who has put together a nice program up in Bay Area good enough to build a tradition around Holiday Bowl runs. But he has no business winning this game. He in fact has never won at the Rose Bowl (0-2 against a coach like Dorrell) and we expect that trend to continue without Marshawn Lynch. Of course this will be one of those “show me” games Walker in which he will have to prove he can scheme up defenses that can stop college teams not playing predictable pro-set offenses. We will expect the Bruins to run up their record to 7-0."

I’m not going to go into the records of Cal and UCLA since 2002 and which one is "nicer."  But needless to say, expectations are SKY high at UCLA this year.  If you read the above Bruins Nation link, they predict that UCLA will "dominate" over Notre Dame this year.  Now, surely UCLA could win, but I don’t see it being "domination."

Reading through that link, Bruins Nation seems to have a lot of respect for DeWayne Walker.  He made a name for himself last year by holding USC to 9 points.  He’s probably coaching for his new job this year.  Will he be focused on UCLA or will his eyes be wandering to other opportunities?

Look, the most exciting thing for me is seeing how many Freddie Mitchell cameo appearances there on at UCLA games.  Now, there’s a man who loves his hands.  If only he would thank them!

YellowFever: Irrational exuberance abounds all over this time of year - why, just today I saw that someone found our blog by searching "odds of minnesota winning national championship".  You know what, if you’re willing to bet on that, you might as well just light your money on fire.  Save some on your heating bill.

But back to the Bruins; yeah, I can see them doing well, but key to our annual loss in LA each year is a massive special teams breakdown courtesy of the inept kickoff coverage teams we have under the tutelage of Pete Alamar.  I don’t even know who the Bruins’ returner is, so the chances of that happening this year seem a little bit smaller.  I can see them finishing as high as third, but how many times has a team really done well in spite of its head coach?  In the NCAA that is.  We’re not talking Marty Schottenheimer here.

HydroTech: Dewayne Walker might have held U$C to 9 points but then what happened against Florida State in the Emerald Bowl?!  Just like Dorrell seems to card a bogey for every birdie, Dewayne Walker has done the same so far too.  Now, I’m not dissing DeWayne Walker, but I think people give him too much props for the $C game without noting the FSU disaster.  He may be good, but let’s bring him back down to Earth.  Until he holds $C along with all other Pac-10 opponents to two touchdowns or less every game, well, who can really refute the argument that he just didn’t get lucky against $C? 

TwistNHook, you might not want to talk about the Cal/UCLA series since 2002, but I’ll talk about it.  Yeah, the home team wins.  But in all honesty, Cal should have won in 2003 and also in 2005.  Even though Cal lost in the Rose Bowl both years, we had the games won and let them slip through our grasp.  What happened was that a few special teams screw ups kept us from getting the Ws.  This year, we have a solid kicker, punter, and special teams coverage besides All-American DeSean Jackson.  With our best special teams unit since Tedford’s arrival, I think it won’t be a liability and we’ll roll in and out of Pasadena in winning style. 

Chalk it up.  Cal over UCLA in the Rose Bowl. 

YellowFever: That’s one thing I wanted to bring up at some point also.  I’m not sure how Pete Alamar has a job.  Between our kickoff coverage teams giving up a kickoff for a touchdown every time the Bears are in LA and the butterfinger hands of our tight ends, what does he really bring to the team?  Maybe a sense of humor and a smile.  Which don’t really help when it comes time to tackle Reggie Bush or Maurice Jones-Drew in the open field.  The presence of Pete Alamar aside, I honestly don’t see how the Bruins have much of a chance of beating our Bears.  It might be close, but their offense doesn’t scare me much at all.

TwistNHook: Actually, Maurice Jones-Drew is quite the giggler.  You get him going and he can’t barely focus on shredding the Cal special teams/defense for over 200+ all-purpose yards.  We could have really used MORE jokes that evening in LA.

Unfortunately, Alamar hired Carlos Mencia and, well, yknow.

HydroTech: A lot of people have criticized Pete Alamar for our special teams woes, but word on the inside is that he’s one of best recruiters behind Tedford, Michalczik, and Gould.  Okay, I suppose that doesn’t make him our best recruiter, but supposedly he’s pretty good at convincing kids to come to Cal.

The Ballots

In the order of: HydroTech, Ragnarok, TwistNHook, Yellow Fever
1.
2.
3.  OSU, UCLA, OSU, UO
4.  UCLA, OSU,  __, UCLA
5.  UO,  ASU,  UCLA, ASU
6.  __,   UO,   UO,     __
7.  ASU, UA,   UA,   OSU
8.  UA,  __,   ASU,   UA
9. 
10. SU, SU, SU, SU,