Wednesday, February 17, 1999
Ten is not Enough
Similar traits can either hinder or help the UCLA and USC
basketball teams
By Brent Boyd
Daily Bruin Senior Staff
At first glance it looks as though the basketball teams from
UCLA and USC have about as much in common as their respective
schools’ surrounding communities, costs of tuition and football
teams – not much.
The Bruins are 17-7, ranked among the elite teams in the nation
and virtually assured of an NCAA Tournament bid. The Trojans,
meanwhile, are barely above .500, within a game of last place in
the Pac-10 and must win most of their remaining games just to earn
consideration for the NIT.
Throw in UCLA’s dominating 98-80 win over USC at the Sports
Arena last month, and yes, initially it looks as though the two
programs are as distinct and separate from one another as their
school colors – Trojan red and Bruin blue.
But, when one looks a little bit closer, say the gold trim that
appears on both uniforms, it becomes clearer that these programs
have more similarities than differences.
Forget that UCLA has beaten the Trojans nine straight times.
Forget that UCLA has won a national championship and 12 Tournament
games since the Trojans have even moved beyond the first round.
And definitely forget that USC hasn’t won a league title
outright since 1961 and that UCLA has won four conference crowns in
this decade alone.
These are all irrelevant numbers. Merely stats of the past. What
is important now is how these programs are progressing, how they’re
operating and how they see themselves in the future. This is where
the similarities begin.
Both head coaches – Henry Bibby of USC and UCLA’s Steve Lavin –
are in their third full seasons of coaching.
While Bibby has snaked his way through a 38-49 record amidst
transfers, controversies and player resignations, Lavin has gone
65-24 … amidst suspensions, lots of controversy, and yes, a
player resignation.
The difference in the records has to at least be somewhat
attributed to the teams they inherited. Bibby’s team was 11-17 the
year before he formally took over (this included a nine-game losing
streak in which he was the interim head coach). Lavin on the other
hand inherited a team that was coming off a Pac-10
championship.
But now the vast majority of the players on both teams are
theirs. Recruited, signed and coached solely by these two
coaches.
Brandon Loyd is the one holdover from the Jim Harrick era in
Westwood and only senior forward Seymour Daffeh was recruited by
Bibby’s predecessor, Charlie Parker, at USC.
The result is two teams that look strikingly similar.
USC’s starting lineup is young. UCLA’s is younger.
At USC, most of the starting positions are given to two
freshmen, two sophomores and a senior.
At UCLA, the more commonly seen starters in a continually
changing starting lineup features two "veterans" – sophomore guards
Baron Davis and Earl Watson – and three freshmen frontcourt men,
JaRon Rush, Jerome Moiso and Dan Gadzuric.
Of UCLA’s 14 players, only seldom-used forward Sean Farnham and
Loyd are upperclassmen.
Though young, both these teams are talented.
UCLA’s 1998 recruiting class was ranked at the top in the
nation, USC’s – featuring starting freshmen Brandon Granville
(USC’s leader in assists), Sam Clancy (its leading rebounder in
conference play) and sophomore transfer Brian Scalabrine (the
leading scorer) – are ranked No. 15.
"We have five newcomers who have all shown that they have
skill," Bibby said. "They can compete and want to compete and they
think like winners. That’s one of the reasons we recruited these
five. They all come from winning programs. We’re trying to change
the whole thinking of the program and we want to bring in people
who have won in the past."
All five of USC’s recruits this year played on state
championship teams – either in high school or junior college a
season ago.
UCLA has three All-Americans in its class.
But, with all the talent in both of these classes, the one
overriding attribute is youth. And youth leads to
inconsistency.
Both of these teams have been a study in inconsistency all
season long.
When first-year players account for a third of the points and
almost half of the rebounds and assists, like they do at USC, and
when they get more than half of the points and rebounds, like they
do at UCLA, there are bound to be some inconsistencies.
And inconsistencies, there definitely are.
USC lost to Washington on the road by only two, beat Oregon in
Eugene, and Saturday upset No. 6 Stanford … on the road.
However, the Trojans have lost to Pac-10 also-ran Washington
State, was defeated by both California (by 14) and Oregon at home,
and got destroyed by 29 against a Kansas team that is no longer
ranked.
But, one can also see these inconsistencies about 10 miles to
the west.
The boys from Westwood literally look great one day, and
terrible the next.
Just last week, UCLA almost shocked Stanford, but then got
pummeled at Berkeley. The week before, the Bruins were forced to
make an amazing comeback to beat Oregon at home, then destroyed a
decent Oregon State team three days later.
"That’s the problem when you have a young team," Lavin said
after UCLA’s loss to Berkeley Saturday. "It shows a lack of
maturity that we can’t (play back-to-back games) with a high level
of intensity."
But, in any case, they are both teams that are more exciting to
watch, and play better as a team than their respective predecessors
– youth has a tendency to do that.
For instance, USC’s leading scorer of a year ago, Gary Johnson,
is gone and so the Trojans are being forced to share the ball at
the Sports Arena.
"There’s a lot more togetherness on this team," senior guard
Elias Ayuso said. "Everyone is willing to accept each other and
accept their roles. There are not a lot of egos like last year.
Last year there were a lot of egos and only one ball."
And thus, without one go-to guy, the Trojans are playing much
more of a team game.
The same could be said over in Westwood.
Last season 70 percent of the UCLA’s scoring left with the
graduation of Toby Bailey, J.R. Henderson, and Kris Johnson and the
resignation of Jelani McCoy.
However, they took only 44 per cent of the assists with
them.
It left a team that plays more together, even if they may be a
little less talented.
"It’s better because you get to form more of an identity for the
team. You get guys who want to be leaders. Everybody just wants to
gel," Davis said.
In any case, the two teams are dramatically similar … young,
inexperienced and talented.
USC is better than it was a year ago, and UCLA … well, that’s
debatable.
But, one thing that is not debatable is that the Bruins are a
more exciting team – one that plays like a young team – with
dramatic ups and downs.
As for both teams, one thing that isn’t debatable is that the
two programs have a lot more in common than most people
realize.
Even if USC hasn’t made it to the Final Four in 45 years.
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]