Through all the doom and gloom of their six-game losing streak,
past all the criticism for their lackluster play and beyond all the
stormy clouds that seem to have gathered over Westwood since they
were 5-0 in Pac-10 play, the Bruins have emerged from the
rubble.
Although they may be slightly beat up, it is clear that this
team possesses something few Bruin fans believed it had ““ a
pulse.
You see, in this unpredictable year for the Pac-10, UCLA is
still tied with Arizona for fourth place in the conference, and is
merely one game away from second. An NCAA tournament bid may be out
of the question, but the NIT is quite possibly still there. And any
form of postseason play seemed unlikely heading into
Saturday’s game.
For the first time in a while, the Bruins did it with grit and
energy ““ and when was the last time this season you could say
UCLA demonstrated these two intangibles?
When was the last time you could say bodies flew to the floor
for loose balls?
When was the last time you could say Cedric Bozeman made a pair
of clutch free throws?
When was the last time you could say this was a team that
refused to lose and had the patience to find the good shots,
shooting 62 percent from the field in the second half?
Heck, when was the last time you could say Ryan Walcott played a
good game?
My memory doesn’t go back that far, but I do remember
this: when Trevor Ariza got the ball on the right wing with a
little over two minutes to go, rose up and slammed it home over
Mike Jensen with such force that it left the 240-pounder groveling
at Ariza’s feet, it was symbolic in many ways.
Ariza was not going to be denied, nor was this UCLA team on this
night. It was a play full of aggression and determination, and one
that, despite the relative uncertainty toward the end of the game,
left you believing that the outcome would not be in doubt.
And for extra measure, Ariza grabbed the UCLA name on his
uniform and called it to everyone’s attention as if to say,
THIS is who we are.
How did the Bruins do it?
For starters, coach Ben Howland rested the starters. The bench
““ Walcott, Michael Fey, Jon Crispin, Janou Rubin and Josiah
Johnson ““ more than held their own when they got their
chances. Walcott shot well and played with poise, a far cry from
his turnover-ridden performance the last time he saw the Huskies.
Fey had his usual good game against hometown Washington, a trend
that was enough to make Howland remark that hypnosis should be used
so Fey would believe every game he played was against Washington.
Even Crispin played within himself.
Secondly, UCLA responded in the face of adversity. You
couldn’t help but think déjà vu down the stretch.
To spark your memory, the Bruins collapsed up in Seattle, inspiring
me to write a “How to Lose an 11-point Lead in Under Two
Minutes” guide. For a while, it looked like UCLA was
following the guide, with the three-point plays and the turnovers,
but this time, the Bruins regrouped, bonded, held together and
gutted it out. Â
Thirdly, the Bruins forced the other team to stage a comeback
for a change. Instead of falling behind, it was UCLA who jumped out
to the early lead, forcing Washington to use a lot of energy to
come back to tie the game. It paid off, too, because when the
Bruins used a 10-0 run to grab the lead for good, the Huskies were
too fatigued to respond.
And lastly, there was the energy. The flying around on defense,
diving for loose balls, hustling for every rebound ““ this was
what we were promised when Howland came to Westwood. And it was a
fine thing to see.
Would UCLA fans be satisfied with games as long as the team
showed the grit and determination they had against the Huskies?
Probably not (Bruin fans always want the “˜W’), but
at least the games would be more watchable ““ and
winnable.
E-mail Tran at btran@media.ucla.edu.