Fire Karl Dorrell

More Encouraging News from the Football Program

2005-05-18T09:00:00.000-07:00

Not really.

Brian Dohn, doing his usual bang-up job in his coverage of the UCLA FB program has a little piece in today's LADN addressing Karl Dorrell's innovative new recruiting strategy.

Get this: Dorrell's revolutionary new plan involves "taking care of our own backyard" and actually visiting prominent local high schools!

"Our job now is to take care of our backyard," said Bieniemy, who also is UCLA's running backs coach. "If you cannot take care of your backyard, it puts us in a situation where we're competing against these kids (on the field). The sad part is some of these kids are pretty darn good, and they come back and they play very, very angry against you. And you don't want that.

The decision for Dorrell to visit so many campuses is being hailed by high school coaches. The Bruins are recruiting several Notre Dame players, and Knights coach Kevin Rooney said this was the first time Dorrell has been on campus."(Dorrell) said he wanted to recruit locally more," Rooney said. "Yeah, it's important to see him there. It's important for the head coach to come."

For those of you that might not know, Notre Dame HS is located in the San Fernando Valley and produces several Division I Football recruits each year. The "decision to visit this campus" shuold be a no-brainer.

"I think they're far more conscious of what's going on locally than in the past," Narbonne assistant Craig Armstrong said. "I would say it's very important for Southern California, (with it) being a hotbed for talent. With recruiters coming from all over the country to get kids out of here, and then you have two major universities in UCLA and USC right here ... you've got to keep the top kids home."

Why are these amateurs just now figuring this out?

On UCLA recruiting inner-city LA:

"Pete Carroll comes to the Watts Coffee House and eats grits and bacon," Asante said. "When he does that, it's just that much more respect for that program. If he knows it's not beneath him to come here, then everyone else knows it, and sees it. The kids see it.

"UCLA is starting to catch up. They're doing a good job. The next step is for coach Dorrell to come here."

I seem to recall that one of the benefits bandied about by Dorrell supporters after his hire was the prospect that he would be able to go into the inner city, to schools UCLA has historically ignored, and be able to challenge USC's dominance recruiting those kids.

Nearly 3 years in to the Dorrell experiment, the media and local HS coaches are still addressing the fact that UCLA is just now catching on to the fact that Southern Califonia is a hotbed of college football rercuiting talent. There's a reason that Miami, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Texas recruit the area so heavily.

Now Karl Dorrell has caught on. Way to go Karl!

A Rose By Any Other Name

2005-04-27T14:44:00.000-07:00

Apparent trouble with season ticket renewals prompts quixotic scheme to boost sales

We're hearing that the Morgan & Murphy crew is sweating about declining attendance figures. So much so, in fact, that they are apparently sending blue roses to people who have not yet renewed their season tickets in an attempt to revitalize apparently slumping ticket renewals.

Leaving aside the preciousness of this horticultural scheme, we would note that traditionally, a blue is considered a symbol for impossibility. We'll get back to that.

Attendance at the Rose Bowl has been declining:

2001: 64613
2002: 65396
2003: 56636
2004: 60,515

After the 2003 season, Karl Dorrell’s first, CFN said "UCLA’s attendance fell by almost 9,000 fans per game for pretty obvious reasons—most weeks they tough to watch."

True, attendance rose last year. But even if we don’t take into account that these numbers may be distorted by the USC game (and the 2002 figures may be artificially high for that reason as well), the simple fact remains that both of Karl Dorrell’s first two years have resulted in lower attendance than either of Bob Toledo’s last two years.

It’s difficult to find season ticket sales numbers, but here is what has been said in the past: by former AD Peter Dalis "Dalis' biggest concern for next year is avoiding the decrease in season ticket sales that schools get after losing seasons. [snip] 'Nobody's ever figured out how to sell tickets to a losing team in L.A. If you've got any ideas, let me know.'"

According to a Sep. 29, 2004 Daily Bruin article, DG feels no need to be accountable to boosters and season ticketholders, despite the fact that a large portion of the department's budget comes from those sources:

In 2003, boosters contributed over $8 million to the Bruin athletic department, about one-fifth of the total budget. The funding goes for equipment, scholarships, traveling and other necessities. Last year, these donations made up about one-fifth of the athletic department's entire budget.
Athletic director Dan Guerrero said. "We're pretty much a self-sustaining operation, so donations are critical to allowing us to make our budget." At many schools some boosters want to influence decision-making, but Guerrero insists he has not felt any pressure of this form.
However, Guerrero experienced significant scrutiny in just his second year, when football coach Bob Toledo and basketball coach Steve Lavin were roundly criticized by boosters for their teams’ sub-par performances. Several boosters allegedly offered to buy out contracts of both coaches in the middle of each of their respective seasons.

Some boosters think that their access to the athletics staff comes with a right to influence decisions. However (at least in the case of UCLA), that is not the case. Says Jim Pagliuso, a UCLA booster who has endowed a scholarship, "People that donate and think they have some kind of influence find out quickly they essentially have no influence."

You can inform the Morgan & Murphy crew that their cute little scheme isn't going to cut it. We need a real coach.

Some programs understand how to increase sales: hire a good coach and start winning, courtesty of Sports Illustrated "season-ticket sales [at Cal] are expected to reach 32,000, the most in school history."

It's not that hard. Save the flowers, hire a good coach. Sending flowers to fans isn't going to get us to the Rose Bowl. A real coach will. Therefore, it's fitting that the Morgan & Murphy crew chose the symbol for impossibility. In keeping with that spirit, if you receive one of these blue roses, don't buy into this goofy focus-grouped and empty marketing gesture. Instead give it to that really hot chick who you haven't been able to work up the nerve to ask out. Then send a letter to the Morgan & Murphy crew telling them why you won't be renewing your season tickets or making any donations until they show that their commitment is to winning.

The "talent" excuse again rears its ugly head

2005-04-24T21:24:00.000-07:00

With four players drafted into the NFL and a 6-6 record Karl Dorrell did an amazingly incompetent job of getting the most out of his talent.

ESPN has conveniently added a feature whereby you can look up the number of players drafted by school. The Bruins, who some Blindos have labeled as lacking in talent, had four players drafted this weekend: Manuel White, Ben Emmanuel, Tab Perry, and Craig Bragg. By contrast, national champions $C had only five players drafted: Mike Williams, Mike Patterson, Shaun Cody, Lofa Totupu, and Matt Cassell. Here is a neat little reference of selected teams (CFN season ending top 25 and the rest of the Pac 10:

TEAM DRAFTEES RECORD WINS/DRAFTEES
UCLA 4 6-6 1.5
$C 5 13-0 2.6
Auburn 5 13-0 2.6
Oklahoma 11 12-1 1.09
Texas 3 11-1 3.67
Utah 5 12-0 2.4
Tennessee 3 10-3 3.33
Georgia 6 10-2 1.67
Va Tech 3 10-3 3.33
Miami 5 9-3 1.8
Louisville 6 11-1 1.83
Michigan 3 9-3 3
Iowa 5 10-2 2
LSU 3 9-3 3
Florida 3 7-5 2.33
Florida State 9 9-3 1
Texas A&M 3 7-5 2.33
Texas Tech 3 8-4 2.67
Cal 5 10-2 2
Boise St. 0 11-1 n/a
ASU 3 9-3 3
Wisconsin 7 9-3 1.29
Purdue 1 7-5 7
Ohio St. 3 7-4 2.33
Pitt 1 8-4 8
BC 0 9-3 n/a

Oregon St. 3 7-5 2.33
Oregon 2 5-6 2.5
WSU 3 5-6 1.67
Stanford 6 4-7 0.67
Arizona 0 3-8 n/a
UW 2 1-10 0.5

Teams bolded had a worse winning-efficiency for NFL-bound players. UCLA got 1.5 win for every draftee. National champion $C got 2.6 wins for every draftee, by contrast.

Only five teams did worse than Karl Dorrell. Two of those schools (UW and Stanford) fired their coaches. Two of those coaches, Stoops and Bowden, have won national championships, and until KD has a winning season, Barry Alvarez shouldn't be too worried about underachieving either.

So what do these numbers tell us?

Karl Dorrell dramatically underachieved with the NFL talent on his roster. With only three NFL draftees, oft-maligned Mack Brown managed 11 wins. Boise State won 11 with zero draftees. Boston College went 9-3 with no draftees. ASU went 9-3 with three.

Blindo just doesn't have the facts on his side. Again.

Karl Dorrell had more 2005 NFL draftees on his roster than the following teams: Texas, Tennesse, Virginia Tech, Michigan, LSU, Florida, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Boise State, ASU, Purdue, Ohio St., Pitt, and Boston College, and Oregon State. All those schools won more games that Karl Dorrell did with more highly talented team (by this measure, anyway -- clearly, this measure is far from perfect, but unlike Blindo measurements, which always favor the incompetent Karl Dorrell, this one is objective).

Only Stanford, Cal, and $C had more players drafted this year than Dorrell.

No Pac 10 coach who retained his job was less efficient with his talent than Karl Dorrell.

Blindo continues to make excuses. The numbers say otherwise. Karl Dorrell is an abomination, and he must go.

It's baseball time

2005-04-14T09:05:00.000-07:00

I don't want to jinx it, but the Dodgers are tied for the best record so far, and are also scoring the most runs per inning.

Since we're not Blindos, we know about the dangers of small sample sizes. For example, at 6-2, the Dodgers are currently on pace to win about 121 games. That's unlikely, to say the least, especially when you look at the history of major league baseball. To relate this UCLA football, Karl Dorrell is 12-13 over 25 games. Does this mean that we can predict Karl Dorrell will go 5-6 or 6-5 this year?

However, as most investors can tell you, past performance does not guarantee future results.

But, based on the analyses performed on this site, and by Mav, we noticed a significant correllation with how a coach, especially a UCLA coach, performs in his first two years, and his eventual level of success.

MSM is largely unwilling, or unable to undertake these sorts of statistical analyses. We highly recommend Moneyball, a fascinating book by Michael Lewis about statistical analysis in major league baseball, focusing on Oakland A's GM Billy Beane.

If you took the time to read previews, precious few MSM types picked the Dodgers to do well. However, bloggers and new media types thought otherwise. Belatedly, here are a few Dodger previews.

If anyone watched the game last night between the Dodgers and the Giants on ESPN 2, you were subjected to a horrendous five-minute long discussion of the infamous trade in which Joe Morgan spent basically the entire time dumping on Paul DePodesta for trading Paul LoDuca last year, who as we all know, because the MSM has beaten it into our head was the heart and soul of the Dodgers. Interestingly, Morganesque analysis is often relied on by Blindos in analyzing new Bruin football recruits. According to BTF, this is how one calculates the heart and soul of a baseball player:

Heart and soul is a multi-faceted concept, best expressed via example.

Paul Lo Duca has heart and soul, and serves as the heart and soul of any team he plays on.

Any 2002 Anaheim Angel has heart and soul.

How to calculate Heart and Soul:

1. Find the player's Productive Outs (derived from Productive Out Percentage)
2. Add 10 if he has ever been called "scrappy" by the team in the broadcasting booth
3. Divide by his height (in inches)
4. Multiply by his clutch hitting factor
5. Multiply by 2 if he is white
6. Multiply by 2 if he is Derek Jeter
7. Add four points for every properly executed fist pump he performs. If said fist pump comes after scoring a winning run in a postseason game, multiply his score by 4.

It becomes pretty clear that heart and soul is a meaningless concept, a fluff phrase used by lazy journalists who are enraged that Beane, Epstein and DePodesta types have attempted to introduce some sort of objective measurement into baseball, concepts which lazy MSM types, for the most part, do not understand. Here are Paul LoDuca's career stats. 2001 aside, they're pretty pedestrian, and he's notorious for having atrocious second halfs. But you can't measure heart (or soul). Sounds a lot like Blindo and his suggestions about how much more dedicated, excited, and full of heart and soul the new, Dorrell-type players are than their athletically superior, but heartless (and, presumably, soulless) highly ranked Toledo-recruited counterparts.

When DePodesta made the trade on July 30, 2004, they Joe Morgan and Harold Reynolds types claimed that the Dodgers had thrown the season away and handed the NL East to the Marlins. The Dodgers won their first playoff game since 1988 and the Marlins failed to make the playoffs. Reynolds and Morgan have since changed their story and declared the trade a failure for other reasons. By the way, after his lengthy dissertation on why the Dodgers are destined for failure, he pretty much didn't say another word after the Dodgers went up 4-0 in the third. Less Morgan is more. Those of you who are able to listen to Vin should count yourselves lucky.

But not all MSM types are clueless. As for college football, CFN is good. Peter Gammons is excellent, and as usual, he has a good article this week:

Then there are the Dodgers, who in many corners were dismissed as the trash-barrel residue of a statistical general manager who dehumanized players and sent the character people like Paul Lo Duca and Alex Cora out to pasture, replacing them with numbers. "It's not like I broke up a dynasty," said Paul DePodesta, who is in the media ridicule line behind only Kobe Bryant and Frank McCourt in Los Angeles. "We did finish first last season (and won a postseason game, the first since the Reagan administration). What some people fail to realize is that when we took over, we were an older team that hadn't won.

[snip]

The trade that began the questioning of DePodesta was the one last July 29 when he sent Lo Duca, Guillermo Mota and Juan Encarnacion to the Marlins in a complicated trade that brought Penny, Hee Seop Choi and Steve Finley. Penny broke down, but, as planned, Yhency Brazoban stepped in and replaced Mota, and had Finley gone to San Diego instead, the Padres would likely have finished first. DePodesta also freed the Dodgers from Encarnacion's contract. Time will tell if the Dodgers pitchers will not miss one of the best leaders in the game behind the plate.

Then this winter, Adrian Beltre was allowed to walk, Alex Cora was non-tendered, Finley was replaced by J.D. Drew and Shawn Green was dumped. That put Kent and Valentin at second and third, where Cora and Beltre played so well in the field, leaving the magical Cesar Izturis as the only above-average defensive infielder. Yet ... "Valentin has played more than 160 games at third in his career and played the position very well this spring," DePodesta said. One game.

When healthy, the Penny-Jeff Weaver-Odalis Perez-Lowe foursome should be fine. Alvarez and Scott Erickson add depth and kids like Edwin Jackson, Jonathan Broxton and Chad Billingsley are on the immediate horizon. If Gagne is healthy, the bullpen is fine.

There are a lot of baseball folks who wonder if Choi will ever be what his numbers say – a .380 on-base, .500 slugging guy. They wonder about Valentin and Kent, Bradley and Drew, and whether Dioner Navarro can be their catcher by midseason.

But the NL West does not appear to have a dominant, flawless team and while the Dodgers' infield defense isn't as good as it was, the outfield defense is probably the best in the division. So they try to win with starting pitching, get what is needed in July, and with only Lowe, Drew and Perez signed past 2006, the door is open to Joel Guzman, Russell Martin, James Loney, Andy LaRoche, Blake DeWitt, Chuck Tiffany and their kids.

The Dodgers were hardly a dynasty when DePodesta took over, and like most rebuilding jobs, there are going to be difficult and controversial choices. Lo Duca was one. Beltre was another. Cora. Green. People get hurt in the process, and while this is a people game, what DePodesta is trying to do deserves to be judged by the team's performance, not what baseball folks and we in the media think will unfurl.

Read the whole thing.

Meanwhile, after that opening day loss to the Giants, Plaschke, Simers, and other MSM morons filed their stories, declaring the Dodgers' season over after one game (small sample size again: based on 1 game, the Dodgers projected to 0-162). They then pretty much failed to write anything until Plascke filed this gem.

I would suggest not reading it, but instead, reading the fisking at the propitiously-named Fire Jim Tracy. Here's a peek:

Welcome Back, Bill

Glad you could TiVo the game and skip to the last at-bat!

As months of catcalls became a long moment of cheers, a personal hailstorm interrupted by a strange and warm sun, the most embattled Dodger danced and soaked and basked.

Months of catcalls by who? Bill Plaschke? He reaches into his "ego representing 'everyone'” pitch early in the count today.

Not Milton Bradley, but Frank McCourt.

Alongside the Dodger dugout late Tuesday afternoon, the owner leaped out of the newly constructed McCourt Family Field Box with a dozen seats and two fancy TVs and protective railings.

How fancy? Are they flat screen? Do they have DVDs and Playstations? What are the protective railings made of? See, one problem with Plaschke is he never gives us any important details.

He pumped his fist at the field.

Paragraph

He pumped his fist into the stands.

Paragraph (Plaschke is thinking at this point: Can I think of anywhere else Frank McCourt might have pumped his fist? That would be more paragraphs! "pumped his fist at the fans?" "pumped his fist in the air?" "pumped his fist at his wife?" Come on, I can do this!)

He ran down the stairs and through the tunnel amid a chorus of roars usually reserved for guys with names like, you know, Arte.

I’m sorry, what did Arte Moreno win last year? Is Plaschke too dumb to remember that when the Angels actually won the series, they were owned by a mouse named “Mickey?” Or does he have so low an opinion of Angels fans that all they care about is the $3 beer? Anyway, if the Angels fans are sitting around roaring for Arte Moreno come July, that's probably not a good sign for the team.

Again, go read the whole thing.

What's the point? First, UCLA stuff is slow, and it's baseball time. Secondly, with the exceptions of the Gammonses, CFNs, and Dohns, the MSM is largely clueless. Sure, Simers seems to make fun of Dorrell, to the extent that it fits into his schtick. But if we finally do the right thing and fire him, I'm sure he'll either jump all over the firing, or demonize the new hiring (if it's a good one) in much the same way the LA media and Blindo have attempted to make false analogies between Howland and Dorrrell, or Dorrell and Harris.

The good thing is, the MSM morons don't have a monopoly anymore. Go Blue. Go Bruins.

Today's USC Football Crime Blotter

2005-04-08T10:46:00.000-07:00

Well, not really, because USC handles these types of things "in-house." After all, what's a little assault and battery between teammates?

USC tight end Dominique Byrd fractured his jaw during an alleged altercation with receiver Steve Smith last week, although few know about the incident because Byrd is academically ineligible for spring practice.
Byrd's jaw was wired shut following the altercation, which took place when the pair argued while playing a video game, according to sources. (Note: at least it was for a good reason)

"I don't have any comment on that," Smith said following Thursday's practice.

USC coach Pete Carroll also declined comment, although sources said he spoke to Smith about the incident. Smith was not punished and has not missed any practices.

Coach Carroll is a brilliant coach. Rather than punishing Smith, he knows that Smith's feelings of guilt over the situation is punishment enough. Why hurt the entire team because of the conduct of one individual? (Especially when that individual is one of your few experienced WR's on the roster.)

Good thing Coach Carroll has a handle on things over there.

By the way, nice hit Steve.

What are your Expectations for this Football Season?

2005-04-06T11:32:00.000-07:00

7 wins is simply not acceptable to this Bruin.

However, I fear that 7 wins this year may be just enough to give the Morgan Center and their merry band of medocrity-accepting access whores the justification they need to back their boy wonder that never should have been hired in the first place.

After all, 7 wins is progress over 6, right?

Blindo will undoubtedly try to justify a 7 win season as some sort of progress, and evidence that Karl Dorrell is leading the program in the right direction. 7 wins would probably earn UCLA a berth in a lower-tiered bowl game, like the SV Bowl or the LV Bowl, against an opponent we should dominate (although that hasn't been the case the past 2 seasons).

However, looking at the 2005 schedule, a 7 win season should result in the firing of Dorrell.

Looking at the schedule:

Sat 09/03/2005 San Diego State @ SDSU

This should be a win. SDSU loses their entire LB corps and their top WR. UCLA should manhandle them, as they did last season. Win. [1-0]

Sat 09/10/2005 Rice-Rose Bowl

Rice has a FB team? Win. [2-0] (Although as Nestor observed, Rice could be to Dorrell as CSUN was to L*v*n. Rock bottom.)

Sat 09/17/2005 Oklahoma-Rose Bowl

Winnable, as OU is unproven at QB, and they lose alot of talent from their defense. However, AP will probably run for 200 yards, and the OU defense will be good enough. Loss. [2-1]

Sat 10/01/2005 Washington-Rose Bowl

Willingham will bring UW back to respectability, but not this year. Win. [3-1]

Sat 10/08/2005 Cal-Rose Bowl

Early on, this looks like it could be one of those significant "turning point games." Inexperience at QB and the losses of Arrington and MacArthur will severely hamper Tedford's wide open offense. Win. [4-1]

Sat 10/15/2005 Washington State @ Pullman, WA

WSU has had UCLA's number for a few years. In 2004, a JC Rb ran for 200+ yards against UCLA's D. Kevin Brown has a monster game. UCLA has the talent and experience to turn it around this year. Win. [5-1]

Sat 10/22/2005 Oregon State-Rose Bowl

Matt Moore throws for 2 TD's and rushes for 87 yards. However, he is flagged for flipping off Dorrell after a 25 yard TD run. Loss. [5-2]

Sat 10/29/2005 Stanford @ Stanford

See WSU game. Trent Edwards comes out on fire, but the Stanford OL and backs can't solve Larry Kerr's innovative blitz packages. Marcedes Lewis has a career game and wraps up the Mackey award. Win. [6-2]

Sat 11/05/2005 Arizona @ Tucson

A stingy UA defense gives up a long TD run to Maurice Drew, and Ben Olson connects with Junior Taylor for a 73 yard TD pass. Justin Medlock kicks 3 FG's. UA's impotent O has no answers. Win. [7-2]

Sat 11/12/2005 Arizona State-Rose Bowl

UCLA defenders pound ASU QB Sam Keller. [Win 8-2]

Sat 12/03/2005 USC Los Angeles @ Coliseum

With nearly a month to prepare, UCLA is the only obstacle in the way of a potential USC 3-peat. What other motivation does UCLA need? With Reggie Bush nursing a hamstring injury (and looking ahead to the NFL draft), UCLA comes out in a nickel defense and takes away the pass. Justin London levels Matt Leinart on a MLB blitz, knocking him out of the game with a concussion. UCLA gets a 95 yard kickoff return from Maurice Drew and a fumble scoop and scoot TD from Spencer Havner. The SC bandwagoners head for the exits early. In his post game comments, Karl Dorell is quoted as saying, "That was really fun!" Win [9-2]

2005 Record: 9-2 (7-1 in the PAC 10). Rose Bowl or Holiday Bowl. A competent coach, with the talent and experience that UCLA has this year at his disposal could win 9 games.

Now, do I think this will happen? of course not. Dorrell's incompetence is good for at least 2 or 3 losses to teams we have no business losing to. (See ASU, WSU and Wyo in 2004). Who will it be this year?

Personally, I believe that anything short of 9 wins cannot be considered progress. Add what should be a decreased margin of error caused by Dorrell's first two very disapointing seasons (have we learned nothing from the L*v*n era?), and 9 wins should be the minimum acceptable record for this team and this coach.

The Bruin Nation should never accept mediocrity.

The expectations for Dorrell should not be lowered to adjust for his incompetence.

No pressure Coach Dorrell.

Update on alleged Sex Criminal Eric Wright

2005-04-01T14:27:00.000-08:00

USC is preparing to go on the assualt against a young woman who was apparently sexually assaulted by a member of their football team.

Meanwhile, Wright's attorney, Carmen Trutanich, is using the investigative firm of Warren Candias and Associates to gather information for the possible case. It's the same firm that gathered information for the first
rape trial of Gregory Haidl, a highly publicized case in Orange County.

In that trial, defense counsel conducted an all-out
smear campaign against the 16-year old victim.

It’s amazing what a nine-member legal-defense team can accomplish. Of course, that tally does not include O.J. Simpson jury consultant Jo-Ellan Dimitrius, an army of private investigators led by a retired FBI agent and several ex–sheriff’s deputies, an audio-visual expert (who made dozens of colorful, anti-Doe charts for jurors to ponder), several lurking fellows with unknown assignments, a full-time publicist, and editorial support from the two local daily newspapers.

Wright's attorney was able to make a sexual assault investigation against Herschell Dennis go away a few months ago. (Although it's the worst kept secret in LA that Herschell took the fall for the USC thugs that did actually assault the unconscious victim).

Money couldn't buy an acquittal in the Haidl case. Hopefully justice will be served against Mr. Wright as well.

UCLA is So Lucky to Have Coach Dorrell!

2005-04-01T09:42:00.000-08:00

Karl Dorrell is doing a fantastic job.

It hardly matters that Karl Dorrell is 1-11 against teams with winning records, 12-13 overall, and 0-2 against USC. The fact that he really doesn't know what he's doing on the sidelines during the games is of no consequence (he's got other coaches to handle that stuff). The Fresno State and Wyoming game losses say nothing about the bright future of UCLA football under Coach Dorrell.

This season will be different. The kids have bought into Dorrell’s offensive philosophy now. They are committed and actually attending off-season workouts. There is a buzz around the program that is different than previous years’ buzzes.

Recruits from coast-to-coast are talking about how UCLA is rebuilding for the future, and how UCLA is a powerhouse in the making. Even though the MSM has not picked up on Dorrell yet, they will, and the NFL will be close behind. I am so happy that UCLA did not pursue that mercenary Steve Spurrier, or that young, up-and-coming offensive guru, Urban Meyer. Thank goodness that the Morgan Center never returned Mike Leach’s call! I’m so happy that SDSU passed on Coach Dorrell for a JC coach. Man, I bet they are kicking themselves right now after witnessing the complete overhaul of the UCLA FB program that Coach Dorrell has directed!

According to many spring practice observers, the offense and defense are clicking better than ever. The amazing thing about the performance of the kids at spring practice is that this is the same group of kids who lost to Wyoming just a couple of months ago. Coach Dorrell has managed to turn the program around in just a few months. Just imagine what he’ll be able to do with all the time he has to prepare between spring practice and the SDSU game! After all, we were able to post a moral victory against USC when Coach Dorrell only had a few weeks to prepare. That was fun!!

Spring practice reports also reveal that some of Dorrell’s unheralded sleeper recruits and walk-ons were actually starting in spring practice! I always knew that Dorrell had an eye for talent, and that he would be able to find that proverbial diamond-in-the-rough, despite the fact that some of his recruits had no other D1 offers. This just proves that Karl Dorrell is one of the best talent evaluators in all of college football. Even though I’ve never even heard the names of some of these kids before this spring, I trust Coach Dorell, as should every real Bruin.

Look for solid progress this season. 7 wins is a fair and reasonable goal, when taking into consideration that some of Bob Toledo’s malcontented recruits like Spencer Havner, Marcedes Lewis, Justin London, Junior Taylor, and Jarrad Page will still be on the team. Boy, I can’t wait until these guys are gone. Just think how much better this team will be without Manuel White and Craig Bragg and their Toledo-era baggage. (Coach Dorrell tried to send a message to Manuel White in the very first game he coached against CU by not playing him the entire game, but Manuel never really saw the light). Then, Coach Dorrell will be able to install his highly specialized hand-picked players for his sophisticated offense. Coaching is hard work! Just give it about seven years, because it will be something to watch!

If you need anyomore evidence, just look to what's happening with the BB team under Coach Howland. Coach Howland and Dorrell have similar overall records, therefore, Coach Dorrell is a great coach.

Karl Dorrell does things the right way, and we should be very proud of him. He’s also one of the best looking college coaches in the country. His cerebral style is just a good fit for UCLA. I for one will be a vocal proponent of locking Coach Dorrell up for a long term contract if he shows progress by winning 7 games in 2005. After all, he knows how to win, because he was a Bruin himself. If you don’t believe in what he’s doing, you are not a real Bruin, and probably a USC fan in disguise.

Thank you Coach Dorrell!

Go Bruins!

Thirty pieces of silver

2005-03-22T12:53:00.000-08:00

Why Blindo, Circulo, and others sell their integrity in support of Karl Dorrell at the expense of UCLA football.

Integrity and support of a coach comes pretty cheap these days. So-called Bruin fans have been known to sell their support of a coach for a few donuts

or a pizza or two

It is indeed sad that so-called Bruin fans are willing to sell their integrity so cheaply, but even sadder and more deplorable still are those who attempt to capitalize on the foolishness on naïveté of some Bruin fans who don't know better.

Thus, if it is wrong (as we surely believe it is) to shill for a coach in exchange for access, donuts, or pizza, how much worse is it to lead Blindo and Circulo into believing that Karl Dorrell is a good coach in exchange for money? We have a word for people like that. A perhaps apocryphal story about Winston Churchill should illustrate:

At a dinner party one night, an inebriated Churchill asked an attractive woman whether she would sleep with him for a million pounds. “Maybe,” the woman said coyly. “Would you sleep with me for one pound?” Churchill then asked. “Of course not, what kind of woman do you think I am?” the woman responded indignantly. “Madam, we’ve already established what kind of woman you are,” said Churchill, “now we’re just negotiating the price.”

What else do Blindos and their ilk sell their integrity for? Well Blindo loves the camaradarie of spring practice, cavorting with other Blindos and Circulos:

[A] tradition is developing among the “Bleacher Blindos” that populate spring football practice at Spaulding Field each year. Over and over again, the same cycle is repeated: a disappointing Bruin football season, followed by a couple of weeks of hand-wringing, then the first boatload of excuses

[snip]; then a disappointing outcome to the recruiting year, followed by the second shipment of ready-made excuses

[snip]; then spring practice, where these Bleacher Blindos have honed an especially ridiculous tradition: watching the team practice against itself and declaring the program miraculously cured of all that ailed it the previous season – and the season before that, and the season before that, and...

Never has the utter madness of this pitiable new tradition been more on display than this season, because the start of spring practice was moved up to February 23 – less than nine weeks after the loss to Wyoming in the Las Vegas Bowl, capping a 6-6 season in which the Bruins finished 106th out of 117 Division I-A teams in total defense (and only tied for 45th in total offense).

Some might object at this point: But isn't feeling good about the team a little different than selling out for donuts, pizza, or cash?

Not in any meaningful sense. Not when it requires discounting all the well-thought out statistics offered by site, and other honest analysts. Not when it involves a pernicious fraternity of denial and deceit.

Why is it that Blindo's practice reports are always positive? Why are all our commits "good gets," and even lesser regarded players regarded as "sleepers" who can improve and contribute? Why is it that even negative rumors from Vegas are regarded as showing Karl Dorrell's "character"? Why are all the stories of older players having questions regarding Karl Dorrell's ability simply evidence of "underbelly"? When talented players transfer out of a concern for the direction of the program, why are these players regarded as "bad apples" who we didn't want in our program anyway?

In short, giving KD and his staff the benefit of the doubt on some issues is one thing, but claiming that he is right about every single decision -- that all signs regarding the program are positive, that every single aspect of the program improved during spring practice, that every single player is bigger, faster, stronger and better thanks to the unique innovation of a strength and conditioning coach -- not only strains credibility, it displays the amazing lengths Blindo will go to. He is so concerned with protecting Karl Dorrell that he doesn't care if doing so destroys the program.

Keep in mind that Blindo and Circulo make these ridulous claims despite Karl Dorrell's own (paraphrased according to the OC Register) assessment of how little was accomplished at spring practice, "Few things were settled this spring, but the Bruins will go into the fall with considerably more depth at quarterback, cornerback and receiver. Coach Karl Dorrell said that is more important than making final depth-chart decisions."

But that didn't stop Karl Dorrell from foregoing valuable days of practice. And somehow Blindo is still convinced this is a good thing.

Only one conclusion can be drawn, Blindo and Circulo are so selfish that their own enjoyment of spring practice, and attending our annual beatdowns at the hands of $C, Wazzu and others are more important than success. In some ways this is the worst of all. Blindo and Circulo are dangerous. They will enable KD to destroy the program, just as that bastard at ESPN destroyed the basketball program. Don't let it happen.

Networking effects and blogging

2005-03-21T21:59:00.000-08:00

Now that basketball season is over, and summer practice doesn't start for an interminable period of many months, I'd like to thank all of our frequent visitors (and new ones too -- thanks to Birkel at ACC Baskeblog including us in the post that launched a thousand hits. Check out the rest of the ACC Basketblog too. We'll be sure to include a permalink whenever we get around to housekeeping matters).

A few words for our regular readers. Help us grow. Encourage your fellow Bruin fans and alumni to read our blog and participate in our community. Read our information about how to contact the people who will ultimately be making the decision about whether to fire Karl Dorrell.

We play a big role in this too though. We are the alumni, the fans, the people who buy the tickets that pay for Karl Dorrell's and Dan Guerrero's salaries. The administration ignores the reaction of its fans, and declining attendance on the field, at its own peril. Declining attendance and giving will surely affect the review of Dan Guerrero's tenure, as well as Karl Dorrell's.

We, and others have given our readers historical perspective on our .500 coach KD.

We've also debunked the talent excuse (among others), and the budget excuse. Not to mention, the notorious rumors from Vegas.

So what can we do at this point? We will continue to do what we have been doing. Namely, providing facts and analysis to help counteract the inevitable lack of those elements and endless Circulo/Blindo manic-depressive, passive-aggressive, cognitive dissonance exhibited by those who are bigger supporters of Karl Dorrell than they our of our football program. Facts and objective analyses are like Kryptonite to Circulo and Blindo. Always remember that.

We need you to help this blog grow. If we're ever going to find a Howland for football, we need your help.

GDFASDRFASDFSADF

2005-03-18T00:23:00.000-08:00

I'm very upset that the season is over. However, we massively exceeded expectations. I just hoped for more. I'm drunk. Anywho...late

Happy St. Patrick's Day

2005-03-17T08:48:00.000-08:00

We're not going to be talking about other things today. But if you're interested, you might find things of interest elsewhere on the internet.

Mav's crunching numbers again

2005-03-16T18:47:00.000-08:00

Mav conducted a little study of 29 coaching tenures in the Pac 10 during the last 20 years (omitting the five hired since 2001). The comparison was between the first two years of the new hire's tenure, and the last two years of the previous coach's tenure. The results are interesting, and not promising for Karl Dorrell.

The results, summarized are as follows:

Eighteen of these coaches had a better record in their first two seasons that the prior coach’s record in his last two seasons.

[snip]

Of these eighteen coaches, twelve had at least reasonably successful performance in their jobs

[snip]

Eleven of these coaches had a worse record in their first two seasons that the prior coach’s record in his last two seasons. Of these eleven coaches, nine were ultimately fired.

To further summarize, that means that roughly 62% of new hires in the years between 1985 and 2001 achieved greater success in their first two years than that achieved in the last two years by the men they replaced. Included among this group is Bob Toledo, who was 15-8 in his first two years, compared to Terry Donahue's 12-11 in his last two.

This also means that only 38% of new hires failed to improve their program in their fist two years.

Right off the bat, Karl Dorrell is in the lower 40% of Pac 10 coaches in terms of first two years objective performance over the past 20 years.

What's more, nearly 82% of those coaches who failed to improve their programs were ultimately fired. Only one-third of those coaches who improved their programs over the first two years were ultimately fired.

Those are pretty telling numbers. So, for those Blindos who claim that you can't judge a coach until he's had years, we say, the numbers say otherwise.

Clearly, there is a highly significant correlation between success in the first two years and overall success.

[snip]

Examining the five most successful coaches in the conference over the past 20 years

[snip]

it is remarkable how quickly they distinguished themselves. They didn’t need years to remove “underbelly.” In almost every case, there was marked, objective improvement in the team’s record over the coach’s first two seasons – the amount of time we are told that it is unfair and meaningless by which to judge Dorrell.

Indeed. Make sure to read the whole thing.

"That was fun"

2005-03-15T08:31:00.000-08:00

(Photo credit: Daily Bruin)

"That was fun." -- Karl Dorrell, December 4, 2004, after losing to USC (A translation into Blindoese: after a "moral victory" over USC) (Hat tip: Mav's quotebook

Why is this relevant today? Because yesterday, Karl Dorrell led his team to the most fun they had since their loss against USC in December.

With spring practice coming to a close, UCLA enjoyed mostly a play day Monday, ending with the Bruins' version of a touch football game.

Things will get more serious again in the fall. Few things were settled this spring, but the Bruins will go into the fall with considerably more depth at quarterback, cornerback and receiver. Coach Karl Dorrell said that is more important than making final depth- chart decisions.

Oh good. All my concerns are allayed. What does the UCLA basketball team think is fun? A 90-69 win (and that's a real win, not a moral victory) in a dunkfest over USC.

"'Everything was clicking,' senior Brian Morrison said. 'This was a fun night.'"

While Karl Dorrell and his team are playing grabass, the UCLA basketball team is getting ready for a big game against Texas Tech. And under Coach Howland, expectations, and hopefully, performance, will continue to grow. And Diane Pucin has a little piece on the game as well.

But back to the major issue. Karl Dorrell is 12-13. He has a terrible record from November through the end of the year. He is 0-2 against USC. But it's good to know that he and the team are having "fun." There are only a limited number of spring practices. If, as Karl Dorrell stated, they really didn't accomplish very much in spring ball, why are they wasting a practice? Disgusting. When Karl Dorrell is fired next November, he has no one to blame but himself.

Ben Howland on the Jim Rome Show

2005-03-14T10:43:00.000-08:00

(Photo credit Associated Press)

Ben Howland was on the Jim Rome show today. I listened and here is a quasi-transcript for those interested. Regardless of your thoughts on Jim Rome and his schtick, he is one of the better interviewers in sports today. He has also has a pretty good relationship with Ben Howland, and unlike some of the other ESPN talking heads, doesn't have an unnatural hatred for UCLA. Here is what I was able to transcribe:

JR: Ben, great to have you back, how you doing?
BH: Great to be on

JR: beaten by Oregon State
BH: Disappointed with how we played, we didn’t play close to how we’ve been playing, always a lesson to be learned, postseason, have to play with sense of urgency. Oregon State played with a sense of urgency, we didn’t, happy to be in, based on how the committee decided, we were confident, happy to be close to home.

JR: How much of an edge is it to be playing at the McHale Center [in Tuscon]?
BH: Better for both teams, I like how they’ve done [pod seeding], good for players, fans, families, that’s a great thing, excited to be in an environment we’ve played in before, but [Hoosiers reference the hoops are] still ten feet high

JR: How do you prepare for Texas Tech?
B: Difficut to prepare for, good fundamentals, set good screens, they’re like blockers, they change angles, scrrens, flare scrrens, rescreen, screen on the ball, we have to call out the screens, they have two good guards.

JR: You've never coached against Bob Knight
BH: I have unbelievable respect for him, that being said, rather play one of our nonconference opponents, I just want to win.

JR: You have a young team, do you approach those young players the way you approach upperclassmen?
BH: You don’t treat every player the same, the freshmen, Aflalo, Farmar, Shipp, also Mata, have done a great job all year long, they’re a big part of the reason for success. You make more mistakes when you’re young, they're playing over 30 minutes a game each, a little thin, [injuries] forced to play 4 perimeter players for three positions.

JR: How much better is it just for experience to be in the tournament?
BH: The experience means so much, getting in will help us for the future, but it’s all about now. We want to win today, get ready for a Texas Tech team, they had opportunity to win Big XII tournament, beat Oklahoma on Saturday, they're a hot team, it will be a challenge.

JR: What are your thoughts on Washington? Are they one of the best four teams?
BH: they have a chance to get all the way to St. Louis, they're a tough team, in the Alaska Shootout, they beat some good teams, NC State, Utah, they beat Arizona twice. They have four guards who are very difficult, get up and down. Lorenzo did a great job. I'm happy for Washington, the Pac 10. Arizona, had they won, would have been fighting for a 1 seed.

JR: Has the UCLA opportunity been what you thought?
BH: It’s been great, I’ve been blessed, lucky. It's been a dream since I was a kid, always been the pinnacle job in all the profession, we’re building something, recruiting, fans have been great, I’m excited.

JR: You and Rick Majerus had a good relationship, with him taking the USC job, but now he’s gone, what happened?
BH: Not sure, but he had 15 years at Utah, he grinds, 110%. You never leave your job in college basketball. I think he realized he needed more time, for his health. I’m glad because I don’t have to compete against him. I appreciate everything he’s done for me. The number one thing is health. I'm excited, he’ll get a great job.

It was an interesting interview. I think Coach Howland showed one of the reasons we are so excited about what he is building here. With all the players we have coming back, and the recruits Coach Howland is bringing in, there are nothing but good things in store for UCLA basketball.

A word about the haters. It's annoying, but as far as I'm concerned, it's all good. If nobody hates you, you're probably a failure. Think about how infuriating Pom Pom Peetie is at that gloridied community college across town. Do you seriously think anyone who graduated from there thinks those kinds of things about KD? Doubtful. Look at Duke. Yes, it's annoying to hear Dick Vitale braying incessently about them, but people love them or hate them because of success. So when you hear various morons of the day talking bad about what Coach Howland is building, just remind yourself, it's because they fear us, they fear UCLA basketball again. And that is great. No one fears KD.

Back from vacation

2005-03-14T09:17:00.000-08:00

Off of Tortola, British Virgin Islands

Great to be back in the tourney. Now let's beat Texas Tech. I have respect for Knight as a coach, but he hates UCLA and goes out of his way to bash us and Coach Wooden's great legacy. Let's beat the crap out of him. And check out Mav's season wrapup.

No affirming UCLA's Actions

2005-03-11T17:08:00.000-08:00

Out of fear of losing our sense of direction in light of the UCLA Basketball team's expectation-busting performance this season, and with a little encouragement from a fellow Bruin, I've decided to revisit the classic article written by Jason Whitlock of ESPN in response to the hiring of Karl Dorrell. (Note: I was only planning to post excerpts, but the whole article is so spot on, that I couldn't resist positing the whole damn thing).

No affirming UCLA's actions
By Jason Whitlock
Page 2 columnist

So why don't I have a good feeling about UCLA hiring Karl Dorrell as its next head football coach?

Many black assistant coaches have a lot riding on Karl Dorrell's success as UCLA's head coach. It's a feel-good story. With the home-run hiring of Division I-A football's fourth African-American head coach, the school that produced Arthur Ashe and Jackie Robinson and employs a Hispanic athletics director just hit for the Jesse Jackson cycle. UCLA might as well be Grambling.

So why am I not shouting from the rooftops, "Free at last! Free at last! Thank Eddie Robinson, I'm free at last"?

I should be overjoyed today. I'm black. I played college football. I'm tired of seeing black assistant coaches passed over for head-coaching opportunities. Why don't I view Dorrell's hiring as a major sign of progress?

Because if Dorrell were white, I would be screaming from the rooftops, "Who the hell is this mother… and when did he become such a hotshot candidate? A 39-year-old, nondescript black NFL receivers coach would've never landed such a good job."

That's exactly what I said when ESPN announced Dorrell's hiring at halftime of the GMAC Bowl. I was pissed that a no-name white assistant coach had stolen the job from Greg Robinson, a no-talent defensive coordinator for the Kansas City Chiefs. We here in Kansas City were hoping the Bruins would do us the same favor USC did in 1997 when the Trojans made the mistake of hiring then-Chiefs offensive coordinator Paul Hackett, the man Marty Schottenheimer refused to fire. We're afraid that the fiercely loyal Dick Vermeil won't have the testicular fortitude to whack Robinson, the leader of the NFL's worst defense and one of three finalists for the UCLA job.

To his credit, Vermeil, a former UCLA head coach, lobbied hard to pawn off Robinson on the Bruins. But, I guess, despite two interviews, the UCLA athletics administration couldn't overlook the fact that in the past three years Robinson had gotten canned in Denver, has overseen the total destruction of Kansas City's proud defensive tradition and doesn't have a defensive player or assistant coach who believes in his complicated, bend-and-break, soft-zone scheme.

But I digress. This column isn't about Robinson's 32 Defense (ranked 32nd in the league and gives up 32 points per game).

This is about Dorrell.

When I heard the announcement, I dropped the controller to my Xbox (Ball State, led by the running of Bernie Parmalee, the hard tackling of Blaine Bishop and the quarterbacking of true freshman standout Jason Whitlock Jr., was in the national championship game) and turned up the volume on my big screen so I could hear what ESPN analysts Mark May and Trev Alberts would say about Dorrell.

To my surprise, I learned that Dorrell was black. That fact seemed to earn May's endorsement. May saw it as a sign that Tyrone Willingham's success at Notre Dame had given athletics directors the courage and desire to consider other African-American candidates.

I can understand May's sentiments. It's good to see a brother get an opportunity, especially at such a plum job.

But Tyrone Willingham was a known commodity. We know virtually nothing about Dorrell. So late last night I jumped on the 'Net looking for information about Dorrell. He was a run-of-the-mill receiver at UCLA, catching passes from Rick Neuheisel. Dorrell had a brief stint in the NFL. As an assistant coach, he hooked up with Neuheisel at Colorado and followed him to Washington. Dorrell coordinated Neuheisel's offenses, then jumped to the NFL as a position coach. Interesting stuff.

But what really caught my attention and raised my skepticism was the Los Angeles Daily News' account of how and why Dorrell landed the job. Dorrell did absolutely nothing wrong. The newspaper story just made me question exactly what the UCLA athletics department was thinking.

According to the L.A. Daily News, "Dorrell is viewed as young, handsome, fit, energetic, bright and, of course, African-American."

Take out the adjective "fit" and it sounds like I could've been UCLA's new coach. I don't think Larry Coker, Frank Beamer or Ralph Friedgen were ever young and handsome or, of course, African-American.

But the L.A. Daily News quoted a source close to the search as saying, "In today's day and age, having an African-American football coach represent your university has the potential to pay incredible dividends for the university. It's a whole brand new ballgame now."

Michigan State is still waiting to collect on those incredible dividends. What, is Trent Lott proposing legislation for kickbacks to universities with young, handsome, fit, energetic, bright and, of course, African-American head football coaches?

And the L.A. Daily News story wrapped up with this valuable bit of insight: "According to a source close to the search, Dorrell, dressed in a stylish dark suit and white shirt, had an extremely impressive interview" with UCLA's chancellor.

Why not just go out and hire Denzel? He did a great job in "Remember the Titans."
I hope Dorrell can coach football. Because I'm not confident the people he'll be working for know a damn thing about football. They won't be any help. Greg Robinson should've never been a candidate. Mike Riley, the other finalist, shouldn't have been a candidate either. He's never won anywhere and, obviously, judging by the jobs he's turned down, doesn't want the responsibility of being a head coach.
The Bruins return a great deal of talent and are expected to contend for the Pac 10 title next season. (Note: Contend for the PAC 10 title? That's not fair to Coach Dorrell in his first season!)I pray Dorrell didn't just step into some ... stuff. Because if he's not ready, if he's unsuccessful at UCLA, black assistant coaches will be hearing his name, not Willingham's, every time a high-profile job becomes available.

There you have it.

CFN Gives Coach Dorrell a Little Shout Out

2005-03-11T12:08:00.000-08:00

Coach on the Hot Seat – Mike Bellotti, Oregon – No one expected Bellotti to produce double-digit win totals every season, but three years of mediocrity and no postseason wins has the former rising star in unfamiliar territory. The administration wouldn’t be foolish enough to replace him anytime soon, but a Top 3 finish in the Pac-10 would be timely. Playing in the shadow of mighty USC, UCLA’s Karl Dorrell looks overwhelmed in his two seasons in Westwood.

"Overwhelmed" is way too generous.

A hearty congratulations to Coach Dorrell for finally getting the media attention that he deserves!

Huge win over OSU

2005-03-03T21:56:00.000-08:00

(Photo credit: AP /Matt Sayles)

With the 69-61 win over OSU, Ben Howland and the UCLA basketball team came up with a huge win. We have a shot at third place, should Stanford lose to UW (as they likely will) and we take care of our business against the Ducks. Should those two events take place, Arizona would win the conference, UW would take second, and we would take third. We have clinched at least fourth.

(Photo credit: AP /Matt Sayles)

Freshman Arron Afflalo snapped a tie on a 3-pointer with 1:42 remaining and UCLA defeated Oregon State 69-61 Thursday night to shore up its bid for an at-large berth in the NCAA tournament.

The Bruins (17-9) also helped their seeding in next week's Pac-10 tournament at Staples Center. Their third straight win moved them into a third-place tie with Stanford at 10-7. The Cardinal lost to Washington State 59-48 Thursday night.

[snip]

Freshman Jordan Farmar led UCLA with 23 points and assisted on Afflalo's 3-pointer that put the Bruins ahead for good. Dijon Thompson added 18 points and Afflalo had 12 points and nine rebounds.

[snip]

The Bruins were 19-of-22 from the free throw line in the second half, which made up for their 37 percent field-goal shooting.

It will obviously take more than a win over the Beavers to make the East Coast MSM scribbler-wankers stand up and take notice. After all, a win on national TV over a team from the big, bad Big East wasn't enough.

But hey, let the haters keep hating. Coach Howland has done a phenomenal job, and from this point, each win continues to surpass our reasonable expectations. And sooner or later, the play on the court will speak for itself. The juxtaposition with Karl Dorrell couldn't be more clear.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to watch the Pac 10 tourney, although hopefully, I'll get a chance to watch Saturday's game. But don't feel too bad for your humble pajama-wearing friend, as I'll be taking in some of the finer sights of the Caribbean.

Later. And go Bruins.

The Underbelly Strikes Again

2005-03-02T07:40:00.000-08:00

Senior tackle C.J. Niusulu, UCLA's most experienced defensive lineman, was suspended indefinitely by Coach Karl Dorrell on Tuesday for violation of athletic department policy.

Niusulu, who sat out last season's game against San Diego State for the same violation, may have played his last game as a Bruin.

"I don't know at this point and time whether I'm going to give him the opportunity to come back or not," Dorrell said. "This happened to him before and it's to the point where we have to make a decision about what we should do with our program and moving forward from this point on."

A few points.

First and foremost, what happened to the underbelly that Dorrell was supposedly cleaning up? See also this.

I'm sure Blindo has a handful of ready-made excuses. It's not Dorrell's fault that this player did whatever it is he did. (Just like Dorrell doesn't make the plays on the field). But KD should get credit for all the other guys that didn't get arrested. Of course. It's becoming increasingly clear that KD is really not a disciplinarian. But we knew all along that this was just a Blindo excuse anyway.

It was just another way to blame KD's current problems on the past tenure of Bob Toledo. Who, by the way, won 7 games the season he was (rightfully) fired. The team won 8 games. Dorrell has yet to win 7 games, and there are discipline problems, in other words, Dorrell has a lot of underbelly of his own. Somehow Blinod will manage to blame this on Bob Toledo, but the fact of the matter is that that excuse just isn't going to fly anymore.

We also don't want to hear about this affecting depth. (Which of course will also be blamed on everyone but Dorrell.) If he had disicplined his players to prevent this sort of thing (or -- perish the thought -- actually recruited some more good players of his own) would not be as big of a problem.

By the way, once again Lonnie White does nothing more than "report" the preparted Morgan Center spin. But Brian Dohn, the best Bruin sports reporter by a longshot, in our opinion, actually explains some of the facts behind the incident:

Niusulu missed practice Monday, but Dorrell said that was because of a class conflict. However, his absence Tuesday was because of the suspension, which comes after a string of transgressions within the program.

Niusulu repeatedly came late to team meetings and workout sessions. Last month, Niusulu acknowledged he was suspended from team activities because of his failure to show up on time for mandatory workouts. But he was reinstated for spring practice.

Last season, Niusulu was suspended for the game against San Diego State for a violation of athletic department policies.

Phone messages were not returned by Niusulu, who started seven games and tied for second among UCLA linemen with 24 tackles.

ESPN Hates UCLA

2005-03-01T14:48:00.000-08:00

At least Jay "Lil' Dookie V" Bilas does.

Why else would the ESPN College basketball "analyst" completley shun the remarkable job Coach Ben Howland has done this season in his discussion of potential Pac 10 Coaches of the Year?

In his profound "analysis" of potential COY candidates, Bilas ponders:

Does it [Coach of the Year] go to the guy that has exceeded expectations and brought a bottom dweller into respectability? [Howland? Yep] Does it go to the guy that has met high expectations and has put together a talented team and coached it well (which is no small feat)? [Howland? Yep]

Like identifying NCAA Tournament-worthy teams, or recognizing quality players, I cannot define my Coaches of the Year, or put them in a neat little box. I just know a great coaching job when I see it. [No, Jay, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground]

And here is how the Pac 10 COY race shapes up for the Bile man:

Pac-10: Oregon State's Jay John has brought the Beaver program further than thought possible this year, and OSU has been very competitive. [Ben Howland has done this with 3 freshman]

Lorenzo Romar of Washington made a late run last year to make the NCAA Tournament, but this year has done it with a bullseye on his back. [UCLA ALWAYS has a bullsye on their backs]

But Lute Olson of Arizona has done another remarkable job, bringing an Arizona team along and making its talented parts play together heading toward March. Olson has, in his words, the best defensive team he has had in his 22 years in the desert and one of the three best shooters in America in Salim Stoudamire. The Hall of Famer's management of the temperamental Stoudamire has been key to Arizona's run. [Howland has transformed Dijon from a player that was laughed out of his NBA evaluation to a potential late first round/ second round pick]

Pac-10 Coach of the Year: Lute Olson, Arizona. Runner-Up: Lorenzo Romar, Washington and Jay John, Oregon State.

No, you didn't miss it. It's not there. He didn't even mention Ben Howland, even though Coach Howland satisfied all of the criteria he utilized for his frontrunners.

According to Bilas' "analysis," a perennial Tournament team (UA) that, is having a solid, but not spectacular year by UA standards, is the product of great coaching. However, leading a program left in shambles by the former coach, while relying on 3 freshman in making a likely Tournament bid doesn't even merit consideration as COY for the PAC 10?

If ESPN is showing this kind of obvious disdain for UCLA at this point, how will they react when UCLA is once again competing for National Championships?

Unbelievable.

Jay Bilas has absolutely no credibility.

Eric Bieniemy takes over as Recruiting Coordinator

2005-02-23T14:12:00.000-08:00

I'm not quite sure what to think of this move.

Is it really a good idea to make your best salesman an administrator?

Stanford game previews

2005-02-20T09:04:00.000-08:00

Regarding the new hire of Moore, Lonnie White files a Morgan Center press release and calls it "reporting." You get paid for that? As usual, however, Brian Dohn earns his pay.

Diane Pucin looks at the Stanford game this afternoon. Stanford will be without Dan Grunfeld, out for the season with a knee injury.

(Photo credit: AP/Marcio Jose Sanchez)

Stanford plays host today to the Bruins (14-8, 8-6) and the winner will be alone in third place. When the Cardinal beat UCLA, 75-64, in Pauley Pavilion last month, Grunfeld scored 25 points.

"That's tough for them," UCLA Coach Ben Howland said. "Dan's proven to be a great player and especially this late in the season, it's a difficult adjustment for a team to make. But with the veterans they have, I know they'll do it."

Brian Dohn has an article on basketball as well:

Not even UCLA coach Ben Howland could categorize this as just another game. And he couldn't call the Bruins' game today at Stanford their most important, as he usually does, solely because it is the next game.

The winner will own third place in the Pacific-10 Conference race and take a huge step toward an NCAA Tournament berth.

"It obviously would be a huge win for us," Howland said. "It's just a huge game. It's a huge game for both teams, and I think both teams are aware of that. I mean, basically, it's coming down to who will have the leg up on third place in our league."

A win by Stanford (14-9, 8-5 Pac-10) would give the Cardinal a season sweep in the series -- and perhaps an edge in the selection process. UCLA (14-8, 8-6) wants another road win and to keep its all-important RPI under 40. After Thursday's victory at Cal, UCLA is 5-3 on the road in conference play.

"We're not satisfied with getting a split up here," UCLA power forward Dijon Thompson said. "We have every intention of going out and getting a sweep."

There's a Rob Kuwada preview as well.

No doubt this is a big game. Go Bruins.

Uh oh, Dorrell hires another NAU buddy

2005-02-19T17:42:00.000-08:00

Karl Dorrell moved quickly to replace Don Johnson, hiring NAU buddy Thurmond Moore to coach the defensive linemen. According to the Morgan Center press release:

Moore, a Sacramento (CA) native, has extensive experience on the defensive side of the ball, including coaching at a dozen collegiate football programs, several NFL internships and NFL Europe. He also coached two members of the 2005 AFC Pro Bowl squad -- Indianapolis' Dwight Freeney and Pittsburgh's Joey Porter -- as collegians.

"We are excited about having Thurmond join our staff," said Dorrell. "He is a very experienced defensive line coach and his lines have excelled in the area of pressuring the quarterback. I feel our young players will benefit greatly from Thurmond's experience and teaching ability."

In 2004, Moore served as cornerbacks coach for the University of Tulsa. In his one season, the Golden Hurricane ranked 22nd nationally in pass defense, allowing just 191.3 yards per game, and cornerback Jermaine Hope was a second-team All-WAC selection.

Moore spent the previous three seasons (2001-2003) as the defensive coordinator at the University of Buffalo. In his first season at Buffalo, Moore guided one of the biggest defensive turnarounds in the nation in 2001.

[snip]

[Moore also] had previous coaching stints at North Texas (1995), Utah State (1994), Northern Arizona (1989-93), Delaware State (1986-88), Wyoming (1986), California (1983-85) and Cal State Sacramento (1980-82).

Looky here. Guess who also coached at for the mighty Lumberjacks during that time period.

[Dorrell's] other coaching stops include Central Florida (1989; receivers), Northern Arizona (1990-91; offensive coordinator/receivers) and Arizona State (1994; receivers).

Well, it worked out so well with Steve Axman.

Furthermore, the beginning of spring ball has been postponed due to "administrative reasons."

We feel better about KD's level of competence already. If you're not yet sure what type of Bruin fan you are, take Mav's quiz.

In other news, UCLA has hired a new assistant sports information staffer, who has agreed to answer a few questions from your humble bloggers. Here's a short excerpt.

FKD: How do you feel about next year's opponents?

BB: Our initial assessment is that they will all die

FKD: Interesting. What about USC and Oklahoma. They were pretty good last year and...

BB: These cowards have no morals. They have no shame about lying. They are like a snake and we are going to cut it in pieces. We will kill them all........most of them.

We are surrounding them and pounding them. The whole trend has changed and we are going to finalize this very soon.

We are going to tackle them.

FKD: Interesting use of metaphors, but I agree that defense will be a key. Now I have a rather sensitive question. Numerous media reports have suggested that Karl Dorrell's job is in danger and ...

BB: The American press is all about lies! All they tell is lies, lies and more lies!

I have detailed information about the situation...which completely proves that what they allege are illusions . . . They lie every day.

Lying is forbidden in the Morgan Center. DG and KD will tolerate nothing but truthfulness as they are men of great honor and integrity. Everyone is encouraged to speak freely of the truths evidenced in their eyes and hearts.

Just look carefully, I only want you to look carefully. Do not repeat the lies of liars. Do not become like them.

I have detailed information about the situation . . . which completely proves that what they allege are illusions . . . They lie every day.

They think we are retarded - they are retarded.

FKD: Well thank you very much for your time. We will certainly try to arrange another discussion sometime soon.

Big win over Cal

2005-02-18T09:45:00.000-08:00

(Photo credit: Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP)

UCLA defeated the Bears, 77-62, Thursday night in front of 9,271 at Haas Pavilion. The Pacific 10 Conference victory kept the Bruins (14-8, 8-6) a half-game behind Stanford and in sole possession of fourth place. It was the Bruins' first win at Cal (12-11, 5-8) since 2000.

"It was a great win for us," UCLA Coach Ben Howland said. "I give us the credit."

His loud voice bounced off the walls. The smile had come two-thirds of the way through the game when guard Arron Afflalo passed up a shot in the lane to get the ball in to center Michael Fey.

[snip]

Howland was also excited about UCLA's defense. Cal made only 25 of 69 shots (36.2%) and leading scorer Richard Midgley had only five points on one-for-10 shooting.

"We did a great job of doubling the post," Howland said, "and we did a good job of rotating." Howland noted that Afflalo and Farmar combined for 12 rebounds.

Brian Dohn channels Bob Marley:

As UCLA put the finishing touches on a 77-62 thrashing of Cal, one thing crept to mind.

As Dijon Thompson slid to the basket for uncontested dunks, and as scores of Bruins took open shots, or beat the Bears down court for easy baskets, the question resonated.

As the inept Bears clunked shots hopelessly off the iron, it screamed out.

How did UCLA lose to this team a month ago on its home floor?

There were no answers, just the opportunity to make amends for it.

"We knew we had to come here and try to take care of business and get the win back they got in Los Angeles," Thompson said. "Nothing is going to make up for it. It's in the past, but it does feel good to get a win here."

The loss a month ago might hurt the Bruins yet, but Thursday's demolition of the Bears at Haas Pavilion gave UCLA (14-8, 8-6 Pacific-10 Conference) a much-needed win in its quest to reach the NCAA tournament.

RPI watch:

33 Warren Nolan
32 Mike Greenfield
34 Ken Pomeroy

Read JD's recap here.

Discuss the game here, in our comments section, or go to Mav's basketball discussion board, although it's looking a little dead in there.

Like Coach Howland said, one game at a time, but the Stanford game looks HUGE.

It's official, Da Bears

2005-02-17T10:14:00.000-08:00

"With the start of spring football practice less than a week away, UCLA lost defensive line coach Don Johnson to the Chicago Bears on Wednesday."

No indication on who will replace Johnson. None here either.

A few more write ups on Jordan Farmer, by Pucin and one by Jim Thomas of the Daily Breeze (hat tip: Yoni who thinks that if Jordan and the Bruins who continue to play well, the team looks good to make the tourney. Fingers crossed.)

More stuff here. " 'Must win. Can't lose in conference any more,' UCLA freshman guard Arron Afflalo said."

In a hurry, so that will have to suffice for now. Go Bruins.

UCLA Basketball Blog

2005-02-14T09:03:00.000-08:00

We stumbled across this blog. Check it out.

And Mav has a new column, summarizing NCAA Tourney chances.

Things that make dams beat upset things that go "woof." Rather handily.

Chris Dufresne has a baseball preview, of sorts.

And Erik Lorig appears to have ended his odyssey by finally comitting to Cal. Still waiting for confirmation, but that would mean that as predicted, KD closed with a big whimper.

19-0 run buries Bruins

2005-02-13T10:35:00.000-08:00

(Photo credit: AP/Mark J. Terrill)

Yikes. Just when you thought we were on the verge of a big win, no such luck. Diane Pucin's recap:

After the young Bruins took a five-point lead to get Pauley Pavilion rocking early in the second half Saturday, Arizona knocked off an effortless 19-0 scoring run, a stretch of swift, powerful basketball that left UCLA dazed but not too confused. The Wildcats were just better.

[snip]

And there was no doubt what happened. Arizona Coach Lute Olson told the Wildcats to slow down and go inside. Channing Frye, the 6-foot-11 center, and Ivan Radenovic, the 6-10 forward, knocked around the Bruins. From that came layups and free throws and then wide-open jump shots for the guards.

[snip]

Still, with 17:34 left UCLA had a five-point lead, 47-42, on a Josh Shipp rebound of a Thompson miss. Pauley was noisy. Freshman point guard Jordan Farmar (career-high 27 points and five assists) had controlled the game with his scoring and floor play.

Until the streak.

Olson called a timeout after Shipp's basket. "Once we got that timeout," Olson said, "our guys came out and made it tough for UCLA to score. We got more touches and were able to make more shots."

It's simple if you have big guys who can catch the ball.

[snip]

"We had no inside attack tonight," Howland said. "Fey's our prime inside focus, and he has to do a good job of wanting it."

Until freshman Lorenzo Mata scored a meaningless rebound dunk with 41 seconds left, Fey's first-half basket was the only one scored by a Bruin center.

"This was a huge opportunity for us to not capitalize on," Howland said.

Said Thompson: "We missed a big chance."

Brian Dohn, as usual, summarizes the events well:

Amid the frenzy created by UCLA's five-point lead, built with crowd-pleasing 3-pointers and easy transition baskets, Arizona coach Lute Olson called timeout and ripped into center Channing Frye.

Frye and Arizona guard Salim Stoudamire then offered choice words for the rest of their teammates, and, boy, the message was received.

Before UCLA knew what happened, or how to stop the devastating free fall, the 12th-ranked Wildcats had scored 19 consecutive points to silence the season-high Pauley Pavilion crowd of 12,681.

Arizona eased to an 83-73 win Saturday made a little less embarrassing when the Bruins scored the final 11 points in the last 66 seconds.

[snip]

"We took a number of questionable shots in the second half that just fueled their run, and it showed a lot of our inexperience," UCLA coach Ben Howland said. "In a game like this, it's a huge opportunity for us not to capitalize on, unfortunately."

[snip]

Jordan Farmar scored a career-high 27 points to pace UCLA, yet it was Arizona's decision to double- and triple-team leading scorer Dijon Thompson that had the Bruins scrambling on offense during the game's pivotal run early in the second half.

[snip]

"He's their team," Stoudamire said. "You have to try and shut down the best player on their team, just like they do me."

Rob Kuwada offers this:

They were there, then they weren't. Quick shots, bad shots, missed shots and nothing positive on the defensive end.

Just like that, the UCLA Bruins lost a lead and were routed in an 83-73 loss Saturday to No.12 Arizona that was not that close.

"We were up five, and then it seemed like we were down 20 instantly," Bruins freshman point guard Jordan Farmar said. "It just felt like it was all coming down."

Much has been made of the poor shooting in the second half. I agree with Howland that the problem isn't missing shots, it's taking bad shots. Additionally, the lack of an interior presence really hurt. Even when we were ahead, we were getting almost all the scoring from the backcourt, while Arizona had a much more balanced attack.

Color commentator Marques Johnson was right with a lot of his points. First, was that a key to a Bruins victory was to have an uptempo game, but to be smart. In the first half, that happened, in the second half it didn't. Second, when Arizona decided to really try to make an effort to go inside, that was a big factor.

Further, Arizona really turned up their defensive intensity in the second half. In the first half, the long threes were going in because our players were getting good looks. There simply weren't as many good looks in the second half because Arizona was playing much better defense.

Part of this you have to blame on the offense for not doing enough to get good looks, but a lot of credit has to go to the good defense played by Arizona.

Mark Whicker has a more positive analysis:

Look at the time line of Saturday's 83-73 loss to Arizona and you can pretty much track UCLA basketball.

The Bruins are halfway back.

The first half was a celebration of assured three-point shots, smooth layup drives by Jordan Farmar, and impassioned loose-ball play. UCLA left the court with a one-point lead.

The second half was reality. Arizona trailed, 47-42, then led, 61-47, a 51/2-minute shutout in which the Bruins, old and young, couldn't handle the truth.

The Wildcats led by 21 near the end, which means they thrashed UCLA by 28 points in a period of 15:09. They are 21-4 overall and 11-2 in the Pac-10, which is what they usually are. At No.12, they are underrated, which is what they almost never are.

There is an almost measurable lag time between reputation and reality in sports. Usually it takes about a year. This time last year, Lute Olson was seriously considering putting several Wildcats up for adoption. Their 20 victories were their fewest since 1987, and they mailed in a miserable first-round NCAA loss to Seton Hall.

[snip]

then they lost to Washington State for the first time in 39 meetings, and at home yet.

"They called a team meeting after that one," Rosborough said, "and I mean they did, not the coaches. Since then our practices have been a whole lot better."

Which didn't keep Olson from calling a lacerating timeout when UCLA got that five-point lead. He met Channing Frye near the three-point line and, well, fried him. Then he saved a few more adjectives for Ivan Radenovic.

[snip]

Frye immediately converted a three-point play, Radenovic scored six points in the next seven possessions, and the Bruins actually went almost seven minutes between field goals.

UCLA's offense at that point consisted of people trying to take eight-point shots.

"We have to find a way to stop runs," said Donny Daniels, Ben Howland's top assistant. "It wasn't their defense that was making us settle for shots. We just didn't take good ones."

"Sometimes there were guys on the other side of the floor that were discouraged because we weren't running to their side," Farmar said, "but what we have to realize is they're just one pass away from being in position to score. It's stuff we always work on in practice."

So the Bruins missed 9 of 11 three-pointers in the second half and got one basket from their three big men. They're 13-8 and 7-6. If they win the games they should, and lose only to Stanford (which lost Dan Grunfeld with a knee injury Saturday) and Notre Dame, they will hand a persuasive case to the NCAA Tournament selection committee.

There's not to much more to say. This was a big opportunity, and unfortunately, our Bruins weren't up to the task. There are no moral victories here. We got a win we needed on Thursday, and we had a chance to do something big last night and weren't able to. Where does that leave us?

According to Warren Nolan's Nitty Gritty Report, we have an RPI of 37, and we're not listed among the "teams in danger." There are three remaining games against top 50 RPI teams, which is the only factor currently listed as a negative (2-6 record against top 50 RPI teams). Those games are Stanford, Oregon and Notre Dame, and I think it's correct to consider those two of the biggest games remaining. Another factor for concern is that we're 5-5 in our last ten, a statistic that could also use improvement.

There are six regular season games remaining: at Cal, at Stanford, $C, at Notre Dame, Oregon State, Oregon, and then the Pac 10 Tourney. We are currently in fourth place in the Pac 10. We're one game behind in the loss column to Stanford, and one game ahead of Oregon State (Oregon State plays UW today). If the season ended today, considering that the Pac 10 has the second highest conference RPI, the Pac 10 would probably get four NCAA teams: UA, UW, Stanford, and UCLA. With five conference games remaining, winning three would give us a better than .500 conference record (10-8). But if we also lost to Notre Dame, that would leave us at 16-11. So I think we need to go at least 4-2 overall and 3-2 in the conference. Whicker's back-of-the-envelope calculation that winning all the remaining games but Stanford and Notre Dame will do the trick might be right. But 17-10 still leaves things a little dicey, especially if we don't do well in the Pac 10 tourney. Winning five games would make it pretty tough to leave us out at 18-9, especially since that would mean that one of those wins would have to be a road win at either Stanford or Notre Dame, and it would mean that we were 7-3 in our last ten.

But again, we might be getting ahead of ourselves. The most important game is the next one. We absolutely have to beat the hippies from Cal.

"Be at your best when your best is needed."

2005-02-10T22:15:00.000-08:00

Quote by Coach John R. Wooden. Great game. Held ASU to 38% from the field. Diogu scored 20, but made only four of 11 field goals. Dijon dropped 39. He won this matchup of potential Pac 10 POY candidates. Farmar scored 20, all in the second half. More later.

More subdued game day roundup

2005-02-10T08:47:00.000-08:00

Hopefully, we've learned our lesson, and we won't go overboard dreaming of Sweet 16's, and so forth. Like Ben Howland, we're just going to take it one game at a time. However, there is no getting around the fact that today's game at home against ASU (7:30, Pauley, Radio 690). The geniuses at the Pac 10 offices and Fox Sports have, in their wisdom, decided not to air this game, which is, with the possible exception of Xavier-Cincinnati, the biggest game of the night. The incompetence of the Pac 10 management at securing television contracts and bowl games is another topic for another day.

{photo credit: AP)

Diane Pucin writes:

Coach Ben Howland won't entertain the notion at all, won't discuss it. But Bruin players can't help but think about the NCAA tournament. With Selection Sunday less than a month away and UCLA tied with Stanford for third place in the Pacific 10 Conference, calculations are being done.

Senior Dijon Thompson, who was a freshman on the last Bruin NCAA team, was most realistic about his chances for making a second trip.

Center Michael Fey thought any win total over 15 plus a third- or fourth-place finish in the regular season would do the trick and freshman Arron Afflalo thought 17 wins might be a good number, but Thompson said, "We need to finish third [in the conference]. I think 16 wins would be pushing it. We need at least 17 or 18 wins. Maybe 18 — 18 is a solid number."

Afflalo said that before the season started he assumed making the NCAA tournament was practically "a guarantee. But it's not guaranteed. If we make it, that's a great accomplishment this year. That's what I think now. It's tough to do."

Three upcoming games might be more important than any others when it comes to NCAA bid time. Arizona State, tonight's opponent, is a game behind UCLA and Stanford in the Pac-10 and most experts seem to think the conference will get either three or four tournament slots. Conference leaders Arizona and Washington will go, which probably leaves UCLA, Stanford and Arizona State fighting for one or two spots.

Brian Dohn's thoughts on Jordan Farmar's responsibilities as a freshman PG:

UCLA point guard Jordan Farmar turned 18 less than three months ago, rather young for someone put in charge of restoring one of the most storied basketball programs in the country.

[snip]

Farmar averages 34.6 minutes per game, third-highest in the Pacific-10 Conference. During that time, he is asked to play tight man-to-man defense -- to be the one who takes an opponent out of its offensive rhythm. Once that ends, he often faces pressure bringing the ball up the court before trying to set up UCLA's offense. At 6-foot-2 and 175 pounds, Farmar constantly is elbowed and shoved by players more than four years older.

"He's been exceptional, I think," UCLA coach Ben Howland said. "We're asking so much of him. I think the thing that surprised him is he hardly ever comes out."

Rob Kuwada writes about the potential strategy of double-teaming Diogu:

The double-team did not work for Cal. It did not work for Oregon State. It has not worked for an overwhelming majority of teams that have tried to run an extra defender at Arizona State forward Ike Diogu, the leading scorer in the Pac-10.

But it did work for UCLA, and has in the past, too. In an 86-82 victory at the Wells Fargo Arena on Jan.13, the Bruins held Diogu to 15 points, at the time a season low.

He made only 6 of 16 shots, again, at that point, his worst night this season. The shooting percentage of .375 was the fifth-worst performance for Diogu in 82 career games.

[snip]

The double-team will have to work again tonight if the Bruins are to beat back the visiting Sun Devils and strengthen their hold on third place in the Pac-10 and a potential berth in the NCAA Tournament. UCLA (12-7) is tied with Stanford in the conference at 6-5, while Arizona State (16-7), Cal and Washington State are tied for fifth at 5-6.

"He's coming off his best week as a Sun Devil. He was player of the weekthis week in the Pac-10. He had 39 points and 35 points in his last two games," UCLA coach Ben Howland said. "He's brimming with confidence right now. And he's a real load."

It should be noted that Howland refused to comment on potential strategies for dealing with Diogu in his press conference.

(photo credit: Michael Sun/Daily Bruin)

Jeff Eisenberg of the Daily Bruin also has thoughts on the game.

Finally, Yoni has a bit on the game tonight.

We're cautiously optimistic. This is a big game, and a big series for that matter. One game at a time. Win this one.

Meanwhile, Blindo continues his celebration of the seeming exodus from the $C football team. Not so fast, writes Trojie Scott Wolf. We've said it before, we'll say it again. There's no doubt that the loss of Chow, and others, hurts them, but I had hoped we were a little less pathetic than to make that the highlight of KD's year. Unfortunately, with the way the season and recruiting went, it just might be. Well don't let anyone tell you that Blindo can't make lemonade out of lemons.

Blindo, Fat Tuesday was yesterday

2005-02-09T07:36:00.000-08:00

Look, I have no doubt that losing Chow (and Orgeron, and Carl Smith, and Dennis Slutak) will hurt $C. But as long as they keep bringing in top recruiting classes, and have Peetie as head coach, and he keeps making good assistant hires (which I have no doubt he will -- unlike KD he doesn't hire former Northern Arizona buddies), they will still be formidable.

Blindo, get this through your head. This in no way makes KD a better coach. It only slightly weakens $C, which is no doubt a good thing, but they still have better talent (and while ours was very good, with KD's recruiting it keeps getting worse). And their coaching staff was markedly better. If Peetie hires good coaches -- and since being an assistant for Peetie seems to be a good career move (unlike being an assistant coach for a coach who is likely to be fired) -- he, unfortunately, probably will.

It's alright, just wait until next year. The battle cry of Blindo, and of a loser.

A little on James Keefe

2005-02-08T08:51:00.000-08:00

Ben Howland keeps landing elite players, having already garnered commits from elite prospects James Keefe and Tayler King. Meanwhile, KD can't close the deal.

Here are a few paragraphs of interest:

There are football players criticized for taking plays off during games. There are basketball players ridiculed for loafing back on defense. There are baseball players mocked for jogging to first base.

James Keefe of Santa Margarita is only 17, but he understands what it means to put on a uniform.

"You let your team down if you don't play hard every time," he said.

And that's how Keefe plays basketball — 32 minutes of unapologetic toughness. He goes after rebounds as if each one represents the difference between victory and defeat.

Sounds like a player without a lot of underbelly. I'm sure Blindo would say that this is the sort of guy who would be a KD-type-player.

Except for one thing. He's an elite, five star prospect, and we all know that (with a few notable exceptions) those are most definitely not KD-type-players.

Go to Mav's site for an in-depth recruiting analysis. Money graphs:

OVERALL OFFENSIVE RECRUITING GRADE: C. Lots of
“ifs” here. “If” Ben Olson is everything we expect of him,
and “if” there is anyone on the roster who can get open and
catch his throws, and “if” the generally unheralded
offensive line recruits can cohere into a decent unit, and
“if” Chris Markey proves to be as good as he flashed in
2004, then the Bruin offense could be productive. But
there have been so many holes in Dorrell’s recruiting on
the offensive side – tight end, receiver, fullback, maybe
offensive line, maybe quarterback depth – that there is
plenty that can go wrong on the way to West Coast Offense
nirvana.

[snip]

OVERALL DEFENSIVE RECRUITING GRADE: D. Dorrell has
done OK at the easiest defensive position to recruit –
defensive back. His linebacker recruiting has been abysmal
and his defensive line recruiting just marginally passable.
Overall, he has not brought in the level of recruit on the
defensive side likely to turn the defense into anything
more than an average Pac-10 unit. Even worse, the gaping
hole at linebacker threatens to keep the defense in the
bottom half of the conference for years to come when the
current starters graduate after the 2005 season.

[snip]

OVERALL RECRUITING GRADE: C-. Count us as atheists
on the argument that Dorrell has a special knack for
picking sleepers who fit his unique scheme, and agnostics
on the claim that he has recruited enough talent to win big
with the right coaching.

[snip]

It reminds us a little of Steve Lavin’s recruiting in the final days, which ended up with a team filled with wings (the easiest position to recruit in
college basketball) but no point guards or centers who
could play. It all adds up to, in our estimation, a
jumbled mess.

And probably the first KD doubter, Kawai, has an opinion on this class, and it's not favorable:

"This is the worst class that I've seen UCLA bring in after following recruiting closely for around 10 years.

[snip]

You are right I follow recruiting closely this decade and KD is horrible. It sickened that the KD legacy will be something that shapes UCLA FB for the negative for what could be almost a decade because of how poorly he has done." -- Kawai, BruinZone, 1/31/05

Yeah, that's what we're afraid of too. If DG doesn't take action soon, the KD era will take a long time to dig out of.

One thing we noticed about Pete Carroll at that glorified community college across town is that when walked into the job, he had a lot of talent on his roster. Hackett was not a good coach, but he managed to get enough talent that it only took 2 years for Carroll to firmly establish $C as a dominant power. To quote the Sports Guy, I think I just threw up in my mouth.

Speaking of those abominable Trojies, there is trouble in paradise as Chow is all but gone to take the OC job for the Tennessee Titans. Unlike Blindo, however, while we recognize that losing Chow will hurt the Trojans, we don't think that it will in any way make KD a better coach.

A few more bits of news, Havner, London, Walker and Chai have had surgery. We wish them a speedy recovery.

And defensive and special teams coach Brian Schneider will no longer coach linebackers, but will take over as the safeties coach and will continue to coach special teams. We're not sure what to make of this. KD apparently didn't feel the need to fire any of his coaches after his abysmal 6-6 performance and embarassing loss to Wyoming, but he apparently feels the need to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. Must have been some underbelly issues and he just needs to get everyone on the same page.

The offseason is a good time to contact the athletic department and tell them you won't put up with mediocrity any longer. Spring Ball starts on February 22. Hopefully this will be KD's last spring ball, and next year a new head coach will give us something to be excited about.

The fact of the matter is that next year KD has enough talent to win nine or ten games, but after that, things are going to get ugly in terms of talent. And if you know any Blindos who think that all of KD's "sleepers" are going to turn into All-Americans, reread Mav's article.

More on hoops coming soon.

It seems that this recruiting class and the disastrous end to the season have convinced some people that next year is KD's make-or-break year. It will be interesting to see how many Blindos keep saying "wait till next year."

Hey Blindo

2005-02-03T07:31:00.000-08:00

I think you'll like this column:

Once again, the top story emanating from National Signing Day in college football was that there were no losers — at least no loser who would admit to it.

Signing Day is like pitchers and catchers reporting for spring training — all futures are bright and everyone thinks they're going to win the pennant.

It's a day when national champion USC and delta bottom-feeder Louisiana Monroe can both say "we addressed our needs."

In three years, some Division I-A team is going to go 0-11 because of the rubbish collected Wednesday, but isn't it nice to be able to defer tomorrow's reality for today's optimism?

[snip]

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, the current P.O. address for two-time national champion USC, rival Coach Karl Dorrell of UCLA continued his slingshot fight against Goliath with a pronouncement of his "outstanding, well-rounded class."

Is it?

It appears the Bruins landed another quality recruiting batch of players, but only time will tell if UCLA can make a dent into USC's dominance.

Lonnie White's breakdown [read: practically the press release issued by the Morgan Center] is here,
but of course, the superior writer, Brian Dohn is worth quoting:

High-profile quarterback Ben Olson has been enrolled in classes for a month at UCLA, and offensive lineman Aleksey Lanis is the lone Parade All-American.

There's a Dorrell quote in there with a lot of hyphens. Maybe someone can explain to me what it means.

One common denominator about this class is they all have that hungry, I'm-the-one-that's-going-to-get-UCLA-back-to-where-it-should-be attitude," Dorrell said. "They know there is work to be done. It's not about, 'Oh, I'm coming to here and we're just going to win.'

"They know that we've got to roll our sleeves up. We've got to do this thing the right way. I mean, everyone in this class feels that way. No prima donnas."

Check out Mav's site for some novel signing day analysis.

Here is what really matters, how the Pac 10 did. It's understandable that $C would have a better recruiting class, those bastards did win the national championship. But we should have one of the two best classes every year. Here are the Rivals rankings, where we're out of the top 25.

School Total 5* 4* 3* Avg * Points

1 Southern Cal 20 4 11 5 3.95 2,631
8 California 24 1 9 12 3.38 1,816
21 Arizona 24 0 7 14 3.17 1,395
26 UCLA 21 1 3 12 3.00 1,107
28 Oregon 23 1 2 13 2.87 1,049
32 Arizona State 22 0 1 16 2.82 774
40 Stanford 16 0 4 5 2.81 640
47 Oregon State 20 0 2 8 2.60 493
52 Washington St. 20 0 0 10 2.50 382
66 Washington 13 0 2 3 2.54 216

We managed barely hang on to a top 25 ranking in Scout. Here's a CFN "analysis".

You can read Pravda if you like. I thought that people were starting to get it. But there are a whole new bunch of Blindos and Circulos explaining why lower recruiting classes are better than highly ranked underbelly classes.

Basketball preview
might cheer you up a bit. Big series this weekend.

More signing day

2005-02-02T17:08:00.000-08:00

We're barely hanging onto the top 25 in the Scout and Rivals.

Look who's on the hot seat according to CFN.

Back to recruiting. Here's your official Morgan Center spin.

Ben Olson is the most impressive, a legitimate top QB, five star player, who was probably the number one QB in his HS class, although he is not considered the top QB in this class.

Shawn Oatis is a top 5 safety, and a four-star player.

Aleskey Lanis is four-star, the number 30 OL.

Aaron Ware is a four-star, top 20 CB.

Logan Paulsen is a top 20 TE, and a four-star player.

Those are the top players, and they should all be pretty good.

Lorig is the only remaining potential elite, and I doubt he's going to sign.

The disturbing thing is that we needed more LBs, and we did not get one four-star or better LB prospect. One of our TEs might be able to play there, and maybe Anyanwu could (a 210 pound DE?).

How about DL? No real apparent difference makers.

Only 2 OL.

No elite WR or RBs.

We did well at QB, DB, and TE and we landed one good OL. that's pretty much it.

Compare past recruiting clases here.

The summary is that this was supposedly KD's best class and it's barely hanging on to the top 25.

Coffee is for closers, KD.

Remember, all the "underbelly" that KD is getting rid of includes elite players graduating and not being replaced.

Time to start looking at those head coaching candidates

And if you buy Blindo's spin that KD will magically turn 2 star players into All Americans, read Mav's article, "Exposing The Myths About Dorrell's Recruiting".

More to come.

First signing day post

2005-02-02T07:25:00.000-08:00

Don't read this unless you want to lose your breakfast. Over on Wildwest they are having a semi-meltdown about this top 10 class. What I wouldn't give for "disappointments" like this one. Sigh.

There's an interesting and bittersweet story about safety commit Robert Kibble.

Speaking of health issues, there's some good news on Matt McKinney, which I recall hearing about watching the game on TV.

And Rob Kuwada has a signing day wrapup before signing day is over:

Coach Karl Dorrell and UCLA got the player they most needed in their 2005 recruiting class - quarterback Ben Olson.

Olson is a premier recruit, considered the top prospect in the country when coming out of Thousand Oaks High in 2002.

He lends a splash of credibility to a coach who is 12-13 in two seasons and to a program that was wounded by a loss to Wyoming in the Las Vegas Bowl.

Whoa. Again with the high expectations. We like BO, but we're not sure he's going to step right in and instantly turn into an All-American. Secondly, BO wanted to stay close to home, and play right away, so it was really a no-brainer. One good player does not a recruiting class make.

UCLA needed defensive backs and are expected to sign safety Shawn Oatis (5-11, 203) from Chino and cornerbacks Robert Kibble (5-10, 175) from Westfield High in Houston and Aaron Ware (6-0, 190) from Oaks Christian High in Westlake Village.

The Bruins needed linebackers and received commitments from Reggie Carter (6-1, 225) from Crenshaw High in Los Angeles, John Hale (6-4, 225) from Los Alamitos and Korey Miller (6-2, 218) and Kyle Miller (6-2, 215) from West High in Plano, Texas.

They got two highly regarded receivers in Jamil Turner (6-1, 190) from Bethel High in Spanaway, Wash., and Gavin Ketchum (6-4, 190) from Oak Park.

They needed tight ends and are waiting for signed letters from Adam Heater (6-5, 245) from Snohomish, Wash., Ryan Moya (6-3, 230) from Oak Ridge High in El Dorado Hills and Logan Paulsen (6-5, 225) from Chaminade High in West Hills.

Oatis, Ware, Carter, Heater, Moya, and Paulsen are rated by various recruiting services to be among the top 20 players in the nation at their positions.

The Bruins' class also could get better today. UCLA remains in on linebacker Adrian McCovy (6-3, 215) from Lakewood and tight ends Charles Brown (6-5, 250) from Diamond Ranch High in Pomona and Erik Lorig (6-4, 245) from Peninsula High in Rolling Hills Estates.

McCovy is to decide between UCLA and Arizona and Lorig between UCLA and Cal. Brown would be a significant get in that he had earlier given a non-binding commitment to USC.

Let's take these one by one.

Ware and Oatis are four-star players. Good.

On LB, I don't want to be mean, but as Mav has pointed out, one of the things some of these guys are most excited about are that a couple of these guys are related to Brian Bosworth. Look, I'm related to William Wallace, but it wouldn't be a reasonable expectation for me to go around medieval battlefields chopping off people's heads with two-handed Scottish claymores.

The WRs are reportedly good, but again, there are no elite prospects among them.

And our class of three TEs. Unless we're switching to the double wing formation (might take awhile to get everyone on the same page), I'm not sure where all these guys are going to play all these TEs. In all seriousness, Paulsen is one of our few elite prospects.

We'll see what happens with the remaining guys. Unlike Mav, I'm not totally pessimistic, but, still, I'm not counting on landing these guys.

Oh, and Mav has a new comic, in which Blindo welcomes a new friend, Circulo, who has some fascinating insights on recruiting.

More on Signing Day Eve

2005-02-01T18:31:00.000-08:00

We're falling in the Scout rankings, and most indications seem to indicate that KD will be closing with a whimper, rather than actually being a closer.

It's hard to believe that some people were actually predicting a top 10 class. We're still holding out hope that tomorrow will bring some more big commits, but we're not sure that's going to happen.

Stay tuned.

Signing Day Approaches

2005-02-01T08:18:00.000-08:00

Check out the Rivals rankings:

23 UCLA 21 1 3 12 3.00

and we're at 20 in the Scout rankings.

Mav notes that in 2002, we signed 16 4 & 5 star recruits, while $C signed 11. Meanwhile, $C's has only improved, and we've 13 in 2003-2005 combined (I'm assuming these are projected since signing day for this year isn't until tomorrow). Anyway, our recruiting class this year has only 4 four- and five-star players.

Amazingly, some message board posters seem to think that every single two- and three-star player is going to become a supersleeper, while all of Bob Toledo's elite recruits were full of underbelly. This is just getting silly.

The Expectations Game

2005-01-28T15:02:00.000-08:00

Robert Kuwada from the OCR has written an interesting article about new UCLA Baseball HC John Savage. While the story about Coach Savage is nice, the discussion about expectations is even more telling.

Goals loftier for UCLA now

Savage was hired away from UC Irvine to coach the Bruins to the next level: Omaha.

By ROBERT KUWADA The Orange County Register

LOS ANGELES – It's about the College World Series now. It's about winning baseball games and competing, year in and year out. The regionals, then super regionals and onto Omaha, Neb. And with UCLA starting its 2005 baseball season tonight with the first of a three-game series against Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Coach John Savage will not hide or shrink from it.

Of the College World Series, Savage said: "That's our destination. We want to establish our program to where we are competitive and that we have a legitimate chance to play for a Pac-10 championship, then a regional and super regional championship, and then go into the final eight and have a chance to play for a national championship."

That is his charge. Savage was hired in July to replace Gary Adams and redirect [ed. note: unlike the "redirection" led by Karl Dorrell] the UCLA baseball program. In 30 years at UCLA, Adams produced more major-league players than any college coach in the country but took the Bruins to the College World Series only once. Athletic Director Dan Guerrero wanted more from the program. So he gave Adams a nudge toward retirement [ed. note: remember this strategy Dan] and hired Savage, who had revived a dormant program at UC Irvine in 2001. By 2004 Savage had the Anteaters in their first NCAA DivisionI Tournament.

"I'd really like to see this program aspire to national recognition on a consistent basis," Guerrero said at the time. "That doesn't mean that you're in Omaha every year, but if you can get to the regional and have an opportunity to advance, that's the model I think ultimately that we'd like."

It is not likely to happen this year. UCLA lost a school-record 10 players who signed professional contracts, nine through the June draft and one as a free agent. Included were six of the Bruins' top seven hitters and the top two starting pitchers. The Bruins have some depth on the pitching staff and return solid position players in junior first baseman Brett McMillan, junior catcher Chris Denove and sophomore center fielder Jarrad Page.

"There are different steps along the way, and it's a long process," Savage said. "I think we need to have a little time to establish a philosophy and really a vision for our players and the inner parts of our program, to make sure we all know that the expectations are extremely high."

The expectations are similarly high for Ben Howland and the UCLA Basketball
program. National Championships are the standard. So that begs the question:

Why isn't football a priority for UCLA?

Where were the pronouncements from Guerrero, Dorrell, or anyone from UCLA for that matter after Dorell's hire that the BCS National Championship would be the goal of the UCLA FB program? Did they know that such an assertion would sound as ridiclous then as it sounds today?

Can you envision a similar headline for Dorrell's hiring announcement?

Dorell was hired away from The Denver Broncos to coach the Bruins to the next level: A BCS National Championship.

(Please refrain from spitting your coffee on the monitor)

So, why is it acceptable for the goal to be national championships from our Baseball and Basketball programs, while moral victories against USC followed by POS bowl games is OK for the FB program?

To us, its not OK. It shouldn't be acceptable for any self respecting UCLA FB fan.

The expectations game that the Morgan-Murphy cronies are playing with UCLA students, fans, and alums to justify the hiring and retention of Karl Dorrell borders on fraudulent.

We'll do everythting we can to expose this fraud.

Interesting article by Pucin

2005-01-28T08:27:00.000-08:00

Washington's basketball team runs. Washington State defends. Arizona pressures, pressures, pressures.

Think of Stanford basketball and you think of big men who make great cuts and shoot layups. A Rick Pitino team will play fast and shoot threes and it doesn't matter whether Pitino's coaching the Boston Celtics, Kentucky Wildcats or Louisville Cardinals.

When UCLA's Ben Howland coached at Pitt, the Panthers became famous — and good — because Howland recruited wide-chested, strong-willed inside players and savvy point guards who could run a half-court offense or run the court. Howland's Panthers played angry defense and were never reluctant to push, hip check and leave bruises.

But what is UCLA's identity?

I care a lot less about identity than I do about results, but it is an interesting perspective. I think more of this will come with time. And as we've said, the results haven't been great lately. But meeting expectations is still entirely possible, and I'm even a little more optimistic than that. Add in the Pac 10 tourney and a tourney bid is still a good possibility. But it has to start now.

Also read this Lorenzo Mata feature, if you haven't already, and a more ominious projection from the OC Register.

DG seems to have high expectations for baseball. That's good. How about taking a look at the football coach?

Thanks to Yoni

2005-01-24T20:49:00.000-08:00

For blogrolling us. We appreciate it. UCLA related bits here and here. If you're a college basketball fan, check his site often. It's the best college baskeball news blog for keeping up on the broader world of college basketball.

FKD visitors, pass the word onto your friends, fellow alumni, and Bruin fans. And don't be afraid to join the community by posting in our comments section. It's new and improved.

And don't look now, but Blindo is coming soon to a T-shirt near you. A scary thought.

If any of you creative types have an idea for an FKD logo or T-shirt, send us an email.

Speaking of Blindo, he's still hard at work on various message boards explaining why last weekend's disappointment in baskeball makes KD a good coach. Here is an example of Blindo's impeccable logic:

Howland lost to Cal.
Therefore, Howland is a bad coach.
Therefore, KD is not a bad coach.

We're sorry, but we don't agree that Howland is a bad coach, and even if he were, that wouldn't mean that KD isn't.

Or perhaps it's more like this:

Howland lost to Cal.
None of the people who criticize KD criticize Howland.
Therefore, KD is a good coach.

This one is simply not true. We think we should have beat Cal, and some of the blame has to go to Howland. And even if we didn't criticize Howland, that still wouldn't make KD a good coach.

It appears that Blindo really is more concerned with making excuses for KD than with the success of UCLA sports. And that's just pathetic.

Meanwhile, message board operators are undertaking a purge of dissenting voices that would make Stalin proud. Paging Downs and Gatton!

Bad loss

2005-01-23T20:15:00.000-08:00

No two ways about it. Read the roundups here here here and here.

Before we get ahead of ourselves, let's take a quick look at what coach Howland had to say (from Pucin's Times story):

"We were very inept in attacking the zone," Coach Ben Howland said. "And we didn't do a good job defensively either."

[snip]

"Our defense against the dribble was not very good," Howland said.

From Dohn's Daily News story:

"I think this is the only team we've seen so far that really stayed in a zone for a long period of time, and they did that because we didn't attack it well. We really need to get back to practice."

A look at the boxscore reveals that we were outshot 51% to 30.3%. From three point range, we were an awful .185 while taking a whopping 27 three point shots. We were outrebounded 40 to 31. This is one game where the turnover bug didn't rear its ugly head, as we only turned the ball over six times.

What it comes down to is that we need to play better defense and rebound better. It's not really a tough game.

We were certainly not impressed with this game, and we are not going to make any excuses.

But one major point needs to be addressed. Blindo seems to think that people like us are unfair to KD, while giving Coach Howland a pass. Please. Coach Howland came in after the worst basketball season in over fifty years. He has truly great recruiting classes coming in, and while this weekend may prove that we're not as far along as we may have thought, there are a few major differences between KD and Coach Howland. For one thing, Howland has won the Big East -- which major conference has Horrell Dorrell ever won?

Blindo needs to realize that Howland has a proven track record. KD doesn't. That's why we can look at Howland's past accomplishments, and his coach of the year awards and predict that good things will come. He is bringing in more talent into the program, and the program is definitely on the way up. Horrell Dorrell has only two years of 6-7 and 6-6, with bowl losses. Horrell Dorrell has a terrible record against winning teams, while Howland has major accomplishments like beating an excellent UW team.

So, in short, there are a lot of differences. Visit Mav's site for a more in depth analysis. Money graphs:

Let’s get this out of the way first: this week has been a horrible one for the UCLA basketball program, easily the low point of Ben Howland’s tenure. The situation is fixable – if the team starts playing again like it had been the previous few weeks, all will be forgiven if not forgotten – but at this point there is at least an equal chance that the team will take a nosedive for the rest of the season, for the first time raising legitimate albeit preliminary questions about the Ben Howland era.

So there will be no excuses made for Ben Howland here. Nor, we suspect, would he countenance any.

You can read about the embarrassing week that was elsewhere. I want to talk briefly about something related but different. It’s the increasing tendency of apologists for the Karl Dorrell regime to dance a jig every time Ben Howland’s program stumbles, apparently in the belief that this (1) excuses Dorrell’s failures, and (2) proves that people who support Howland but not Dorrell are hypocrites.

As a threshold matter, a few facts. This is the last time we will say this, so please, Dorrell fans, pay attention: the situations are not equivalent. Howland took over a 10-19 team that had lost its two best players, Jason Kapono and Ray Young, without which the team would probably have been closer to 4-25. Howland managed to improve on that record, albeit only slightly and by winning only 2 of his last 15 games. The worst that can fairly be said about Howland’s first season, though, is that he didn’t overachieve.

Dorrell’s first season, by contrast, was a disaster even by the account of the most stupefied Dorrell sycophant. Dorrell inherited an 8-5 team about which a prominent website operator opined in February 2003: “[W]ith the young talent that’s on the team, it’s not as if Karl Dorrell and company need an immediate influx of talent to turn around the program. They really only need it to keep the talent level up, which is a luxury for a new coach and staff.” Dorrel proceeded to finish 6-7 (including a five-game losing streak to end the season), offering up perhaps the worst offense in modern UCLA history.

The first half of Howland’s second season was characterized by vast overachievement; Dorrell’s by sparks of potential, conceivable incremental improvement that quickly fizzled. The story of the second half of Howland’s second season has not yet been written; the story of Dorrell’s is yet another implosion, embarrassment, and myriad excuses for why it is not Dorrell’s fault, but pretty much anyone and everyone else’s why the football team is competing with Louisiana-Lafayette for recruits.

It’s the need to make a seemingly endless stream of lame excuses that characterize Dorrell supporters, but it refreshingly absent from the ranks of Howland supporters.

[snip]

I can guarantee you that if Howland finishes this season with the kind of implosion that we saw last season, you won’t see any Howland groupies getting all excited when Dorrell gets creamed by Oklahoma next fall, or claiming that this somehow vindicates Howland. There ought to be no relationship between the two. If you claim to be a UCLA fan, it is despicable for you to denigrate one program to prop up another.

The cult of no-personality that has grown around Karl Dorrell like moss on a statue in the Sculpture Garden is frightening because no coach is bigger than the program. For some reason, protecting Karl Dorrell has become for many a cause more important than the success of the UCLA football program.

Read the whole thing.

Blogging comes to the corporate world

2005-01-19T22:45:00.000-08:00

Now that Randy Baseler, Vice President - Marketing at Boeing has started blogging (hot on the heels of Airbus unveling its new A380), and so has GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz, it's becoming increasing clear that blogging is not just for the unwashed masses like your good pajamma-wearing friends here at FKD.

What Blindo and friends will never understand is that what we are doing is here is every bit as valuable, strike that more valuable than what the scribblers in the MSM do.

If the folks at M & M were really interested in improving their public relations, and interacting with fans and alumni, they would start up their own blog.

But that's not what they want. They want their own little fiefdoms, free from public scrutiny. This is why it is imperative that Bruin fans and alumni contact the administration.

Hat tip: Hugh

Plaschke does a nice profile on Farmar

2005-01-19T08:17:00.000-08:00

(Photo credit: Donald Miralle / Getty Images)

A bit of a fluff piece, but Plaschke was trying to share an interesting anecdote that lets you "get to know Farmar a little closer." And I think he did a good job revealing Farmar's tough attitude:

It was a party, for Pistol Pete's sake, a party, a time for everyone to gather inside and celebrate the next great point guard's signing with UCLA.

Where was Jordan Farmar?

Outside at the backyard hoop, in a one-armed shooting contest with his high school coach.

Derrick Taylor took the lead. Farmar took the bait.

"I'm going to beat you if we have to stay here all night," said Farmar.

And so they nearly did, shooting again and again until frustrated family members finally stalked out and ordered them back inside.

[snip]

He is the locked knee in the new Bruin stance. He is the insistent humming in the new Bruin buzz.

Have you watched him? He plays like nobody is watching him, running with innocent abandon, wild pass followed by wow shot followed by whoa defense, the conscience of all these Bruin comebacks.

Nine turnovers one night, three turnovers in the next three games combined. Twenty-two percent shooting one night, 57% the next.

Trailing by double digits one minute, leaping into a set of sweaty arms the next.

"To me, it's the YMCA, it's Taft High, it's my backyard," Farmar said. "No cameras, no people, everything zoned out, nothing there but the game."

[snip]

"I want to be the best point guard in the country," he said. "The best point guard in school history? Sure, I want that too."

[snip]

"I didn't come here to be average," Farmar said. "I want us to win the Pac-10 every year. I want us to contend for the national championship every year. And I'm talking about this year."

And to think, he almost didn't come here at all.

He ranks third in the Pacific 10 Conference in minutes played — the only freshman in the top 10 — yet a couple of years ago the Steve Lavin regime stopped recruiting him.

He ranks third in the conference in assists — one of only two freshmen in the top 10 — yet he was originally headed for Florida or Gonzaga.

Then Lavin was fired, Ben Howland was hired, and the squarely built boss made a nimble leap from introductory news conference to Farmar's living room.

"Jordan's final schools were coming to see him beginning on a Tuesday," recalled Taylor, his Taft High coach. "Ben called and said, 'Please, can you put me down for Monday?' "

Howland talked his way into the house, then talked Farmar into making an official visit to campus, all but snapping at the kid who had decided to become a Gator.

Said Farmar: "Lavin didn't really want me and I didn't really want to go to UCLA; it was mutual."

Said Howland: "I liked his toughness, his ability to lead, his mentality. This was the kind of kid we needed to have."

This was, after all, a kid who helped a Valley team win a City championship for the first time in four decades. This was a kid who, with his team trailing by 10 in the final minutes, once scored 11 consecutive points in a playoff game.

Taft eventually lost that game, but Farmar's career had already been the stuff of local legend, and Howland knew just now to reach him.

"He told me he was going to make UCLA a winner again whether I signed or not," said Farmar with a grin. "I kind of liked that."

What clinched the deal was a late-night dinner with father Damon, a former pro baseball player, and godfather Eric Davis. Yeah, that Eric Davis.

The evening ended with a post-midnight eight clap, even the cool Farmar was sold, and now Davis can be found sitting right above the student section.

"They were saying that I had no idea what UCLA basketball is, and what it could be," Farmar said. "I can see it now."

Playing to increasingly large crowds, the Bruins have pulled big upsets at home (Washington) and on the road (Arizona State) while remaining unbeaten in eight games at home.

Although unranked, their four losses are to opponents with a combined record of 49-12, so they are rated 13th in the national RPI index, which contributes to the seeding of teams in the NCAA tournament.

If Dijon Thompson is their All-American, Farmar is their All Can't-Miss-Him, creating mismatches with his speed and dropping jaws with his creativity.

"I don't want to be like anybody," he said. "I just want to be like myself."

It's also interesting to contrast the toughness and approach of Farmar and Howland with KD, and also Howland's recruiting approach with that of KD.

As KD continues to attempt to lower expectations, the expectations of Bruin Basketball continue to rise. This is what happens when you hire a proven, successful coach. Brian Dohn reports on a possible return not just the tourney, but a potential deep run:

Dijon Thompson remembers the fun of reaching the Sweet 16 as a freshman, and figured it would be a seasonal occurrence. After all, it was the fifth time in six years the Bruins reached the Sweet 16.

Now, as Thompson's UCLA career approaches the end, he figures just a return to the tournament after a two-year hiatus would be nice. And Thompson, who leads UCLA in scoring and rebounding, believes it will happen.

"I think it's reachable, especially with the way our conference is. And the way we're playing, we're going to reach it," said Thompson, who has carried the Bruins by averaging 18.4 points and 8.4 rebounds per game. "It's nothing to worry about. We just gotta take one game at a time."

If Pacific-10 Conference history and the latest RPI (rating percentage index) rankings are an indication, all UCLA needs to do is play slightly better than .500 the rest of the season for a return to the NCAA tournament.

The Bruins are 10-4, including 4-2 in league play, with 13 regular-season games, and at least one Pac-10 tournament game, remaining. Eight more wins would push UCLA's total to 18, a mark that usually ensures an NCAA berth for a Pac-10 team.

[snip]
"We're doing pretty good, better than in years past, and we know (the NCAA Tournament) is definitely a goal we can reach," UCLA junior center Michael Fey said. "Looking at the season right now, we just have to keep going game by game."

Another thing UCLA is banking on is continuing its success at home. The Bruins enter Thursday's game against Stanford with an 8-0 mark at Pauley Pavilion. They have seven home games remaining.

Blindo may not get it but we do. Meanwhile, KD continues his ferocious recruiting battle against Boise State. Hey, you lose some, you win some.

Coffee is for closers

2005-01-18T19:55:00.000-08:00

KD that means you need to step away from the coffee pot.

Updated Rivals rankings

And a quick summation from Bruin Gold

#10 Arizona (was #7)
#17 USC (was #20)
#19 Cal (was #16)
#22 UCLA (was #15)
#35 ASU (was #47)
#38 Oregon (was #36)
#45 Stanford (was #43)
#51 OSU (was #48)
#52 WSU (was #51)
#83 Washington (was #90)

Ranked by average # of "stars"

USC 3.73 (was 3.60)
Cal 3.29 (same)
Arizona 3.18 (same)
UCLA 3.05 (was 3.16)
Stanford 2.90 (same)
Oregon 2.93 (was 2.71)
OSU 2.67 (was 2.50)
WSU 2.62 (was 2.58)
ASU 2.87 (was 2.43)
Wash 2.14 (was 1.67)

Only one school's average is going down.

And BaBa weighs in in typical pull-no-punches BaBa fashion

And this should be a shock to anyone?

have clearly stated for OVER A MONTH, while all the Dorrellistas have been crowing over our Top 12 Nationally and 2nd in the Pac-10 class, that this class is sub-par for Ucla and THIS CLASS WOULD DROP OUT OF THE TOP 25 NATIONALLY AND WOULD BE 4TH OR 5TH IN THE PAC-10.

With 3 weeks left until signing day, we are now at #22 and ahead of schedule for our plummet down the recruiting rankings.

Depending on how ASU and OREGON close thier classes, we have a chance to drop to 6th in the Pac-10.

To put this into perspective, a quick lesson on how most of these services rank classes...

They weight the recruits point value based upon "star level", the more points the better, and then all the points are added up. The teams are then ranked in descending order.

It works pretty good but it is a little baised toward very large classes (like the 28-30 man classes that Colorado & LSU used to ink) and baised against very small classes (like Toledo's 14 man class).

Speaking of that 14 man Toledo class... If I remember correctly, it still wound up as a Top 30 class and #3 in the Pac-10.

On the other hand, Dorrell's current class, despite almost being twice as large, will probably be ranked lower nationally and 4th or 5th in the Pac-10.

Basically, that means that Toledo's 14 man class had TWICE THE STAR QUALITY

We're not buying the talk about a new "theory" of recruiting. This is a Reality-Based Community, not a Blindo community. MSM isn't going to give it to you straight.

If you need a refresher course on debunking Blindo's excuses or the great tradition of UCLA football, now is as good a time as any.

Contact the Athletic Department

2005-01-16T13:02:00.000-08:00

and let them know how frustrated you are with Coach Dorrell. This site can provide a lot of the basis for your letter, with historical facts and data. We are not going to suggest any template, because form letters are ineffective. We ask that you be respectful and provide a lot of facts to back up your opinion.

If you are a donor or season ticketholder, you have a reason to complain. If you have cancelled season tickets (as I have) because of frustration with the team and the lack of coaching, this is a valuable fact to include.

If you receive any response, you can let us know in the comments section, or by sending us an email. There are a number of people to send letters, emails, faxes and phone calls to, not just the athletic director. Here is a list:

Dr. Albert Carnesale, Chancellor
UCLA Chan Ofc
Box 951405, Murphy Hall 2147
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1405
Telephone: 310-825-2151
Fax: 310-206-6030
chancellor@conet.ucla.edu
acarnesale@ucla.edu

Dr. Peter W. Blackman, Administrative Vice Chancellor
UCLA Admin V Chan Ofc
BOX 951405, 2211 Murphy
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1405
Telephone: 310-825-2411
Fax: 310-206-3616
pwblackm@capnet.ucla.edu

Mr. Daniel G. Guerrero, Director of Athletics
UCLA Intcol Ath
BOX 951639, Morgan Cntr
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1639
Telephone: 310-206-6382
Fax: 310-206-7047
dguerrero@athletics.ucla.edu

Prof. Donald Morrison, Faculty Athletic Representative & William E. Leonhard Chair in Mgmt
UCLA Anderson
BOX 951481, B515 Gold Hall
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1481
Telephone: 310-825-7706; 310-825-0003
donald.morrison@anderson.ucla.edu

Mr. Bob Field, Associate Athletic Director
UCLA Intcol Ath
BOX 951639, Morgan Cntr
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1639
Telephone: 310-206-6580
Fax: 310-206-7047
bfield@athletics.ucla.edu

In the end, though, money talks. While the athletic department did turn down a lot of money to hire a big-name coach, this can't last forever. Declining attendance rates and declining giving will be the biggest impetus towards change. Letters from loyal fans and alumni will certainly have an impact.

We will post a permanent link to this later.

MSM is dead

2005-01-13T14:35:00.000-08:00

We don't like to get political here at FKD, but there is analogy between the Rathergate scandal, on the one hand, and the approach of MSM newspapers and certain websites to UCLA football on the other.

Legacy media, and certain websites that have become a part of it, are used to being listened to simply because they have been around for a long time. At least longer than us.

You can see the same thing going on here. It used to be that Bob Toledo complained about the anonymity of message board posters. Now message board posters whine about the anonymity of your hard working Pajamahadeen here at FKD.

The MSM rose because it had a monopoly. And it fell because it lost that monopoly.

Let me repeat that: The MSM rose because it had a monopoly on information.

[snip]

In one of his "Making of the President" books the liberal but ingenuous Teddy White famously said of 57th Street in Manhattan that when he stood there he was within a stone's throw of all the offices in which all of American media was busily churning out its vision of The News. Churning it out were a relatively small group of a few hundred liberals who worked and mostly lived on an island off the continent; they told that continent not only what it should be thinking about but how it should be thinking of it. (I think the New York Times unconsciously echoes this old assumption in their television commercials in which an earnest, graying, upscale dunderhead says the New York Times surrounds a story and gives him new ways to think about it. Doesn't it just?)

[snip]

All this has been said before but this can't be said enough: The biggest improvement in the flow of information in America in our lifetimes is that no single group controls the news anymore.

You can complain now, and your complaints can both register and have an impact on the story, as happened with bloggers and Rathergate. You can be a part of the story if you find and uncover new information. You can create the story, as bloggers did in the Trent Lott scandal. American journalism is no longer a castle, and you are no longer the serf who cannot breach its walls. The castle doors have been forced open. Other voices have access. Bloggers for instance don't just walk in and out, they have offices in the castle walls.

Is there a difference between the bloggers and the MSM journalists? Yes. But it is not that they are untrained eccentrics home in their pajamas. (Half the writers for the Sunday New York Times are eccentrics home in their pajamas.) It is that they are independent and allowed to think their own thoughts. It is that they have autonomy and can assign themselves stories, and determine on their own the length and placement of stories. And it is that they are by and large as individuals more interesting than most MSM reporters.

[snip]

Now anyone can take to the parapet and announce the news. This will make for a certain amount of confusion. But better that than one-party rule and one-party thought. Only 20 years ago, when you were enraged at what you felt was the unfairness of a story, or a bias on the part of the storyteller, you could do this about it: nothing. You could write a letter.

When I worked at CBS a generation ago I used to receive those letters. Sometimes we read them, and sometimes we answered them, but not always. Now if you see such a report and are enraged you can do something about it: You can argue in public on a blog or on TV, you can put forth information that counters the information in the report. You can have a voice. You can change the story. You can bring down a news division. Is this improvement? Oh yes it is.

Some think bloggers and internet writers of all sorts are like the 19th century pamphleteers who made American politics livelier and more vigorous by lambasting the other team in full-throated broadsides. Actually, I've said that. And there are similarities. But it should be noted that the pamphleteers were heavy on screeds and colorfully damning the foe. The most successful bloggers aren't bringing bluster to the debate, they're bringing facts--font sizes, full quotes, etc. They're bringing facts and points of view on those facts that the MSM before this could ignore, and did ignore. They're bringing a lot to the debate, and changing the debate by what they bring. They're doing what excellent reporters would do.

They will no doubt continue to be the force in 2005 that they have been the past few years. Meantime the MSM will not disappear. But it will evolve.

[snip]

But everyone will buy the networks when they sell what they're really good at, which is covering real news as it happens. Tsunamis, speeches, trials--events. Real and actual news. They are really good at that. And there is a market for it. And that market isn't over.

We will continue to aspire to breach the walls of the castle known as the Morgan Center. We will continue to attempt to bring you facts and analysis based on facts.

When he have a breaking story, we will continue to report it. When we see Morgan Center spin, we will point it out and we will analyze the realities of the situation, not a fairy tale world that some would have you believe.

You can help by emailing us and contributing in the comments section. We won't censor anyone as long as you follow the board rules (and when we say namecalling, we mean don't call anyone an @sshole, we don't mean it's not okay to point out the total lack of logic of KD, the Morgan Center and their peons).

This is a reality-based community, we're trying to provide a forum for Bruin fans of all types, even if you disagree with us.

The newspapers and television stations aren't going to give it to you straight, and increasingly message boards and such are not going to either. That's what we're here for.

MaverickBruin has futher thoughts on the Vegas Incident

2005-01-10T08:25:00.000-08:00

It seems to me that there are a few points that people are missing about the "Las Vegas incidents" involving the UCLA football team, and what they mean to the future of Karl Dorrell and the likelihood that he can rescue his coaching tenure from disaster.

People have gotten so caught up in debating whether one version or another of the story is more accurate that they are losing sight of the bigger picture.

That's a good point. The new Dorrellista technique seems to be to point to one particular version of events, claim that it must be true because a certain website said it was, and claim that therefore, everything is fine in underbellyville. Without actually considering the implications.

Let's assume for purposes of avoiding that distracting he said/she said debate that the most innocuous, Morgan Center-friendly version of the events is the accurate one. I find even that version extremely troubling.

First, the fact that players, any players, are showing up not just hung over but drunk (to the point of vomiting) at a team meeting suggests a complete lack of respect for the coaches and the team itself. Apologists can call anything an "isolated incident" but these sorts of things have a way of happening to out-of-control programs where the coaches are not respected. In 1983, for example, reports surfaced that Darren Daye had loudly belched during a team meeting while Coach Larry Farmer was addressing the team. Many viewed that as a sign that Farmer was losing his team; others defended the likable but in-over-his-head Farmer. The following season, the program fell apart, finishing 17-11 and missing the NCAA tournament for the first time in almost 20 years. Farmer was gone.

Second, the story of Karl Dorrell's confrontation with two UCLA players is troubling to me in two respects. I will give Dorrell a pass (whether deserved or not) on his outburst because many coaches lose their temper. But I find the players' post-game "chuckling" (to use the most innocuous term I have heard to describe their behavior) troubling because, regardless of the context, it suggests a lack of depth of commitment to the program and the team. We have all seen players in locker rooms after games like this crying, calling teammates out, silently shaking their heads in disbelief. I find it hard to believe that these players were really broken up but nevertheless found a moment in the midst of their grief to chuckle about old times.

Again, there is a precedent, and it is not good. In 1988, the UCLA basketball team was humiliated in a first round loss in the Pac-10 tournament -- a tournament they had to win to get into the NCAA tournament. On the bus ride back home after the game, forward Craig Jackson, who had just completed a disappointing Bruin career marked by remarkable passivity, began leading his teammates in a chorus of the song "Goin' Back to Cali." Some players (such as Gerald Madkins) were disgusted. But the event showed that the coaches just had not instilled in the players the competitive drive and spirit to succeed. Coach Walt Hazzard was fired in the aftermath of that game.

Finally, what bothers me the most about the Las Vegas incidents was that one of the players felt comfortable enough to get back into Dorrell's face and go toe-to-toe with him in anger. This degree of insubordination smacks of lack of respect for the coach. If one player reacts this way, does this not suggest deeper problems within the program?

God points all Mav. The most hilarious thing to us about the sanitized, Morgan Center friendly accounts of the Vegas incidents was the notion that on the one hand, it wasn't Dorrell's fault -- we all know how firey he is and how he wears his emotions on his sleeve. And you can't blame the players, they didn't do anything wrong either.

This was not your basic coach yelling at a player situation. Dorrellistas actually think this is a good thing. It's not. At bare minimum, it is proof that the underbelly "problem" is still there. At this point, Dorrellistas generally argue that it's Toledo's players who did this, and tell us that once KD gets all his own players, things will be great. Just like they were with Mackovic.

I have no idea if Dorrell's program is out of control or not. I really don't. What I do know is that these types of incidents, historically, have generally coincided with out-of-control, losing Bruin programs.

As always, make sure you check out the comics.

Mackovic analogy on Bruingold

2005-01-08T14:27:00.000-08:00

I'd had these thoughts before:

Ask John Mackovic about

what happens when you berate players without having their full respect. A mutiny ensues. THIS is the real problem. Not KD ripping into players, but rather, players NOT ALLOWING KD to rip into them. It shows a lack of respect.

There have been other signs. Manuel White has looked at times like he's wanted to rip EB's throat out. When Manuel White turns on a coach, that's significant.

Bottom line, KD hasn't earned this team's respect. They see the countless mistakes he makes, and how he's regarded by other schools. They see the media ragging on him. They see that he's 12-13. Dorrell needs to gain his team's respect before he tries the fire and brimstone routine.

I think this analogy makes a lot of sense. For anyone who wondered, we don't have a problem with coaches letting a player have it for a good reason. That's not the point. The point is why throw what amounted to a temper tantrum, when it is so out of character, and when it appears that it was completely misdirected.

Yell at a guy for missing a blocking assignment. Rip a guy in films for making a bad read. Yell at the receiver on the sidelines for running a bad route.

DON'T: Stand impassively on the sidelines while the Wyoming coach coaches circles around you
DON'T: Take out your frustration for your own failings on a kicker who was possibly the game's most valuable player and a guy who was too injured to play.

Dorrellistas think this makes KD look good, and tough?

Dorrellista arguments shredded here and laughed at by Trojies here.

A little context, please.

So let's see, Dorrellistas can't talk about the record because KD is under .500 and now the underbelly argument is gone, and it sounds like KD is losing the respect of the team.

We didn't want to make the analogy to the bad old days of L***n, but the longer this failed experiment goes on, the worse it's going to get. We hope it doesn't take a full-scale Mackovic revolt for people to see that KD is in way over his head. It would be truly embarassing for that to happen to us.

The word has gone out...

2005-01-07T21:22:00.000-08:00

It's interesting to see the reaction to the story we broke earlier.

GOt an email from a Bruin friend about the incident:

So, let's set this record straight.

First, any claims that Karl Dorrell was out partying and intoxicated are flat out wrong.

And the person who was making the assertion that Dorrell was holding Eyoseph Efseaff and Ben Lorier responsible for something he, himself, did, is completely wrong.

Note that the other claims are not denied with respect to other individuals. We stand by the facts as we reported them, based on multiple confirmation from multiple sources. But the dog that didn't bark in the denial is as interesting as the dog that did bark.

Let's finally make it public what happened that led to Efseaff and Lorier suspended from the team.

The team arrived in Vegas on their own. The coaches had told the players repeatedly not to partake of the Las Vegas excesses.

But in the first team meeting late that night, Efseaff and Lorier show up very intoxicated.

Many players in the meeting thought that Dorrell handled the situation well. He made Efseaff and Lorier sit at the front of the meeting. And actually, many of the players thought that Dorrell was actually going to let them off at this point, that he'd make them do some pretty rigorous conditioning the next morning when they were hung over.

But then both proceeded to wretch, pretty much at the feet of the coaches.

Dorrell, still relatively calm, then decided that they were done.

Okay, so that's the real version of that story. Now for the locker room incident.

The game is over. Dorrell hasn't gone into the locker room yet, but is in the coaches' room. He's livid, barely able to see straight he's so pissed they lost.

So, in the locker room Chris Kluwe and Tab Perry are talking. They're two seniors who have been through a lot, and they started talking about their experience at UCLA, reminiscing some. At one point they were laughing, going over old times.

At that moment is when Dorrell happened to come into the locker room.

Now, Dorrell is so damn livid, remember, he can't see straight. But he does see Kluwe and Perry laughing. So, Dorrell, his temper flared, went off on both of them -- ripping them for being able to laugh after such a disappointing loss.

Perry, never one to back down, got back in Dorrell's face, but Dorrell then kept in Perry's face. It was pretty heated, and got pretty personal from what I understand.

Kluwe, being pretty smart, left the locker room.

Some of the players who witnessed it said they had never seen Dorrell so angry.

Many have said that, given the circumstances, they could understand how Dorrell went off. It wasn't the fault of Kluwe or Perry, but if you were in Dorrell's situation you very well might have lost your temper in that situation also. In fact, some of the players have said they were impressed that Dorrell was so angry about it.

As I said before, I think, given the circumstances it's understandable. Dorrell misunderstood the situation, but you can maybe see how he could have lost his temper at the time.

This is partially a confirmation of the facts we already reported. It is partially an attempt to clarify from one particular perspective, namely the perspective most favorable to Karl Dorrell and the Athletic Department. No doubt there are multiple sides to this story, and Dorrell's recollection of the incident may differ from some of the players, and some players may have perceived the incident differently than others. Still, it is interesting to read this attempt to "set the record straight." We are merely reporting this version of the events, and we will leave it to the reader to decide. We practice open source journalism here at FKD, and we leave it to our readers to decide which version of the events is most credible.

It is interesting to note some of the Trojie http://www.wildwestsports.com/wMessage.aspx?board=football&mess=0&id=82581:

The players were impressed that Dorrell was angry???? rofl you cannot be what you are not.

there's plenty of spin in there but that's not a 'good' incident no matter how impressed the rest of the team was that dorrell got into a personal heated argument with one of his seniors after losing to wyoming. the vegas bowl is just a bad idea. kids always do something they're not supposed to when they were out there. there were rumors about the SC team partying a lot when we got worked by Utah out there a few years back.

We will continue to monitor this story. As far as FKD is concerned, the Trojie reaction to the story tells us a lot about Dorrellistas who spin this as a good thing.

Other interesting Wildwest tidbits:

man, Tracy P. is lying again

says Ucla can 'possibly' end up with with studs because they are in on Fred Rouse (hahaahhahaa// ya right Tracy. If that happens I'll let MAD lick your balls), Roy Miller (ya right?), Ryan Renolds (after that OK performace maybe possibly), Justin DE (sheeet - kid couldn't get into FSU so maybe he'll end up at SC but not Ucla).

Don't lie to your guys dude.

We always take anything from Trojies with a grain of salt, but it is interesting to note the reaction, and to place it in distinguish it with a man who as openly admitted that he is running a business, not operating a forum for entertainment and knowledge.

We have no biases or financial incentives here. We are Bruin fans who want the best for the program. We want KD fired because we have reached the conclusion that that would be best for UCLA football. This is the result of our analysis and this is our opinion. We could be wrong, but based on our facts and analysis -- which is not motivated by any financial interest, unlike some people -- we think we are correct. Again, we report, you decide.

CFB News is Catching On

2005-01-06T09:07:00.000-08:00

Karl Dorrell is in way over his head.

Those of us diehard alums and fans that have watched the downfall of the UCLA FB program since Karl Dorrell succeeded Bob Toledo knew this.

However, the media (besides Trojie nut Juggler Simers from the LA Times) has been slow to recognize that Karl Dorrell is driving the UCLA FB program into the ground, much like Steve Lavin did to the Bruin Basketball program.

Much like the Lavin situation, Dorrell's incompetence cannot be overcome by acquiring elite talent, such as Ben Olson.

Congratulations to CFB News for catching on.

All Is Not Well With The Underbelly

2005-01-03T21:29:00.000-08:00

We are hearing lots of rumors about postgame and after hours intrigue in Vegas.

You know what they say?

What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.

DEVELOPING...

Happy New Year

2004-12-31T11:10:00.000-08:00

Hopefully 2005 will be a much better year for Bruin football than 2004. For New Year's reading, take a look at the plethora of excuses trotted out by KD supporters. (Hat tip: Mav). And refresh your memory about Bruin football tradition, because Dorrellistas are sure to claim that UCLA has no football tradition, in their lame efforts to excuse KD's sub-.500 performance.

Meanwhile, on another message board, one less concerned with shilling for KD, an old friend makes a similar observation:

Tracy is living in "LaLa Land"...

with all of his "new" recruiting strategies and is making excuses for the staff.

Tracy has clearly stated several times that BRO is "a business" and that he operates it as such...

If I was a drug company, would I be publishing articles about holistic medicine and it's successes?

If I was in the business of selling subscriptions to a UCLA Fan Website, that is his business, would I be writing articles about how our future is bleak because recruiting sucks when compared to the previous staff? No I would put a positive spin on it and claim that it is a "new strategy".

Other good stuff from BruinGold:

KD is 1-10 against winning teams. How does that

compare to previous Bruin coaches in their first two seasons?

Tommy Prothro 7-3-1 = .682
Dick Vermeil 7-3-2 = .667
Bob Toledo 6-7 = .462
Terry Donahue 4-6-1 = .409
Pepper Rodgers 3-8-1 = .292
Karl Dorrell 1-10 = .091

atrocious. Remind Dorrellistas of facts next time they tell you about "progress" and "underbelly." Further, Baba reminds us

that 8 of his 12 wins have come against...

SDSU, Illinois, Washington and Arizona.

Of our 12 wins in the KD era, 11 of them have come against sub-500 programs. 8 of those 11 wins have come against 4 teams.

Of our 13 losses, 10 have come against above-500 programs but 3 have come against sub-500 programs.

KD has a 9% winning percentage against teams over .500

And he has some more good takes on talent and recruiting. A look at the talent on the 2003 team:

Players that have been drafted signed as Rookie Free Agents...

Mat Ball
Dave Ball
Ryan Boschetti
Brandon Chillar
Rodney Leisle
Matt Ware

Guys that will be drafted or get rookie free agent contracts this season...

Matt Clark
Spencer Havner
Ben Emmanual

Guys that will be drafted of get rookie free agent contracts after next season...

Justin London
Jarred Page

So from just our 2003 defense... 9 or 11 will get a cup of coffee in the league after the 2003 and 2004 seasons. The other 2 starters will get there after the 2005 season.

I could go on and on but let me just says this... I have more that one buddy that is an NFL Scout or an NFL Agent, UCLA is the most talented losing team in the country. Let me quote one... "There is no way that Ucla should be that bad with their talent"

But, fortunately, KD is hard at work on the "underbelly."

This should pretty much put to bed the talent excuse. But of course, we've already debunked it, but it's always good to have more ammo.

But what about KD's latest class, with the savior (note we like Ben Olson, we just think the Dorrellistas are expecting too much for him to clean up all the "underbelly" and "issues" left by KD...err, BT? Well, the class is good, although the only class of Bob Toledo's it exceeds is his 2000 class, after his worst season. BaBa again makes short work of the latest Dorrellista arguments:

Lets compare Toledo's last full class...

to Dorrell's current and soon to be best class.

[snip]

In 2002, Toledo's class was comprised of the following 26...

2 Five Star Players (7.5%)
14 Four Star Players (54%)
8 Three Star Players (31%)
2 Two Star Players (7.5%)

In 2005, KD's best full recruiting class to date, it is comprised of the following 19...

1 Five Star (5%)
4 Four Stars (21%)
8 Three Stars (42%)
6 Two Stars (32%)

Just keep hitting Dorrellistas with facts. It may be time to start writing letters, emails, and making phone calls to the powers-that-be at UCLA. We will provide a list for those interested shortly. Also, expect some site news in the near future.

Happy New Year! KD must win at minimum nine games next year, or be immediately fired. The next hire must be legitimate and have real credibility, like Howland. And don't give us the budget excuse, because we've already debunked that nonsense too. Besides, it's well known that DG turned down over a million to hire a new coach, so he could go with KD instead. Pathetic. We have to force our incompetent administration to make a change. They will not do it on their own.

Fire KD related sites

2004-12-30T22:11:00.000-08:00

firedorrell.com is not updated very often, here is a recent quote after the Vegas debacle:

I'm not sure what I'm more suprised and disgusted at the most, the loss to Wyoming in the Las Vegas Bowl or the Guerrero extending Dorrell's contract until 2010! It's going to be a long summer as we try to digest another sour season. There is some ray of hope. There are a lot of players returning, but so is Dorrell. The talent will be there, so the coach's ability is what will be in the spotlight. If Dorrell cannot do something next season, he will definitely have to get fired.

I like alliteration, and dumpdorrell.com has it. They don't have much content, however.

firekarldorrell.org and firekarldorrell.com, are under construction.

We will keep you updated regarding various firekarldorrell sites as the news becomes available.

Meanwhile, Mav is at it again. Do yourself a favor and read his article on historical football recruiting. A few money graphs (read the whole thing):

I think what the list shows is pretty sobering for those people who would like to believe that the current coaching staff has "turned the corner" and it's just a matter of getting "their players" before the program is dominant again. Here are the major conclusions I draw from the data:

The success of the football team generally coincides with the level of elite talent

[snip]

it is also clear that Karl Dorrell has not done anything to reverse the trend that was already evdent under Toledo. Moreover, Dorrell has managed to achieve a 12-13 record over his first two seasons based on a lot of the "elite" level talent that Toledo recruited but is slowly but surely disappearing from the roster. For example, in 2003 Dorrell still had about 6 elite guys to work with (Lehmann, Mociler, Emanuel, Ware, Lewis, and Drew). In 2004 he also had 6 (subtract Lehmann and Ware, add Perry and Harwell). This is not to say that 6 elite players is a stacked roster -- some of Donahue's stacked teams of the late 1980s had well over a dozen such players, and the 2000 team, to give one example, had over a dozen as well.

But here's the kicker -- it's getting worse, not better. Next year's team will have Marcedes Lewis, Maurice Drew, Brigham Harwell, and Ben Olson. Four guys. OK, we could get more recruits, but right now the only committed player other than Olson who might qualify for this list is Shawn Oatis, and he is on the cusp. And OK, guys can qualify for "elite" if they get picked in the first three rounds of the NFL draft, but who on the roster is likely to accomplish that? Spencer Havner? Chris Markey? Not real promising. Actually, the few players left on the roster who seem capable of an NFL career -- Manuel White, Craig Bragg, possibly Tab Perry -- have used up their eligibility.

In short, no matter how you look at it, or who you blame, Karl Dorrell goes into 2005 with about the least amount of elite talent UCLA has had in the last two decades, at least.

More blogging about this later, but it is the type of analysis that people who are paying for good writing and insight should receive at premiums sites. Instead they get Gattonesque shilling. It is absolutely pathetic.

Et tu BRO?

2004-12-30T15:09:00.000-08:00

A prominent UCLA website has permanently lost all its credibility by shilling for KD and his mediocre, sub-.500 having, lower bowl-tier losing, underperfomring record.

The year end reviews were a laughable attempt to shove everything off on the "underbelly," and to promise that things will be better in the future. Shades of Phil Gatton. Don't drink the Kool Ade. We'll keep fighting the good fight.

Meanwhile, Bruin message boards are in full meltdown mode, reminiscent of the Lavin days. It seems to be about half and half, split between those who rely upon facts to make their arguments, and those who keep hoping that the underbelly will turn around. Much more to come.

Maverick is en fuego

2004-12-26T23:10:00.000-08:00

These comics are hilarious.

So is his editorial (Mav needs permalinks Post this stuff on the blog -- which is now mysteriously deleted:

Looking at UCLA athletic history, when the basketball team performed poorly on the court, Steve Lavin was fired. Walt Hazzard was fired. Larry Farmer was made to feel unwelcome enough that he “resigned.” When the football team performed poorly, Bob Toledo was fired. Even Terry Donahue arguably was forced out, because football is what happens on the field.

By that standard, Karl Dorrell is a failure as a head coach. He took over a program whose 15-9 record over the previous two years, including some big wins but also some embarrassing losses, got Bob Toledo fired.

In the two years since then, Dorrell is 12-13, with no big wins and many embarrassing losses. Dorrell’s losses have demoralized many formerly sane Bruin fans to the point that some have even taking to claiming that one of Dorrell’s losses – to USC this season – was a win. This is akin to someone in a failed, loveless marriage who, to avoid facing reality, nevertheless convinces himself or herself that everything is hunky-dory.

The most remarkable element of Dorrell’s failure, though, is the amazing phenomenon that the more he fails, the more support he gets from the core UCLA football fans – the same fans who ran Toledo out of town for a far better record than Dorrell’s, but nevertheless tolerated a 20-year Terry Donahue regime that bookended a pretty decent 7-year run from 1982-1988 with 13 years of mediocrity and passivity.

If football is what happens on the field, then Dorrell is a dismal and embarrassing failure. But for whatever reason, this core group of fans who embrace mediocrity are more interested in keeping Dorrell as coach than in having a successful football program that brings pride to the university.

So these Bruin fans have to ignore what happens on the field, and focus on those subjective and unprovable factors we talked about earlier – the same kind of squishy, mind-numbing “intangible” stuff that gets trotted out by every failed head coach and was not enough to save coaches like Solich, Willingham, Gilbertson, or Holmoe.

Even calling these arguments “excuses” gives them too much dignity. They’re just deflections. They’re used by people who, for whatever reason, refuse to face reality, refuse to deal with the fact that football is what happens on the field.

1. It’s the prior coach’s fault. After the Wyoming loss, I heard one fan say that this was “the last of the Toledo regime.” Toledo, who hasn’t coached a game for UCLA in over two years?
2. It’s the players’ fault. After all, Dorrell can’t throw and catch and run for these guys, can he? Of course, neither could Holmoe, Gilbertson... you get the idea. Football is what happens on the field.

3. It’s the assistants’ fault. This one doesn’t quite work here, though, since Dorrell just professed tremendous satisfaction with his assistants and their performance not one week ago.

4. It’s the fans’ fault. Here we have the classic mixing up of cause and effect – claiming the team performs poorly because the fans are negative, when in fact the fans are only negative because the team performs poorly.

5. It’s the administration’s fault. How can we beat Wyoming when we don’t have an on-campus stadium, or when we won’t allow the coach to bring in any more Billy Don Jackson’s, or when there are so many distractions in a big city like Los Angeles (like, I don’t know, the national championship winning university across town?).

6. It’s the underbelly’s fault. I don’t even know what this is, but it sure sounds good. Someone needs to tell me, after two full seasons as coach, when two players are sent home days before the loss to Wyoming for coming to a team meeting drunk, is that an example of the coach cleaning up the underbelly? Or, rather, demonstrating that he is incapable of cleaning it up (whatever it is)?

7. Things will get better soon. When all else fails, point to the future. Apologists love to point to intangible and unmeasurable things and just hope that things will miraculously change. Hence, we hear about how some strength and conditioning coach will work wonders with the players’, well, strength and conditioning, or that the team is “young” (as opposed to all those college teams with a bunch of old men all over the field), or that the new recruiting class is filled with breakout stars (even though the quality of Dorrell’s recruits, by any objective measurement, is below Toledo’s) or players with better attitudes (conveniently, a completely unverifiable claim).

We could go on and on, but we’re just wasting our breath. Because Paul Hackett didn’t fail at USC because of the facilities, or because John Robinson’s players were soft, or because of his assistants or USC’s intolerant fans, and Pete Carroll didn’t turn the USC program around in less than two years because the fans or the administration suddenly got more supportive.

Carroll succeeded where Hackett failed because Carroll is a far, far better coach than Hackett.

Dorrell will not be fired now. They just gave the guy a two-year extension, for God’s sake (brlliant). But after next season, when UCLA struggles yet again to stay over .500, we can only hope that even those delusional Bruin fans who think we beat USC and are “going in the right direction” if only we can “clean up some issues,” will start to recognize that all the deflections in the world can’t change the fundamental, no-excuses fact that separates a coach that deserves to keep his job from one who doesn’t:

Football is what happens on the field.

Read the whole thing.

And the quotes:

"I am just gushing with happiness because I know Karl will have an immediate impact....He won't need a two-year window. He'll do things early." -- Matt Stevens, December 19, 2002, Orange County Register, after UCLA finished 7-5, and 4-4 (tied for fourth) in the Pac-10

"Our goal is to ultimately be the best in the conference. We're making strides in that direction and I don't think it's going to be long before we get exactly what we want. Is that next year? Who knows?" -- Karl Dorrell, December 18, 2004, Los Angeles Times, after UCLA finished 6-5, and 4-4 (tied for fifth) in the Pac-10

"I guess I can smile now. That was fun." -- Karl Dorrell, December 4, 2004, giddy with excitement after leading UCLA to its sixth straight loss to archrival USC

"Football is what happens on the field." -- Anonymous

"I was interested in seeing how hard we would play. That was the one thing I wanted to observe. I saw our spirit and guys playing hard. The sideline was alive. That was what was exciting to me." -- Karl Dorrell, on February 3, 2003, asked how he felt watching the UCLA football team win the 2002 Las Vegas Bowl, just before he began coaching the team

"We all have to question how we play this game....I don't know if we put everything into each and every play." -- Drew Olson, on December 22, 2004, after the Bruins lost to Wyoming in the 2004 Las Vegas Bowl after two seasons under Coach Karl Dorrell

Also read this hilarious and sarcastic statistical breakdown:

Much has been written about how much Karl Dorrell has changed the UCLA football program for the better since taking over from the fired Bob Toledo in 2002. What better way to chart Dorrell's remarkable progress than by a statistical comparison of the quality of play that got Toledo fired with the quality of play
that got Dorrell a contract extension and has so many Bruin fans giddy about the program's future?

Let's go right to the numbers:

2002 2004
Points 387 361
Per Game 29.8 30.1
Points Allowed 326 309
Per Game 25.1 25.8
First Downs 237 242
First Downs Allowed 237 256
Total Yards 4643 4920
Per Play 5.2 6.0
Per Game 357.2 410.0
Total Yards Allowed 4651 5195
Per Play 5.1 5.8
Per Game 357.8 432.9
Fumbles Recovered 8 5
Fumbles Lost 12 12
Interceptions Made 17 14
Interceptions Allowed 11 13
Turnover Margin +2 -6
Penalties 78 65
Yards 756 521
Per Game 58.2 43.4
Touchdowns Scored 46 45
Touchdowns Against 41 37
% Scoring in 2d Half 48.8 41.6
Pac-10 Record 4-4 4-4
Result of USC Game Loss Loss*
Overall Record 8-5 6-6

*Moral victory

Pretty impressive. The Bruins scored 0.3 points more per game than the dismal 2002 team -- though they gave up 0.7 more points per game. The team gained 52.8 more yards per game, but gave up 75.1 more yards per game (oops!). The team
recovered fewer fumbles and made fewer interceptions and its turnover margin declined from +2 to -6. But on the positive side, penalties declined by about
one 15-yard penalty per game.

Based on numbers like these, it is no wonder that UCLA's Athletic Director Dan Guerrero decided to extend Dorrell's contract. It would be a pity if some other
school like Notre Dame or Florida snapped Dorrell up just when he is beginning to clean up some issues and get everyone on the same page.

Also take a look at Lonnie White's post bowl breakdown:

The atmosphere in the UCLA locker room after the 24-21 loss to Wyoming in the Las Vegas Bowl on Thursday night was tense. Some players wore angry faces, while others appeared sad or simply stared straight ahead with a blank look.

Four of the last players to leave Sam Boyd Stadium were juniors: tight end Marcedes Lewis, linebacker Justin London, defensive tackle C.J. Niusulu and receiver Junior Taylor.

Four players who began their UCLA careers with hopes of playing in big bowl games against national powers. Instead, they'll be entering their senior seasons playing for a program that lost in minor bowl games two consecutive years against teams that love to upset a Pacific 10 Conference opponent.

"Our team effort has to be focused on every snap," said Lewis when asked about the 6-6 Bruins' problems with consistency. "We were ready for Wyoming, but we were not ready to play every play…. That pretty much sums up our season: lack of focus when we needed it the most."

Not being ready to play doesn't sound like "working on issues" and "cleaning up underbelly" to me.

Added Taylor: "I'm not saying that we took [Wyoming] for granted, but it wasn't the same UCLA team that played USC, Oregon and other teams during the season."

The defeat certainly did not enhance the Bruins' image. It raised more questions than anything. And Coach Karl Dorrell's critics have more ammunition because UCLA lost to a Wyoming team that did not come close to having the same talent as the Bruins.

For whatever reasons, Dorrell's team did not get the job done, which happened too many times this season.

"We have to learn how make our own plays," Niusulu said. "We can't keep doing things right and then make a mistake that costs us. We have to force the other teams into mistakes more. That's what killed us this season."

[snip]

[Marcedes Lewis said,] "This season, we've lost in every possible way. We've had games when we've been ahead and let teams come back; we've had games when we've started out late and then finished strong, and then there were those when we just didn't finish."

Showing consistent progress is something quarterback Drew Olson has struggled with.

[snip]

The offensive line made great strides under coordinator Tom Cable, led by center Mike McCloskey, who may be the team's most consistent and complete player.

UCLA will miss seniors Steven Vieira and Paul Mociler, but freshman guard Shannon Tevaga emerged as a solid blocker over the second half of the season. If Cable can get 6-foot-9, 345-pound junior tackle Ed Blanton to play in a dominating fashion, the Bruins could be even better across the front.

Defensively, UCLA spent a season learning on the job. Sophomore tackle Kevin Brown has shown potential to be a star, and freshman end Brigham Harwell made his share of great plays. Junior college transfer ends Kyle Morgan and Justin Hickman improved with each game.

Freshmen linemen Bruce Davis, Nikola Dragovic and William Snead took their lumps but gained valuable experience.

The defensive strength next season will be at linebacker, with starters Spencer Havner, Wesley Walker and London returning along with backups Aaron Whittington and Fred Holmes.

Junior safety Jarrad Page and freshman cornerback Trey Brown will return as secondary starters. Backups Eric McNeal, Chris Horton and Dennis Keyes along with a couple of incoming freshmen will give UCLA more speed in its defensive backfield.

"This says nothing about our future," London said. "This is a different team in a different situation than teams in the past. We're going to be cool. We're going to show how we learned from our mistakes."

Most telling is this:

Not Two Easy

Karl Dorrell has the worst record over his first two seasons at UCLA since Edwin C. Horrell went 7-9-4 in 1939-40. A look at how UCLA coaches have fared in their first two seasons since then:

Coach Years Record Pct.
• Bert LaBrucherie 1945-46 15-5 .750
• Henry R. Sanders 1949-50 12-6 .667
• William F. Barnes 1959-60 12-6-2 .650
• Tommy Prothro 1965-66 17-3-1 .850
• Pepper Rodgers 1971-72 10-10-1 .500
• Dick Vermeil 1974-75 15-5-3 .717
• Terry Donahue 1976-77 16-6-1 .727
• Bob Toledo 1996-97 15-8 .652
• Karl Dorrell 2003-04 12-13 .480

Don't say we didn't warn you.

Also take a look at the talent excuse, the budget excuse, the youth excuse, the Ben Olson as savior argument and the tradition straw man.

12-13

2004-12-24T09:56:00.000-08:00

Dorrell is now a sub .500 level coach. Some thoughts from Brian Dohn:

It was a painful flashback to Fresno State, something UCLA insisted would not happen.

And yet this was far worse. A much more talented UCLA, with ideas of building something for the future and using a win as momentum, was instead reminded of the fragile state of the program on a horrific Thursday night. [My thoughts, does that sound like turning the corner? Does that sound like good coaching?

[snip]

"We all have to question how we play this game," said UCLA quarterback Drew Olson, who left in the second quarter with a knee injury. "If we played inspired football like we did against 'SC, then I think it's a different outcome. I don't know if we put everything into each and every play. [My aside: whose fault is that? Sounds like the players weren't prepared. Again. Just like Fresno State last year. Just like Wazzu. How many times does this have to happen before people realize that we have a bad coach?]

"We have a lot of stuff to take care of. There were positives this year, but it was a real setback." [Don't we always seem to have "issues" and "underbelly" to take care of? I thought that was supposedly getting better?]

It is the first bowl win for Wyoming (7-5) since the 1966 Sun Bowl. UCLA (6-6) has dropped its last two bowl games, falling to Fresno State last season before this latest debacle, which the Bruins wasted a 21-10 third-quarter lead.

"This one hurts. I'm sick to my stomach right now," UCLA tight end Marcedes Lewis said. "Not taking any credit away from them. They're a good team, they fought hard, but this is a no-brainer. We should have won this game.

"It was a combination of them playing harder, us not executing to the best of our ability and they got us. They wanted it more than we did." [Why did they play harder? Why did they want it more?]

Making it worse, if that is possible, was that UCLA had a chance to put the game away late in the third quarter when Wyoming trailed by 11 and was punting from its own end zone, but Craig Bragg muffed the punt and the Cowboys recovered.

[snip]

"We played a lackluster football game," UCLA coach Karl Dorrell said. "This is a total team effort in this loss; special teams, defense, offense." [You forgot coaching. A lackluster football game, you should be the first person to take the blame.]

[snip]

"We overlooked them, really," Drew said. "On film, they didn't look as good as they played. We need to start learning that film doesn't mean a thing. They got Division I scholarships for a reason. We have to learn not to underestimate a team and to go out there and fight."

This is just pathetic. We saw this happen against Wazzu. Everyone feared that this sort of thing would happen. Good coaches with over three weeks to prepare don't allow this to happen. We should have won by 20.

Lonnie White's thoughts:

In true UCLA fashion this season, the Bruins played to the level of their competition Thursday night, and their inability to deliver a knockout punch cost them a victory in the Las Vegas Bowl.

Playing to the level of the competition. Sounds a lot like a certain UCLA basketball team during the L---n era.

Wyoming rallied from an 11-point fourth-quarter deficit to defeat UCLA, 24-21, on a 12-yard touchdown pass from Corey Bramlet to John Wadkowski with 57 seconds remaining.

On the Cowboys' winning drive, they moved 72 yards in 10 plays, took advantage of a disputed pass interference penalty and converted on a couple of key fourth- and third-down plays before a crowd of 27,784 at Sam Boyd Stadium.

As for J.A. Adande, read the whole thing, but here are the money graphs:

Ignore the math and follow the logic: a three-point defeat after a five-point defeat represents a huge step backward.

I've never heard UCLA fans so thoroughly satisfied with a loss to USC as they were after the Trojans eked out a 29-24 victory on Dec. 4. The chasm between the two programs was so great that simply coming that close qualified as immense progress for the Bruins.

Throw all that giddiness away now that the Bruins completely self-destructed and lost the Las Vegas Bowl to Wyoming, 24-21, Thursday night.

So after earning accolades for hanging with the top-ranked Trojans, the Bruins couldn't play the part of 12-point favorites against the Cowboys.

And while there was visible evidence of progress this season, there also were tangible results that suggest the Bruins still have a long way to go. This team heads into the off-season losers of three of its last four games and five of its last seven.

The Bruins also have lost four of their last five bowl games, with only one of the games — the 1999 Rose Bowl loss to Wisconsin — coming in the marquee month of January.

And speaking of heading in the wrong direction, all but a handful of Bruin players went directly to the locker room instead of sticking around to congratulate the Cowboys after their upset victory.

How did this loss happen?

[snip]

UCLA came out almost expecting Wyoming to roll over for them, playing as the Cowboys actually believed all of the hyperbole coming earlier in the week from Wyoming Coach Joe Glenn, who waxed about the UCLA offensive line.

This is just pathetic. KD must go. He will destroy this program.

Pathetic

2004-12-23T23:04:00.000-08:00

6-7, 6-6

Back to back non winning seasons. Only the fifth time in the last 60 years.

Happened 99-00 (Toledo)
89-90 (Donahue)
62-64 (Barnes)
43-44 (Horrell)

Absolutely pathetic.

Brian Dohn has an interesting article

2004-12-23T09:21:00.000-08:00

It really chronicles some of the failures of the program over the last four or five years. The entire thing is worth reading. Basically there are a lot of facts that aren't so great, but a lot of excuses, let's count them. Money graphs:

UCLA gear was everywhere Craig Bragg looked. Kids were wearing it at his high school, it was in the shops at malls, and the Bruins were players in the national championship race.

Bragg was so impressed, he committed to UCLA as a high school junior, well before a dismal 4-7 mark in 1999 foreshadowed what would be a tumultuous demise of the program.

Now, nearly six years after committing, Bragg plays his last game, today against Wyoming, in the Las Vegas Bowl. He will leave as UCLA's all-time leading receiver, and with the reputation of being one of the nicest and classiest individuals in the program.

He also will leave without playing in a major bowl, a pain balanced by the belief he was a major factor in what he thinks is the program turning around.

[snip]

The vibe about the future of UCLA is definitely better than it has been during coach Karl Dorrell's two seasons, but it can disappear in a heartbeat. That is what makes the Las Vegas Bowl vital.

The Cowboys (6-5) appear to be nothing more than a middle-of-the-road Mountain West Conference school, in the postseason because nearly every school with six wins is in a bowl.

"This is important (to) win to keep momentum going in this program," UCLA coach Karl Dorrell said.

[snip]

"With the youth of this football team, we might be in position to be in that (preseason) top 30, top 25, if you do something well (tonight). Those are the things we're building with this team."

[snip]

Steven Vieira committed to UCLA a day before the 1999 opener against Boise State. Since then, the Bruins are 37-34, and the most prestigious bowl the Bruins played in was the 2000 Sun Bowl. The following year the Bruins declined an invitation to the Humanitarian Bowl. In 2002, coach Bob Toledo was fired before the Las Vegas Bowl, and last season, Dorrell's first, UCLA was humiliated in the Silicon Valley Football Classic.

The seniors' time in Westwood has been dotted with scandal (think handicap parking), controversy (think Cory Paus and DUI, or DeShaun Foster and SUV), with instability (think Toledo's firing) and with dysfunction (think riffs within the coaching staff).

It has not been chock full o' wins.

"I was expecting a lot of championships, you know, Pac-10 championships and competing on a high level," Bruins senior cornerback Matt Clark said. "Things didn't turn out like that."

Even Dorrell's first year was fraught with off-the-field issues, including several arrests, selfishness and in-fighting among players, and what many current players describe as a lack of quality leadership from the upperclassmen.

This season, despite a ho-hum record, the direction and perception of the program seem more positive. Players worked harder in the offseason, and there was more accountability among players willing to police themselves.

Until Sunday, when, according to sources, seniors Eyoseph Efseaff and Ben Lorier showed up intoxicated for a team meeting and were suspended from the game and sent home, there had been no embarrassing off-the-field moments.

Senior running back Manuel White, a co-captain, said even the suspensions showed a positive turn in the program.
[snip]

So, I count one belief that the future is getting better, one vibe about the future, one prebuilt youth excuse, one "despite a ho-hum record, the direction and perception of the program seem more positive," one absurd comment from Manny White (who is a great guy, but his comment is ludicrous) that the suspensions are a plus. Look, there are reasons to be positive, even I'll grant that, but all this work on the underbelly is silly, and claiming that the suspensions of players for being out of line proves that the team is more disciplined is the most preposterous thing I have ever heard.

Ben Olson Commits

2004-12-22T09:58:00.000-08:00

So it will be a Merry Christmas after all.

Coach Karl Dorrell received the commitment UCLA's football program had been waiting for when highly recruited quarterback Ben Olson selected the Bruins over California and Arizona State on Monday.

Olson did not return calls from The Times, but sources close to the Bruins and the 6-foot-5 left-hander said that he would begin attending classes at UCLA in January.

Further down the article, Tab Perry, commenting on the commitment, notes the recent plight of UCLA football while presided over by KD:

"When I first came in, UCLA was already at a certain point in football," Perry said. "They were ranked in the top 10 a couple of times and ranked in the top 25 every year.

"Now it's like we were at the bottom working our way to the top. The last two years, the foundation was being put in place. It's time to start building on the base, and we're seeing a lot of good things going in the right direction."

One wonders why we've fallen so far so quickly. We keep hearing about building blocks, underbelly, and so forth. And getting BO is a good thing. But why have we fallen so far? Worth pondering.

Meanwhile, work on the underbelly continues:

UCLA arrived for the Las Vegas Bowl, but even before the first team function, a 10 p.m. team meeting Sunday, there was trouble to be found, and two Bruins were suspended for Thursday's game against Wyoming.

Seniors Ben Lorier, a linebacker scheduled to make his third career start, and backup defensive tackle Eyoseph Efseaff were sent home for violating team rules, Bruins coach Karl Dorrell said Monday.

And while there apparently is accountability for players who makes mistakes, for coaches who do the same, there is no accountability: "UCLA coach Karl Dorrell reshaped his coaching staff a year ago, and he is so pleased with the results, he wants to retain the entire staff."

Yeah, 6-5 and the second-worst bowl game against a vastly inferior team. What's not to be pleased about? Paging head coaching candidates, head coaching candidates please report to the Morgan Center. Sigh.

Head coaching candidates

2004-12-14T20:01:00.000-08:00

Now is a good time to discuss and brainstorm potential head coaching candidates. Plese post your ideas in the comments section. Perhaps if we do the work the Morgan Center is paid to do, we will get a good coach eventually.

Tom O'Brien
Dan Hawkins
Randy Edsall
Bobby Petrino
Mike Price
Butch Davis
Mike Leach
Gregg Brandon
Dick Vermeil
Al Saunders
Mike Heimerdinger
Jim Schwartz
Scott Linehan
Tom Rossley
Dick LeBeau
Gregg Williams
Jerry Gray
Dennis Erickson
George O'Leary
Norm Chow
Rick Neuheisel

Thoughts, comments, additions?

Stanford, UW get coaches

2004-12-12T07:30:00.000-08:00

Stanford is hiring Walt Harris, and UW is hiring Willinghma, according to ESPN.

Well, the one thing I used to be able to say about KD -- that he was a better coach than Teevens and Gilby -- I sure can't say about these guys. We now have the worst coach in the Pac 10. This conference has some very tough coaches. Things are only going to get tougher.

DG reups KD

2004-12-10T21:27:00.000-08:00

Just how lazy are beat reporters? First, rollover contracts are standard operating procedure. So this contract extenstion is nothing out of the ordinary, deserved or not:

Karl Dorrell politely declined last year when offered the rollover provision to extend his contract at UCLA. As the Bruins coach said at the time, he did not feel he deserved it.

But there will be little debate this year after a season in which the Bruins showed marked improvement in the development of the program and on the field. Athletic Director Dan Guerrero declined to delve into specifics of the rollover, but he and Dorrell had preliminary discussions regarding the contract last week before the Bruins' loss to No.1 USC. It is likely that the parties will reach agreement before the Dec. 23 Las Vegas Bowl against Wyoming.

KD declining the extension last year was a nice little gesture. But that's all it was. He showed "marked improvement" by taking a team he inherited that won 8 games and winning 6 games in his first season, and 6 games this year. Marked improvement? Little debate? Hey Rob, check out this blog. Or the message boards. Not everyone drank the "moral victory" Kool Ade.

The Bruins' coach has established a work ethic and attitude within the program that was lacking when he arrived, weeding out a number of players along the way.

Translation: Underbelly. Underbelly. Underbelly. Work ethic and attitude are great. But I'm not convinced that they have improved. Particularly when there are reports that the team just didn't show up prepared against Wazzu. Also, you conveniently can't measure work ethic and attitude and underbelly. You can measure wins and losses: two seasons 12-12.

UCLA is 6-5 - the same number of regular season victories as it had a year ago - but the offense went from the bottom of the Pac-10 rankings in every pertinent statistical category to the top third in rushing and scoring. A young defense also showed improvement during the final weeks of the season in a victory at Oregon and in allowing only two touchdowns to USC.

You forgot to mention that the Pac 10 went from among the best in the Pac 10 (or even one of the top dozen or so in the country) to the worst in the Pac 10. But it was young. Of course. Underbelly.

Dorrell said that he is more comfortable and had much more fun this season than last, his first as a head coach.

Oh goody. He finally figured out who Manny White is and how to put his headset on. I'm glad KD is having "fun" losing to $C again. This isn't preschool and there's no playtime in bigtime college football.

"It was fun coaching this year," he said. "They want to be special, they want to be good. They really want to work and be as good as they can be. It's fun when you have guys who aspire to do those kinds of things. As a coach, it's really rewarding when you have guys with that type of attitude. We're going to keep building on that and getting better."

Wanting to be good is not enough. You have to actually do something about it. If the players didn't want to perform to the best of their ability there would be something seriously wrong with them. How many Division I athletes do you know who said "I just want to be mediocre. I'm shooting for two seasons of .500 ball"? Yeah, me neither.

The UCLA staff also is putting together a solid recruiting class, adding a commitment Thursday from tight end Ryan Moya (6-foot-3, 230) from Oak Ridge High in El Dorado Hills. Moya is part of a group that includes safety Shawn Oatis (5-11, 205) from Chino, tight end Logan Paulsen (6-5, 225) from Chaminade of West Hills and tackle Aleksey Lanis (6-6, 300) and linebacker Reggie Carter (6-1, 225) from Crenshaw of Los Angeles.

The Bruins remain in the running for some of the premier recruits in the nation including linebacker Ryan Reynolds (6-2, 220) from Bishop Gorman High in Las Vegas, left-handed quarterback Ben Olson (6-5, 230) from Thousand Oaks and defensive end Raymond Henderson (6-5, 255) from Oak Creek, Wis.

In fairness, the staff has a chance to put together a much better class than they did over the last two years. Those were the worst in the last six years or so. But they were still top 25 classes, so don't tell me there isn't enough talent to be better than .500.

You're playing Wyoming in the crappy Las Vegas Bowl. You haven't beaten a team with a winning record all season. You're .500 over two years. Stop having so much "fun" and get to work.

Public Service Announcement: Keep the laptop away from your junk

2004-12-08T20:10:00.000-08:00

BUSINESSMEN and teenage boys [and especially pajamma-clad bloggers!!!] could be risking their fertility by using laptop computers, research suggests.

The combination of heat generated by the computers and the posture needed to balance the equipment on the lap leads to raised temperatures around the scrotum, a study has found. Past research shows that higher scrotal temperatures can damage sperm and affect fertility. And the introduction of new technology such as Bluetooth and infrared connections — which provide wireless links to the internet — has resulted in a growing number of men using the machines on their thighs rather than at a desk.

To keep the testicles at an ideal temperature — and for greater comfort — men naturally sit with their legs further apart than women. When working on a laptop, however, they will adopt a less natural position in order to balance it on their laps, which results in a significant rise in body heat between their thighs.

I have no further comment. But there are a lot of jokes to be made.

How about those 6 wins?

2004-12-07T14:49:00.000-08:00

Take a look at the schedule and standings:

Wins over
Illinois (3-8, t-10th Big 10, coach fired)
UW (1-10, 10th Pac 10, coach fired)
SDSU (4-7, 7th Mountain West)
Arizona (3-8, t-8th Pac 10)
Stanford (4-7, t-8th Pac 10, coach fired)
Oregon (5-6, t-5th Pac 10)

The teams we managed to beat had a combined record of 20-46, or a .303 winning percentage. Aside from losses to a decent ASU team (8-3, 3rd Pac 10), a so-so Oklahoma State team (7-4, 5th in the tough Big XII South), and losses to obviously strong Cal and the team from South Central, we also lost to a bad Wazzu team (5-6, 7th Pac 10) who played the game without their starting QB.

To recap: we played 2 good teams, and lost both games. One of them was a "moral victory" (or so we're told). We lost to two above average teams. We played seven games against bad teams, and we lost one, and managed to beat the other six garbage teams, none of which had a winning season or finished higher than fifth in their conference (or in Okie State's case even in it's division).

Three of the teams we beat were so bad their coaches were fired. Now we are going to not a second-tier bowl, but a bad bowl game. We keep hearing about all the progress the team has made. I'm not impressed.

Guererro rapidly losing credibility

2004-12-07T09:36:00.000-08:00

We knew it would just be a matter of time before the Morgan Center began to spin yet another loss to the Hated Ones as a program defining moment. Dan Guererro is now in full spin mode, as witnessed by this gem from the Long Beach Press Telegram:

"Two years ago there was a lot of speculation about the future of this
program, and where it was going," UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero said.
"Most of that speculation and uncertainty kind of pointed to a downward
direction. Even though we're going to the Las Vegas Bowl again, I think
most people would say the direction is pointed in a positive way, and I
would concur with that."

Uh, no Dan. Many of us do not concur with that. Does 12-12 mean anyhting to you?

Dan chimes in on the Bruin's "program defining" win at Autzen:

"The one game we had to win, the biggest game of Karl's short career as a
head coach, was the Oregon game," Guerrero said. "There was a lot riding on that
game, and our kids were well-prepared and they were emotionally ready to
play that game and they played undoubtedly their best game of the year. And
they followed that up with a great effort against the Trojans."

I can think of another big game that some of us considered a "must win."

The LBPT recognized the significant progress accomplished during the Karl Dorrell era:

This season the Bruins, who were picked to finish eighth in the preseason
conference poll, are 6-5 and finished fifth in the conference at 4-4.

Wow. At this rate, we might be able to see a Holiday Bowl before 2010.

Look for even more absurd spin emanating from the Morgan Center as the
presitigious Las Vegas Bowl draws near.

Meanwhile, up I-5, Cal recognizes that a solid FB program is a good thing:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=1939823

It's the Vegas Bowl

2004-12-06T06:47:00.000-08:00

Sweet progress. The Bruins get the second-worst Bowl game, according to CFN:

27. Las Vegas Bowl, Dec. 23, ESPN 9:30… Wyoming vs. UCLA
UCLA returns to the site of the scintillating 23-17 2002 Las Vegas Bowl win over New Mexico zzzzzzzzz. Wyoming will be jacked up to be in a bowl game, but it’ll take a total Bruin meltdown for this to be interesting.
Stars of the show: UCLA LB Spencer Havner, Wyoming QB Corey Bramlet
The knee jerk, off-the-cuff initial prediction: UCLA 38 … Wyoming 17

Nothing like a pre-Christmas bowl against a team the least populous state in the country (well, the lower 48) to really show off your progress. Only the Wyndham New Orleans Bowl is considered worse, pitting North Texas and Southern Miss. Didn't Toledo get fired for getting his team to the Vegas Bowl?

A .500 coach

2004-12-04T19:43:00.000-08:00

Karl Dorrell is a .500 coach in two seasons. His first year, he took a team that went 8-5 the previous year and compiled a 6-7 record. This year, he has compiled a 6-5 record (prior to the bowl game, of course).

UCLA's 16th head football coach. Before Bill Spaulding took over in 1925, no UCLA football coach had so much as a winning season, let alone a winning career percentage. There have been 12 head coaches from Spaulding through Dorrell (excluding Ed Kerizian's one game stint as the interim head coach subsequent to Bob Toledo's firing).

Only five of those head coaches have failed to post a record better than .500 in their first two years. Right from the start, Dorrell's tenure is in the lower half of the coaches who have coached at UCLA since Bill Spaulding was the first to post a winning season in 1925.

The coaches who failed to have a winning record in their first two seasons were Babe Harrell, George Dickerson, Bill Barnes, Pepper rodgers, and Terry Donahue.

Babe Harrell took over from Bill Spaulding in 1939. In his first season, he posted UCLA's first ever undefeated season, going 6-0-4, in 1940, he went 1-9. Harrell's career ended after the 1944 season with a career .443 winning percentage.

In 1958, after the untimely passing of the great Red Sanders, George Dickerson coached three games, going 1-2, and ending his career with a .333 winning percentage.

Bill Barnes took over, going 2-4-1 in the remainder of the 1958 season, and 5-4-1 in 1959. In 1964, Barnes' tenure ended, with a career winning percentage of .478.

In 1971, Pepper Rodgers took over for Tommy Protho. Rodgers went 2-7-1 in 1971, but improved greatly in 1972, going 8-3. Rodgers' UCLA winning percentage in three years was .609 (and a career .528 winning percentage in 13 years at Kansas, UCLA and Georgia Tech).

In 1976, Terry Donahue took over for Dick Vermeil. Donahue went 9-2-1 in his first season, and 0-11 in 1977. Donahue ended his 20 year career in 1995 with a .635 winning percentage.

Out of these five coaches, three (Harrell, Dickerson, and Barnes) ended up with career winning percentages under .500. Two of the coaches (Rodgers and Donahue) had failry successful careers, both having UCLA winning percentages of .609 or better. But both of these coaches had something in common: they won eight games or better in one of their first two years (and Rodgers had won nine games in his second season at Kansas prior to taking the UCLA job). Both Donahue and Rodgers also won at least eight games in their third year.

So it's not unreasonable to expect a coach to have success early in his career. Indeed, only those coaches who won at least eight games in one of their first two years and at least eight games in two of thier first three years ended with career winning percentages over .500.

Interestingly, the six coaches who had a winning percentage of better than .500 over their first two years -- Spaulding, Bert LaBrucherie, Red Sanders, Tommy Protho, Dick Vermeil, and Bob Toledo -- all ended their careers with winning percentages over .500.

So, 100% of coaches who had .500 winning percentages or better ended their careers with winning percentages above .500, and only 40% of those with .500 or below in their first two seasons ended up with career winning percentages above .500. And, both of those coaches with .500 or below records in their first two seasons had something in common, they won at least eight games in each one of their first two seasons.

There seems to be a strong predictive factor here. It's pretty simple: a good coach is a good coach. A good coach doesn't make -- or need made for him -- excuses about youth, talent, difficulties in recruiting players because of academics, officiating, or underbelly.

No, a good coach wins, and he wins pretty quickly. We have a .500 coach. Given the past record of UCLA head coaches, his chances of becoming a good coach are not good. And spare me the officiating complaints. There are bad calls in every game.

I also don't want to hear about moral victories. It's nice that we didn't get destroyed by that team across town like we did last year, but we still lost. For six straight years now. If Dorrell and company don't get their act together, our record 8-straight winning streak of the 90s may be in jeopardy. Two senior classes have now gone through their entire UCLA careers without beating $C. That's embarassing.

Yet, somehow, some way, people on message boards are actually happy about this loss. I haven't seen improvement. I've seen a coach who took a team that won 8 games, and won 6 games. Twice in a row. Taking a team that your predecessors were able to go 8-5 with and then going 6-7 and 6-5 is not improvement.

Ladies and gentlement, a present to you, a .500 coach.

6-5 is not much better than 6-6

2004-12-04T16:50:00.000-08:00

those are the two regular season records. Karl Dorrell is now 12-12.

There is no such thing as a moral victory.

The players should be proud that they left it all out on the field.

But Karl Dorrell and his staff are very mediocre. They are not taking steps forward. We can do better.

Reggie Bush

2004-12-04T13:40:00.000-08:00

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

UPDATE: Three and out after a great return. Terrible. Glad we pinned them deep on the punt though.

UPDATE: Nice return Craig. Now only if the offense could do something.

UPDATE: Blocked punt!!! Now if we can get some offensive play...

UPDATE: Missed FG, another Bush TD run. So long comeback.

Nothing to lose, everything to gain

2004-12-04T07:57:00.000-08:00

We can ruin the season of the school across town.

"They have everything to lose and we have everything to gain," UCLA flanker Tab Perry said. "It's a perfect day for an upset…. This is pretty much a national championship game for them. They beat us, they get to go. They lose and everything is different."

[snip]

it could thunderously help UCLA make up some of the huge distance that has grown between the programs during Carroll's four seasons.

"This would be huge for recruiting," Perry said. "Right now, everyone is on the USC bandwagon. But if we could go out and show that we could beat them, that would let people know…. It would just do wonders for our program."

So true Tab. Make us proud.

Meanwhile, even if Pom Pom Peetite has been saying all the right things, that school across town is looking right past us.

In 26 of the 73 USC-UCLA games in history, the Trojans were hoping to earn a trip to the Rose Bowl by defeating the cross-town rival Bruins. Today, for the first time, USC goes to the Rose Bowl if it loses to UCLA.

Perhaps that twist in logic was the reason something was missing around USC this week during what normally passes as the most exciting time of the year.

It might warm Trojans coach Pete Carroll's heart to hear it, but the thought of playing UCLA barely raised a pulse on campus, whether you were at Howard Jones Field or the traditional bonfire Thursday night.

Things are setting up perfectly for the upset. No excuses. No moral victories. A win. Go Bruins. Beat $C.

Matt Clark wants payback

2004-12-02T09:36:00.000-08:00

So do I. More links:

Apparently a game against your cross-town rival is enough to fire up anyone, even Karl Dorrell

Todd Harmonson reports on how to beat $C

Lap Dance Price, now at UTEP explains:

"You've got to find a way to get pressure on Matt and play zone behind it," said Price, whose Washington State team sacked eventual Heisman Trophy winner Carson Palmer four times in a 30-27 overtime victory over USC. "If you don't pressure the quarterback, he'll pick you apart."

Price said the key isn't necessarily blitzes from the edge. Leinart is too sharp and usually will find his receivers or backs on hot reads.

He said the pressure needs to come from the middle

Continuing the article:

Perhaps the best strategy is to keep USC's high-powered offense off the field as much as possible.

"Run the ball, control the clock if you want to keep Matt Leinart from getting under center," said ABC analyst Craig James, one of only two voters in The Associated Press' media poll who had USC third in the nation this week. "Because when he's in there, they're usually going to score."

Cal's Jeff Tedford, the only guy to actually do it recently (with much less talent last year than this UCLA team), explains:

"You have to be patient, take what they give you and wait for your opportunities to make a big play," said Cal's Tedford, whose team gained 424 yards against USC on Oct.9 but fell, 23-17, because of its inability to convert drives into scores. "But they don't give you many opportunities."

"I think you have to run the ball the way Notre Dame did against them," said ABC's James, a former Southern Methodist running back.

And why not? Notre Dame's mix of power and speed led to 195 rushing yards, the most USC has surrendered this season.

Then again, USC has appeared shaky at times against the pass, such as when Oregon State threw for 330 yards.

The reality, however, is that a team needs to do both to find consistent success against USC.

"If all you can do is run or all you can do is pass, you're in trouble," UTEP's Price said. "You have to be able to do both against them."

More (and do I here KD beginning to make excuses already? We have the talent:

UCLA obviously can run the ball, especially if tailback Maurice Drew recovers from his right ankle injury. But, with a defense that ranks last in the Pac-10, the Bruins don't appear strong enough to snap USC's winning streaks of 20 games overall and five in the series.

"The issue will be the skill," Dorrell said. "We are going to have to match up with their skill and try to contain the big plays they make offensively."

Let's get it done. No excuses

A look at the BCS top 10

2004-12-02T08:35:00.000-08:00

It is easy to speculate as to the reasons why the UCLA football team is not currently competing at an elite level. Here at FKD, we believe that one of the reasons is patently obvious—the lack of a proven and experienced head coach.

Just for a little perspective, consider the head coaches that are leading the current top-ranked BCS contenders:

1. USC: Head Coach Peter Carroll.

Former NFL head coach and defensive coordinator. Many thought this was a terrible hire at first, but not too many complaints have been heard out of Fig. Tech lately. All of that NFL experience has translated well to the college game.

2. OU: Head Coach Bob Stoops.

Before taking the helm at OU, Stoops served as Steve Spurrier’s Assistant Head Coach and Defensive Coordinator. Also served in same capacity at KSU.

3. Auburn: Head Coach Tommy Tuberville.

Tuberville was the Defensive Coordinator at Miami during three of their National Championship seasons. Also served as the DC at Texas A&M and Head Coach at Ole Miss, where he put together a respectable record despite scholarship restrictions.

Anyone think the Auburn AD is shopping for head coaches anymore?

Of course, many attribute Tuberville's tremendous comeback to the hiring of former UCLA OC Al Borges.

4. Cal: Head Coach Jeff Tedford.

Tedford is considered by many as the premier quarterbacks coach in all of college football. Under his tutelage, Trent Dilfer, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, David Carr and Kyle Boller have blossomed into high first-round NFL draft picks. Before taking over the Golden Bears, Tedford was the Offensive Coordinator and QB’s Coach at Oregon under Mike Belotti, where he helped lead the Ducks to a #2 ranking. The Ducks haven't been the same since Tedford left.

Of course, USC fans remember Jeff Tedford as the man who orchestrated the 1992 Freedom Bowl upset over the Trojies while he was the OC and QB Coach at FSU (that’s FRESNO, not Florida).

5. Utah: Head Coach Urban Meyer.

Longtime college WR coach until earned he his first HC job at BGSU in 2001. During his first three years as a HC, Meyer has compiled records of 8-3, 9-3, and 10-2. The UTES are currently 11-0 and in line for a BCS berth. Urban Meyer is considered by many as one of the brightest young offensive minds in college football, and will more than likely take over at ND for Ty Willingham.

6. Texas: Head Coach Mack Brown.

Before taking over the Texas job, Mack Brown was an established Head Coach with stints at North Carolina and Tulane. Brown led the Tarheels to six consecutive bowl berths and back-to-back ten win seasons.

7. Georgia: Head Coach Mark Richt.

Prior to taking the Georgia Head Coach job, Mark Richt was Bobby Bowden’s QB’s Coach for 10 years and Offensive Coordinator for 6 years at FSU. Under Richt’s tutelage, the FSU offense was ranked in the top 12 five times between 1994-2000. Before arriving in Tallahassee, Richt was the OC at Eastern Carolina.

8. Boise State: Head Coach Dan Hawkins

Dan Hawkins worked under current ASU Head Coach Dirk Koetter as Assistant Head Coach, Special Teams and Tight Ends Coach, and Recruiting Coordinator before Koetter left to take the ASU job. Before joining the staff at BSU, Hawkins was the Head Coach at Willamette University where he went 40-1 and captured the NAIA NC.

9. Louisville: Head Coach Bobby Petrino.

Petrino is rapidly becoming one of the hottest coaches in college football. Before returning to Louisville, where he served as OC that presided over the Cardinals offense that led the nation in scoring and total offense in 1998, Petrino spent three seasons in the NFL with the Jacksonville Jaguars as their QB’s Coach and Offensive Coordinator. Petrino also served as OC at Auburn, and earlier in his career, Utah State and Nevada, where he also put up incredible offesnive statistics.

10. Miami: Head Coach Larry Coker

Coker served as the Miami OC and QB’s Coach for 5 years under Butch Davis. He also coached DB’s at Ohio State, and served as the OC at Oklahoma and Oklahoma State (where he coached Barry Sanders during his 1988 Heisman Trophy campaign.

With the exception of Urban Meyer, who many consider a modern day offesnsive savant, every single coach listed above had either:

1) Experience as a head coach, or

2) Experience as an OC or DC under an experienced head coach at a major college football program.

After considering the massive amount of experience leading the top teams in the country, is it really any surprise that UCLA continues to loiter in mediocrity? This should not be the case considering the talent available and currently on the team, the beautiful location, the esteemed football tradition (see below), and the opportunity to receive one of the top college educations in the country.

We can only hope that when the inevitable occurs, that the Morgan Center will look a bit more closely at what it takes to have an elite program. (That's making a dangerous assumption that an elite football program is anywhere on their list of priorities)

Note also that #1-#3 are all defense-oriented coaches.

The Dominoes are Going to Start Falling

2004-12-01T09:24:00.000-08:00

There are openings at ND, UF, UW, Stanford, and elsewhere.

On Tuesday, the volcano erupted without warning. Major-college football is at 12 coaching changes, and more are sure to follow. None, however, will have the impact of what took place Tuesday. Notre Dame fired Tyrone Willingham, the Cleveland Browns and Butch Davis parted ways, and the effects may be felt from the Pacific Northwest to central Florida.

Since the University of Florida fired Ron Zook in late October, Urban Meyer has endured questions concerning his interest in going to Gainesville. No one has to ask the Utah coach if he is interested in Notre Dame, where he spent four seasons as an assistant under Bob Davie. Meyer had a clause inserted in his contract that allows him to leave Salt Lake City for South Bend with no penalty.

One door shuts, another opens. When the University of Washington contacted Willingham two weeks ago, it may have been a long shot to lure a coach away from the Golden Dome. The speculation for the Huskies continues to center around California coach Jeff Tedford, but Washington has established itself on the inside track with Willingham, a coach who won a Pac-10 Conference championship only five seasons ago.

Spurrier is in at USC (Cocks, not condoms)

Predictions:
ND: Meyer
UF: Davis (or Tedford)
UW: Willingham (or Tedford, or Hawkins)
Stanford: Chow (or Willingham)

Also open spots at Illinois, Indiana, and a number of lesser jobs

Potential openings at Utah, Cal, Boise State, Ole Miss, BYU and potentially others.

We'll continue to monitor the dominoes...

Talent and Recruiting

2004-11-30T19:27:00.000-08:00

(Hat tip Phil Steele, sorry no link available)

Some of you are probably familiar with Phil Steele's publication which is a goldmine for data for a college football fan (or for those who like to place a few bets).

He publishes composite rankings of recruits. Here are the rankings form 1998-2004:

1998
1. UM 2. ND 3. UCLA 4. PSU 5. FSU 6. NC 7. UGA 8. UF 9. OSU 10. ALA 11. TEX 12. NEB 13. LSU 14. TENN 15. USC 16. WIS 17. S.CAR 18. MSU 19. OK 20. SYR 21. IOWA 22. STAN 23. ASU 24. COL 25. MINN

1999
1. TEX 2. ALA 3. A&M 4. OSU 5. LSU 6. UM 7. ND 8. UGA 9. MIA 10. MissST 11. ARK 12. BC 13. MSU 14. UCLA 15. UF 16. FSU 17. AUB 18. KSU 19. GT 20. NC 21. TENN 22. SYR 23. USC 24. S.CAR 25. ASU

2000
1. UF 2. TENN 3. FSU 4. PSU 5. TEX 6. ND 7. ALA 8. OSU 9. MIA 10. MSU 11. USC 12. ASU 13. AUB 14. OK 15. UM 16. STAN 17. UCLA 18. COL 19. NC 20. NEB 21. WIS 22. SYR 23. A&M 24. LSU 25. GT

2001
1. FSU 2. UM 3. TEX 4. LSU 5. ND 6. MIA 7. TENN 8. OSU 9. OK 10. NEB 11. PSU 12. UCLA 13. USC 14. WASH 15. STAN 16. VT 17. ARK 18. A&M 19. UF 20. PU 21. WIS 22. KSU 23. UGA 24. IOWA 25. CLEM

2002
1. FSU 2. TEX 3. OSU 4. TENN 5. ND 6. MIA 7. USC 8. OK 9. UCLA 10. UM 11. UVA 12. PSU 13. UF 14. S.CAR 15. MSU 16. UGA 17. COL 18. WASH 19. MissST 20. BC 21. A&M 22. LSU 23. STAN 24. NEB 25. AUB

2003
1. USC 2. UF 3. ND 4. UM 5. TENN 6. MIA 7. LSU 8. OSU 9. TEX 10. OK 11. A&M 12. UVA 13. UGA 14. MARY 15. NC 16. NCS 17. VT 18. WIS 19. FSU 20. IOWA 21. STAN 22. BC 23. UCLA 24. ALA 25. NEB

2004
1. USC 2. OK 3. MIA 4. LSU 5. TEX 6. UM 7. UF. 8. FSU 9. OSU 10. PSU 11. UGA 12. TENN 13. ORE 14. A&M 15. CAL 16. MSU 17. ND 18. MARY 19. MIZZ 20. ALA 21. WASH 22. NEB 23. OkST 24. UVA 25. S.CAR

So for the relevant years
UCLA: 3, 14, 17, 12, 9, 23, NR (SI/Scout: 24)
USC: 15, 23, 11, 13, 7, 1, 1

Averages:
Total: UCLA: 14.57, USC: 10.14
Last 5: UCLA: 17, USC: 6.6
Last 4: UCLA: 17, USC: 5.5
Last 3: UCLA: 18.67, USC: 3
Last 2: UCLA: 23.5, USC: 1

Now a couple of things should be immediately clear:
(1) UCLA has had top 25 talent for each of the relevant periods.
(2) UCLA has had top 20 talent for each period except the last two recruiting periods, and even so, those players are at most true sophomores.
(3) USC has higher average rankings, top 10 talent for each of the periods. But that is comparable talent.

So, UCLA has very good talent, among the best in the country. There are teams that have performed better with worse recruiting rankings.

Compare starters at several key positions:

Drew Olson

PrepStar All-American and No. 6 quarterback in West ... Rated No. 16 quarterback in nation and four-star rating by PacWest Football ... Four-star prospect by Max Emfinger ... No. 15 quarterback prospect by Max Emfinger ... Tom Lemming All-American (No. 93) and No. 15 player in West ... Rated No. 14 quarterback in nation by Tom Lemming ... Rated No. 4 quarterback in West by PacWestFootball.com ... Rated No. 46 player in Far West (CA/HI/NV) by SuperPrep ... Member of Tacoma News Tribune Western 100 ... First-team All-State Small Schools (Cal Hi Sports) ... Orange County Register Fab 15 second team ... Member of Las Vegas Sun Super 11 second team

Matt Leinart

His 2000 honors included Parade All-American, Super Prep All-American, Prep Star All-American, Student Sports Senior All-American, Prep Star Dream Team, Student Sports Top 100, Super Prep All-Farwest, Prep Star All-Western Region Super 30, Long Beach Press-Telegram Best in the West first team, Las Vegas Sun Super 11 first team, Tacoma News Tribune Western 100, Gatorade California Player of the Year, Cal-Hi Sports All-State second team, All-CIF Southern Section first team, All-CIF Division I Co-Offensive MVP, Los Angeles Times All-Orange County Back of the Year, Orange County Register All-Orange County first team and All-Serra League as a senior at Mater Dei High in Santa Ana (Calif.)

Maurice Drew

Parade All-American ... A four-star selection by rivals.com ... Rated No. 1 all-purpose back nationally by rivals.com ... rivals.com also ranked him the No. 7 prospect in the West and No. 54 nationally ... PrepStar All-American ... SuperPrep Elite 50 (No. 27) ... SuperPrep All-American (No. 3 running back) ... SuperPrep FarWest Offensive Player of the Year and No. 5 prospect ... Rated No. 3 running back in West by PacWest Football.com ... All-West selection (No. 65 prospect) by Tom Lemming ... TheInsiders.com four-star selection ... Ranked No. 6 nationally at running back by TheInsiders.com ... Max Emfinger six-star selection as all-purpose back ... Member of Tacoma News Tribune Western 100 ... Selected first-team All-State by CalHiSports.com ... Named State Running Back of the Year by CalHiSports.com ... Named Long Beach Press-Telegram Best in the West honorable mention

Reggie Bush

He was named a 2002 Parade All-American (and the top running back), USA Today All-USA first team, Super Prep All-American, Prep Star All-American, Student Sports All-American first team, Tom Lemming All-American, The Insiders.com All-American second team, Tom Lemming Super Team, Super Prep Elite 50, Prep Star Top 100 Dream Team, The Sporting News Hot 100, FOX Sports 50, Tom Lemming Top 100, Super Prep All-Farwest, Prep Star All-West, Tom Lemming All-West, Tacoma News Tribune Western 100, Orange County Register Fab 15 first team, Long Beach Press-Telegram Best in the West first team, Cal-Hi Sports All-State first team, All-CIF San Diego Section first team, San Diego Union-Tribune Offensive MVP and All-Grossmont South League Offensive MVP pick as a senior running back at Helix High in La Mesa (Calif.).

Marcedes Lewis

Parade All-American ... SuperPrep Elite 50 (No. 4) ... SuperPrep All-American (No. 1 jumbo athlete) ... Rated No. 2 player in Far West (CA/HI/NV) by SuperPrep ... PrepStar Dream Team and No. 1 tight end in nation ... Member of Student Sports Hot 100 (No. 30) ... Rated No. 1 tight end in nation and five-star prospect by PacWest Football ... Rated No. 1 tight end in West by PacWest Football.com ... Ranked No. 22 nationally in TheInsiders Top 101 ... Five-star prospect by Max Emfinger and member of All-America team ... No. 1 TE prospect by Max Emfinger ... Tom Lemming All-American (No. 33) and No. 6 player in West ... Rated No. 2 tight end in nation by Tom Lemming ... The Sporting News Hot 101 (No. 35) ... Ranked No. 30 nationally by Student Sports ... Second-team All-State (Cal Hi Sports) ... First-team All-CIF Southern Section ... CIF-SS Division I co-Offensive Player of the Year ... All-CIF SS Division I first team ... Member of L.A. Times All-Star Team ... First-team L.A. Times All-Southeast/South Coast ... Member of Tacoma News Tribune Western 100 ... Orange County Register Fab 15 first team ... Member of Long Beach Press-Telegram Best in the West first team (nine votes) ... Long Beach Press-Telegram Dream Team ... Member of Las Vegas Sun Super 11 ..

Dwayne Jarrett

2003 Parade All-American, Super Prep All-American, Prep Star All-American, Super Prep Elite 50, Prep Star Top 100 Dream Team, Super Prep All-Northeast Offensive MVP, Prep Star All-East and New Jersey Offensive Player of the Year pick as a senior wide receiver and defensive back at New Brunswick (N.J.) High.

Look, I'm more than willing to concede that $C has more talent. Their recent recruiting rankings demonstrate that. But there is no doubt in my mind that UCLA has plenty of talent. There are plenty of teams (probably about 100 or so) in IA ball that UCLA is more talented than. There is no question in my mind that we have enough players and enough talent to beat $C. Recruiting rankings and a look at some of the accomplishments and accolodes of our players demonstrate that. $C is a talented team, a very good team. But we have enough talent to play with anyone.

Again though, apologistas don't like facts.

WIlliamham resigns at ND

2004-11-30T10:34:00.000-08:00

One of his biggest failures at Notre Dame was failing to beat $C each of the last three years. More later. Beat $C.

A message to our new readers

2004-11-29T20:22:00.000-08:00

For some inexplicable reason, we've noticed an increase in traffic today. We would like to welcome our new readers and invite them to check back frequently.

If you're curious what this blog is all about, please read this, this and this.

Also, please feel free to contact us. We do try to read email, although we seldom respond. Also, we invite all our new readers to comment on our posts. We welcome discussion, and we will not censor anyone, provided you follow the rules.

Also check out some of our recent posts.

Thanks. And BEAT $C

Bruin Football Tradition

2004-11-28T20:47:00.000-08:00

During this week, it's appropriate to take a look at the tradition of UCLA Football. Many KD apologists repeat the myth that UCLA doesn't have a great college football tradition. UCLA is just a basketball school, and really, therefore, so the self-fullfilling prophecy goes, you can't expect too much success, and therefore, the mediocre performance of the head football coach must be excused, as you can't expect too much from him anyway.

Nonsense.

College Football Data Warehouse has a lot of neat statistics that easily dispel this myth.

First, UCLA is ranked 25th alltime. This is an amazing feat in itself. Consider: UCLA was founded, and began playing football, in 1919.

Notre Dame is #1 on CFDW's list. Notre Dame was founded in 1842 and began playing football in 1887. Alabama began playing football in 1892, $C in 1888, Oklahoma in 1895, Michigan in 1878. So those teams had a bit of a head start on us.

UCLA didn't have a winning season until Bill Spaulding's first year as head coach in 1925. We lost to three high schools and the USS Idaho in that first year.

We've come a long way:
18 Conference Championships
1 National Championship
1 Heisman Trophy Winner
12-12-1 Bowl Record (did not compete in a bowl game other than the Rose Bowl until the 1976 Liberty Bowl, against Alabama)
8 straight bowl victories (1983-1991)
12 Rose Bowls

Compiled Rankings
From 1950 on, it's quite impressive
Quarter Century: 1950-74: 15th
1975-99: 14th
Decade: 1950-59: 9th
1960-69: 17th
1970-79: 18th
1980-89: 8th
1990-99: 13th
2000-03: 18th

Winning percentage since 1950:
20th, .638 (note that South Florida has only been D I-A since 1997, Boise State, only since 1968)

10th places us higher than Arkansas, LSU, and Washington, along with many other programs of course. (Other teams of note: Oklahoma 1, .752; Michigan 5, .724; $C 9, .688; Notre Dame 10, .688; Florida State 12, .677; Arizona State 13, 664 ;Miami 14, .664; Florida 17, .657; Washington 24, .615

One more fun fact. Athlon Sports asked fans "which school has the best greatest college football tradition?". UCLA was one of the ten programs listed. Also listed were Notre Dame, Texas, $C, Nebraska, Michigan, Alabama, Oklahoma, Penn State, and Ohio State.

Granted, we received less than one percent of the vote (but Texas also received less than one percent of the vote). (The Evil Empire won, and Nebraska won a greater percentage of the vote than Notre Dame, Michigan, Oklahoma, or Alabama, making this poll a travesty in my opinion -- but it's not exactly scientific).

If anyone has any more examples of Bruin Football tradition, we'd love to add it. Great facts to add would be number of alumni in the NFL, number of All Americans, and other accomplishments.

But just looking at the raw numbers compiled by CFDW, it's tough to say that UCLA doesn't have a great football tradition, or that UCLA hasn't traditionally been a very prominent program with a great tradition.

But the apologista arguments never really on pesky things like facts. These are the same people who thought L***n would be a better coach than Coach K. You just can't take these arguments seriously. But you can shoot them down with facts. Apologistas can't take facts.

UCLA has a great football tradition. We deserve better than mediocrity.

One last stat: we beat $C for eight straight years! That is an accomplishment that has never been exceeded or equalled in the storied history of the rivalry.

Every year we should expect to beat $C. This year is no different. KD must beat $C or this season is definitely a failure. If he beats $C and gets 8 wins we can consider this season is an improvement. Don't accept mediocrity because the talking heads, the higher ups, the mid-level bureacrats, or the self-interested press or proprietors of message boards tell you that's how it is.

That's not how it is, and historically that's not how it's been.

Now BEAT $C!

Howland and crew win again

2004-11-23T21:49:00.000-08:00

Cocooning continues on UCLA message boards re: KD. A few quick thoughts. Some people keep repeating that Toledo was fired because the program was spiralling downhill. Not true. Toledo was fired for many reasons, but primarily for underacheiving with great talent and losing to the biggest rival.

What has changed? Nothing. Recruiting seems to be suffering to some extent, so the underacheivment is not/will not be as noticeable as the talent level decreases. That only means it will be harder to win.

I'm not sure what this vaunted underbelly is that KD keeps talking about. KD apologists keep repeating the mantra that Toledo had disciplinary problems, kids with bad attitudes, prima donnas, etc. We're also told that we can't take kids who meet the minimum NCAA standards because we have some exclusive standards for our football team.

Look, I want to put this nicely. I have known a lot of football players. Some are very intelligent and have gone on to great success, on the field and off. Some are very intelligent. But some, well, aren't exactly rocket scientists.

Oh and the All-Pac 10 Academic team was announced. No Bruins made the team. We're told that that is because UCLA's classes are so demanding. Not a compelling argument. Especially because we've had players make the academic team in the past. One of the purported excuses for not being able to recruit top players is because of UCLA's purported tough academic standards.

This is all spin. Don't buy the hype. The lengths to which KD apologists will go never ceases to amaze, surprise and sadden. Again, don't buy the hype.

Congrats to the hoopers!

2004-11-22T16:21:00.000-08:00

A couple days late, but congrats to the basketball on team on the first win of many (knock on wood).

On the gridiron, the Bruins have still not beat a team above .500. But hey, it's all good.

This brings to mind a recent discussion on a UCLA message board where one of the "gurus," a member of an "independent fan sight," rated KD's performance as good to great based on the results so far.

That just doesn't pass the smell test. We haven't beat a team that's above .500. Beat SUC and I'll join in the circle jerk myself [ed. - bad, bad image], but at this point let's not start sucking each other's popsicles just yet.

Win the next two games and we're talking good to great. Lose against SUC and the season is mediocre any way you cut it. A little better with a bowl win, but not much. A more thorough, and a much more reality-based breakdown here.

Excuse: It's the Budget

2004-11-16T09:55:00.000-08:00

Old news, somewhat, but there is a claim floating around various UCLA message boards that UCLA cannot afford to pay for a big-time head football coach because (and this argument takes various forms): UCLA as a state school can't pay a big salary; the UC system is in a budget crunch and UCLA can't pay a big salary, etc.

For one thing, the UCLA Athletic Department is self-sufficient: public moneys don't pay for the athletic program. The state school argument is just silly, especially when one considers salaries at other state schools (e.g., Bob Stoops at Oklahoma).

So anyway, how much did UCLA spend on football last season? Only about $16m, which was, incidentally, more than any other school in the Pac 10.

Only USC and Washington spent more than UCLA in the total athletic budgets [Ed: isn't Washington a state school too?]. Bad news is that UCLA lost over $6 million on the year.

On this mostly Dodgers blog (it's a good one, we'll blogroll it later), some implications and explanations are examined:

A couple of things jump out from the graph published in Seattle. First is UCLA is fourth in the Pac-10 in football revenue generated ($19.89 million), second in men's basketball revenue generated ($7.75 million) -- and still lost more money than any other university in the conference. While a number of things likely contributed to that, I bet at the top of the list is lack of donations to the athletic department that year. Remember, that is a year with Bob Toledo and Steve Lavin in their last seasons as coaches, and both of them were run out of town by frustrated alumni (particularly alumni Dan Guerrero).

Also notice how dependant both Southern California schools are on football, and how little profit UCLA made on it. It should be pointed out that both schools made nearly $500,000 less than hoped in football that year because only one Pac-10 team was invited to a BCS bowl.

USC made a profit of $12.38 million on football, and football revenues accounted for 57% of the money that the athletic department took in. Football, $1.06 million from menâ€™s basketball plus donations from alumni, kept the program at break-even point for the year.

UCLA, on the other hand, made just $3.88 million on football, in part because it spent $1.6 million more than the next highest football program (USC). Football revenues accounted for 68% of all the athletic department revenues

The Seattle Times notes, in painfully small print on its graphic, that experts warned them that these numbers are not completely reliable because, well, lets face it, these schools probably have Enron-caliber accountants on board who divert and hide some of the money that flows through a program that big. More detailed numbers should be looked at and would provide more anwers, like where is all that UCLA football money going? That said, while not perfect, these figures do provide some insight.

Good questions and stats. The revenues from football are particularly important. If attendance continues to decline, it bodes poorly for the entire athletic department and all the other programs that don't make money.

So how do you get more football revenues? Getting more people to attend football games would be good. The best way to do that is have a good program. It should be clear that money isn't a problem -- we're throwing a lot of money around (although what it's going to, we're not exactly sure). But if UCLA wanted to pay a coach more, it could do so.

Take a look at these attendence figures (2004 figures from official UCLA site):
average (rank) record
1998: 73,709 (16) 10-2
1999: 49,825 (32) 4-7
2000: 67,280 (21) 6-6
2001: 64,613 (22) 7-4
2002: 65,396 (23) 8-5
2003: 56,636 (32) 6-7
2004: (inc.) 54,930 6-4

You'll notice that the worst two rankings in attendance came in the two seasons with losing records. The best attendance ranking came in a season with the best record. There also seems to be an overall decline (although the SUC game will probably enlarge this season's average). I'm not going to do any statistical analysis to see if there's a true correllation, but this fits the conventional wisdom that "LA fans support a winner." Draw your own conclusions.

The Death of the Independent Message Board

2004-11-16T07:28:00.000-08:00

In the good old days of internet fan boards (and by that we mean about 5 years ago), internet message boards were a place where fans could express their views on their favorite programs. The only thing that mattered was whether you express your opinion well and back it up with arguments and facts.

It was a place to avoid the spin put out by Media Relations types through the MSM. It was also the best place to get the inside scoop.

Eventually, the proprietors of these message boards realized they could make a few bucks. And there's nothing wrong with that. But there was a price. The Athletic Department realized it could provide what the proprietors of these message boards needed -- access. Eventually, word came down: stick to the script or you lose your access to the program. It happened with SL in basketball and it's happening with KD in football now.

It's not FKD's place to tell the various Bruin internet communities how to run their businesses. But we wish they would be more honest about what they're doing. Frankly, it's affecting the quality of their product. In the long run, I think selling out will hurt rather than help their business. Their credibility is really their stock in trade, and by selling it for a quick buck now, rather building up their goodwill, they hurt their reputation.

FKD isn't interested in obtaining access to the Morgan Center higher-ups and we're not going to worry about who gets offended by our opinions. We're going to give you our analysis without the spin and BS. We just don't care if it upsets some people. We're going to tell it like it is, and if some mid-level bureacrat gets his panties in a bunch, so be it.

The independent message board is dead. Long live the blogosphere.

Robert Kuwada hints at frustration under the surface

2004-11-15T11:45:00.000-08:00

The UCLA Bruins are bowl eligible after a 34-26 victory at Oregon. And what do they get now? Two weeks of not much before resuming a normal week of game prep for a Dec.4 season finale against USC.

But the Bruins should have plenty of impetus to carry them through the downtime, which will include three practices this week and perhaps three next week.

They have a bowl game. They have a five-game losing streak against the Trojans to think about. And they have a lot of questions to answer, despite beating the Ducks.

[snip]

Consistency has been a problem for the Bruins all season, particularly the past few weeks. But Dorrell reiterated that the Bruins still were learning.

"I'm just excited about where we are at as a program, and I know that our future is just going to kick off from here," Dorrell said.

So the question after the game was what this team might look like if it ever totally comes together. The answer was provided by Junior Taylor.

"When it gets to that level, this team is going to be scary. It's going to be scary. We've shown it this year, it's just that we haven't been consistent," the junior split end said. "Last week we didn't have that same character, and this week we had it and we need to bring it every week. ... That's all it is. We're learning how to win and how to be consistent."

(emphasis added)

To reiterate, let's not start sucking each other's popsicles just yet.

But under this positive spin, is the very sort of frustration that we, among others, have articulated.

This team is talented. Don't buy the spin about youth, underbelly, or turning the corner. Do note that this team is talented. Talented enough that winning eight games is a completely reasonable expectation. Expecting the team not to lose six straight Victory Bell games is a reasonable expectation. Winning a bowl game is a reasonable expectation.

For all the times we've heard that these goals are not reasonable, we have to wonder what exactly is motivating those who would seek to lower expectations?

Evaluating the Season

2004-11-15T10:16:00.000-08:00

A lot of apologists suggest that this season is a step in the right direction. Give KD enough time, the argument goes, and he will be a successful coach. We keep hearing that KD is fixing the "underbelly" (whatever that means) and that given enough time, with "his players" (who are always assumed to be everything that Bob Toledo's were not, including more mentally tough, less trouble off the field, with more "heart," etc. We've yet to see any evidence that these assertions are true.) KD will "turn the program around."

What exactly turning the program around entails is not entirely clear. Even the most ardent apologist can't seem to bring himself to predict that KD can build anything comparable to what's going on across town. It's also worth noting that this season the schedule was one of the most favorable in recent memory. Indeed, this team has managed to scratch out six victories without defeating a single bowl eligible team (Oregon may yet attain bowl eligibility).

So what has all of KD's work on the "underbelly" achieved? In the LA Times UCLA Rewind feature, Lonnie White explains:

If the conference's top three teams (USC, California and Arizona State) close the regular season with wins, UCLA (6-4, 4-3 in the Pac-10) would finish as the Pac-10's No. 5 team and play a Big East representative in the Insight Bowl on Dec. 28 in Phoenix.

The Trojans and Golden Bears would represent the Pac-10 in bowl championship series games with Arizona State going to the Holiday Bowl in San Diego as the No. 3 team.

Although UCLA is tied with Oregon and Oregon State in the conference, unless the Bruins defeat USC, they will finish behind the winner of Saturday's game between the Oregon schools, which would go to the Sun Bowl in El Paso.

So assuming the most likely scenario, a loss to SUC we're left with fifth place, a sixth consecutive loss to SUC, and an Insight Bowl game, probably against Pitt. (Which would be no cakewalk.) A loss against Pitt would result in an untterly mediocre 6-6 record and a career record in two years for KD of 12-13. A victory over Pitt or in a bowl game would make KD's career record a slightly better, but still mediocre 13-12. A victory over SUC would result probably in a Sun Bowl bid (although this is not certain since it is not clear that two Pac 10 teams would get BCS bids under this scenario), probably against Northwestern or Michigan State.

FKD believes that in order for this season to be considered a success, UCLA must defeat SUC and win a bowl game. That would result in a final record of 8-4, finish the season strongly, likely result in improved recruiting, and represent substantial progress. Anything less is unacceptable. 6-7, 6-6, and 7-5 records may be acceptable and even considred "good seasons" for the Northwesterns, Georgia Techs, and Texas Techs of the world, but not for UCLA.

A Hoops Interlude

2004-11-14T16:32:00.000-08:00

Taking a few minutes to take a look at the state of the Bruins' basketball program is useful for several reasons. For one thing, everything that is right about Ben Howland illustrates everything that is wrong with Karl Dorrell. Ben Howland is experienced, he had head coaching jobs at Northern Arizona and Pitt before taking over the head job at UCLA. He was successful in rebuilding programs in both cases. He was well known as an excellent basketball coach that any program would be happy to have at the helm.

That said, FKD has heard, and read on various message boards, the objection that Bruins football is not the elite program that Bruins basketball is. Nonsense. (More on that later). But even if this were true, you don't become elite for settling for an inexperienced coach with no head coaching experience. Karl Dorrell is apparently a very nice guy who works hard and has good character traits. But that doesn't make him qualified to take over a program of UCLA's stature. Ideally, Dorrell would have gained some experience at a lower profile school like, say, San Diego State. If he had proven himself capable there, then perhaps it would have been appropriate to consider his as a candidate.

There are always objections to this point that guys who turned out to be great college coaches, (e.g., Bob Stoops, Jeff Tedford) also were hired before they had any head coaching experience. The analogy is deeply flawed. Both men were up-and-coming assistants who were mentioned for virtually every job and were almost certainly on every athletic director's short list of potential candidates.

FKD wishes to congratulate Ben Howland for his success in pulling off another great recruiting class. We look forward to many great memories under the Ben Howland era. We hope the Ben Howland hiring will serve as an exemplar for the coaching search to replace Karl Dorrell. Let's take a brief look at the recruiting class. Diane Pucin breaks it down in the linked Times article:

After signing four Southern California players for his first recruiting class, UCLA Coach Ben Howland has gone international for his second.

Three high school players signed letters of intent Wednesday to join the Bruins next season, and two more are expected to sign in the next two days.

Of the five recruits, one comes from Canada and two from Cameroon. The most highly regarded are 6-foot-9, 225-pound power forward Ryan Wright of Mississauga, Canada, who had Stanford and Michigan State in his last three schools; and 6-7, 240-pound Alfred Aboya from Cameroon and Tilton (N.H.) School, who chose UCLA over Georgetown and Virginia.

Also from Cameroon is 6-7, 180-pound wing player Luc Richard Mbah A Moute, who is playing at Montverde (Fla.) Academy and who gave UCLA a verbal commitment last month.

UCLA received official letters of intent from Wright; 6-5, 195-pound wing player Michael Roll of Aliso Niguel High in Aliso Viejo and 6-foot point guard Darren Collison of Etiwanda High.

It was expected to take at least another 24 hours to receive signed letters via fax from Cameroon. But both Aboya and Moute, who had also strongly considered South Carolina, Georgia and Virginia Tech, have indicated they will be attending UCLA next year.

Roll had given a verbal, non-binding, commitment to UC Santa Barbara last month before reconsidering after UCLA and Stanford showed continued interest in him.

[snip]

Howland called Roll "tough and hard-nosed." Roll led his team in three-point shooting a year ago and began attracting more attention from Pac-10 schools with an impressive performance at the Adidas Superstar Camp in Georgia last summer.

Collison, who committed to UCLA during the summer, was considered the second-best point guard prospect in the West. He led Etiwanda to a 31-3 record last season while averaging a team-high 15.6 points and 5.4 assists a game.

Wright averaged 17 points and 10 rebounds last year and was chosen Canada's top junior player. Howland said Wright's "good hands" and shot-blocking ability were big pluses.

Howland has said that with the early departure of Trevor Ariza to the NBA after last season, the Bruins' biggest weakness this year is at the power forward spot, where Wright should be an immediate improvement.

We're excited about all these guys, and about the future of Bruins' hoops. It just goes to show what an effect a good hire can bring.

While we're on the subject of hoops, we found an interesting collge hoops blog. Check it out.

Channelling the Sports Guy

2004-11-14T10:43:00.000-08:00

Regarding yesterday's win: yes it was a quality win on the road over a reasonably good team. Winning at Autzen is tough, especially as an underdog (granted, part of the problem is that this team should never have been the underdog in the first place).

But when you start to hear things like "this team has really turned the corner" or "Westwood supporters had good reason to celebrate because the victory was the Bruins' sixth and qualified them for a bowl game."

As the Sports Guy would say,remember the Wolf's quote from "Pulp Fiction" that I'm not allowed to print? Goes something along the lines of "Let's not start sucking each other's popsicles yet?"

It bears repeating each time you hear a dubious claim from a Dorrell apologist. The fact of the matter is, it all comes down the game against $C. Win that, and a bowl game, and Dorrell can claim a successful season.

So was beating Oregon a step in the right direction? Yes. But has the program turned the corner? Let's not start sucking each other's popsicles just yet.

Cause for celebration? We beat a team that may not make a bowl itself (which puts them in good company with all the other teams UCLA has beat this season). In fact, unless the things that go quack beat OSU in this year's Civil War, UCLA will have defeated exactly zero bowl-eligible teams.

So a good win to get to bowl eligibility? Yes. But let's not start sucking each other's popsicles just yet.

Michael Bradley rips Spurrier

2004-11-11T13:58:00.000-08:00

I know a columnist's job is to be edgy and controversial. But why does this guy feel he is qualified to make this assessment of Steve Spurrier?

The thought of Spurrier riding to the rescue of some underachieving or overmatched program is as enticing as a photo op with Tara Reid.

Until you start looking a little closer. Then, the Spurrier-as-savior argument weakens. In fact, it practically falls apart.

It would be one thing if there was any logic to his argument. But there isn't. He just proclaims that the "Spurrier-as-savior argument...practically falls apart." Clearly. It must. A member of the MSM has proclaimed it to be so. Therefore, it is.

Even with Spurrier's substantial track record of success in Gainesville (and before that with Duke) and his reputation as someone capable of turning a sloppy offensive lineman into a Heisman-winning passer, there are considerable entries on the wrong side of the Spurrier balance sheet.

Ok, so Spurrier has a substantial track record of success and a reputation as a good quarterbacks coach. You have almost convinced me that Spurrier would not be a good coach for an underachieving program (e.g., UCLA). Please continue Mr. Bradley.

The first is Spurrier's motivation. He's devoted the last year to chasing little white balls around finely manicured golf layouts -- and made no secret of his affection for the lifestyle. Other coaches spend their exile years talking football on TV or traveling the country visiting friends in the coaching fraternity, because the game is their love. Not Spurrier.

So Bob Davie would be a better headcoach because he has spent time as a talking head? How did that work out for John Mackovic? Also, is Steve Spurrier the only college football coach who has ever picked up a nine iron? Would he be a better coach if he had hit the links covertly rather than making no secret of it?

Steve Spurrier wants to be a college head coach again. He's been very successful. An argument could be made that he needs the competition.

Also, he'll turn 60 next April, and it's not inappropriate to wonder how long he'll stay at any job. He doesn't seem like the kind of guy who'll fight to stay on the sidelines well into his Centrum Silver years.

That may be a fair point. That's one so far Mr. Bradley.

There's also the question (and substantial size) of Spurrier's ego. The Florida job became less palatable to him once Gator AD Jeremy Foley and school prez Bernard Machem made it clear they wanted a full-fledged search, not merely stage a Ball Coach coronation. Even if Spurrier does deign to participate in a conventional hiring procedure, if he gets the job, he will arrive on campus with the bulletproof aura of a gridiron liberator. It's unlikely he'll be willing to fit in to an established dynamic or chain of command. You want to win? You do it his way. His time at Florida has earned him that.

Spurrier does have a large ego, and frankly, he has earned the right to do things his way.

Or has it? Spurrier won a national title in 1996, largely because he acknowledged that defense is a key part of football. Before that season, he hired Bob Stoops to run the defense, and for the first time in his tenure in Gainesville, the Gators stopped people. Will Spurrier put a heavy-hitting defensive coach on his staff, or will he refuse to share the stage? That's a major concern. So is Spurrier's record in his last three years in Florida. During that period, the Gators went 1-2 in bowl games and averaged three losses a year. Worse, UF was 1-3 in Spurrier's last four games against Florida State. Was he slipping? Could be.

So basically it boils down to a few ridiculous rhetorical questions. Bradley's unraveling of the "Spurrier-as-savior argument" is more flawed than the argument he purports to force to crumble with the awesome power of his mighty intellect.

The Gators averaged three losses a year in his final three years there! Perish the thought! UCLA has averaged over 5 losses per year in the last three years. North Carolina averaged nearly 8 losses per year over the last three years. Bradley mentioned North Carolina head coach Jim Bunting, presumably because Bunting is likely to fired and North Carolina would be thrilled to have Spurrier as their next head coach. Despite the fact that he averaged three losses a year. The horror.

Bradley finishes off with what he probably thought was a clever little line

athletic directors charged with choosing a new coach shouldn't be fooled. Better to look in another direction than to select a football hero-king whose coronation could be the high point of his reign.

First of all, the notion that hiring Spurrier could be the high point of his tenure is unlikely. Secondly, it could also be the case that it might not be. Anything could happen. KD could win the next 50 games he coaches. But it's not likely. This is a typical MSM hatchet job.

Let's take a look at the Steve Spurrier Legacy

When Steve Spurrier was named head football coach at the University of Florida on Dec. 31, 1989, none of us ever expected what would happen over the next 12 seasons.
After 58 years of SEC participation and competition, no previous Florida team had ever won an official league championship in football (1984 was stripped after cheating). Spurrier-led Gators have accomplished this six times (1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 2000) dominating the SEC, its title game, and rising to national dominance by always finishing in the top 10.

He is the first coach in SEC history to win three outright conference championships in his first five years in the league. Florida's 86-14 SEC record during this period is the best in history for any head coach with a minimum of five years at a league school. Spurrier has guided the Gator to ten straight bowl appearances including two BCS appearances in the Orange Bowl.

From 1906 to 1989, only seven Gator teams won as many as nine games in one season. In twelve seasons, Spurrier teams have won nine or more each year, including 10 in 1991 and 1994, 11 in 1993 and 12 in 1995 and 1996. UF has been ranked in The Associated Press' national poll in all but one week during his tenure at Florida (160 of 161 weeks). The Gators have appeared in the AP Top 10 in each of the last 123 weeks. Spurrier has been named SEC Coach of the Year five times and won the SEC's Eastern Division championship in the first five years of conference divisional play winning the four title games in a row (1993-96).

Spurrier became the first UF coach to beat Georgia in eight consecutive years (1990-97). The 1996 season was the greatest in school history, as the squad posted a superb 12-1 regular season record and chopped the seminoles 52-20 in the 1997 national championship game - The 1997 Nokia Sugar Bowl.

At Duke his teams reached heights no Blue Devil squad had seen in nearly three decades. The offense set records and shredded Atlantic Coast Conference standards and resulted in a 1989 bowl appearance and an ACC conference championship - Duke's first bowl showing since 1960 and first conference title since 1962.

Spurrier had a career winning percentage of .746 and a Florida coaching percentage of .816.

Spurrier might not ever win a national championship again. But his credentials are solid and he is a very good coach. Michael Bradley's credentials are as follows:

Michael Bradley is an internationally renowned writer, radio analyst and television personality who resides in a top-secret world headquarters in suburban Philadelphia. Bradley's work has appeared in Sports Illustrated, The Sporting News, Sports Illustrated for Kids, Men's Health, Maxim and ESPN, The Magazine. He is a Senior Writer for Hoop and Inside Stuff magazines and is a Senior Writer for Slam. He is the College Football Insider for Sporting News Radio Network and covers college sports for Comcast Sportsnet, a Fox Sportsnet affiliate in Philadelphia.
Bradley is an accomplished body-surfer, disco dancer and one helluva nice guy. Devastatingly handsome, with chiseled features and a personality described by one debutante as "lively," Bradley holds court in saloons and watering holes throughout the USA and rarely lets anybody near him pay for a drink. A 1983 graduate of the University of Michigan with a degree in History, Bradley pines for the old days of the USSR and lists Ivan the Terrible as the famous person he would most like to meet.

Uh, yeah. Anyone who knows anything about sportswriters know they rarely pay for anything, if they can avoid it, so I think we need to take the rest of this with a grain of salt.

FKD didn't want to have to devote a lengthy post to fisking a self-described internationally renowned writer, but the fact of the matter is Steve Spurrier is, and should be, at the top of any self-respecting AD's wish list. We'll see if he's at the top of ours.

College Football News Prediction for UO

2004-11-11T10:11:00.000-08:00

Not good. CFN has a good track record, and they usually are pretty knowledgable about UCLA (and as opposed to much of the MSM, East Coast-biased types, fairly "up" on UCLA).

Bottom line, "CFN Prediction: Oregon 34 ... UCLA 27 ... Line: Oregon -6"

If KD can't pull this out, the future looks bleak against you-know-who.

Spurrier drops hints

2004-11-11T09:36:00.000-08:00

The AP reports, "Steve Spurrier wants to return to college coaching."

It's been pretty clear that the Ole Ball Coach wants to return to coaching college football. FKD is of the opinion that UCLA and Spurrier would be a great fit. FKD reported earlier on Spurrier scuttlebut, and Spurrier-UCLA rumors have been bandied about. Let's take a closer look:

"I probably decided then that I was done with the NFL," he told The Gainesville Sun. "It wasn't the lifestyle best for me. You don't have scout teams in the NFL. When I was at Florida, I worked with the quarterback every snap for two hours. It wasn't that way in the NFL."

Miami Dolphins coach Dave Wannstedt resigned Tuesday, prompting speculation that Spurrier would bring his famed visor and playbook to South Florida. But Spurrier told Florida Today that NFL teams shouldn't even bother pursuing him.

"I've said recently to several people that if I get back coaching, it will probably be a good college job somewhere," Spurrier said. "It seems like I'm better suited for that. I know I certainly had a lot more success in the college game than in the NFL. So if I return to coaching, I think that would probably be the best idea."

Spurrier even took a shot at his NFL record.

"Probably very few NFL teams would want me after the success I had," he said. "Some probably would say that in the right situation I could be successful. But if I had a choice, I'd lean toward the college game. Everybody has their own little niche. The college game was certainly a lot better success-wise for me."

Spurrier withdrew his name from consideration to return to Gainesville, where Ron Zook was fired last month after two-plus seasons.

Spurrier said he would prefer to coach in a warm-weather climate. South Carolina? North Carolina? How about Texas?

He declined to say whether he has spoken to any schools.

"I can't answer all that. I can't answer all your questions. In the next two or three weeks, once the season is over, we'll see what happens," he told The Sun

"I think I've made it clear now that if I go back into coaching, it'll be at a good state university, a college job. Hopefully it will be in the South. I'd rather not get up there in the North."

Reading between the lines, what Spurrier is really interested in is a fairly high-profile state school with good weather and good golf. UCLA meets all these criteria. FKD has heard objections that SoCal doesn't qualify as "the South." Cultural differences aside, and given past rumors regarding UCLA and Spurrier, we think UCLA and Spurrier would be a great fit.

We've also heard objections that UCLA isn't really a high profile football school. Expect more blogging on this later, but this objection is just wrong. We've also heard objections that UCLA won't hire a big-time head coach and that no big-time head coach would want the job. In short, we can't do any better so just accept mediocrity. Usually this sort of nonsense comes from the likes of those that compared Steve Lavin to Coach K or KD to JoePa.

Site News: Big Changes

2004-11-11T07:21:00.000-08:00

Earlier, we hinted at big changes. I'm pleased to announce that some of the other members of the FKD reality-based community have officially agreed to take over blogging duties. We are also contacing other writers who can bring different, hard-hitting perspectives. FKD continues to grow. If we may borrow a phrase, we may soon be the largest Fire Karl Dorrell community on the internet.

What Was, What Is, and What Could Be

2004-11-09T20:34:00.000-08:00

The last few weeks saw a lot of ups and downs in the world of UCLA football. After the 21-0 victory over Stanford, we began to hope that we had been terribly mistaken about Karl Dorrell. Was it possible that he (and the program) had turned a corner? With a 5-3 record and a 3-2 conference record (combined with a likelihood of 2 Pac-10 BCS teams) visions of Holiday Bowls began to dance in our heads. Some Bruin fans, and we count ourselves among them, allowed themselves to contemplate the possibility of ending the season with victories over Wazzu, the Ducks, and -- dare we even say it now --
the Evil Empire.

Last Saturday's debacle (and we don't use that word lightly) gave the lie to any hopes we may have had. With two games remaining (at Oregon, home against aforementioned Evil Empire), it is becoming increasingly likely that Karl Dorrell will fail to even finish the season with a bowl eligible team. Recruiting, of course, will suffer. The LA Times has an article with the dramaticly understated and obvious title Missing Tackles is Still a Problem (in other news, water is wet, grass is green). Money graphs:

UCLA's inconsistent tackling was a problem in the Bruins' season opening loss to Oklahoma State and it's still a major issue heading into this week's game at Oregon.

"We had 21 missed tackles," safety Jarrad Page said about the Bruins in their 31-29 loss to Washington State on Saturday. "It wasn't as if people weren't playing hard. It just seemed that sometimes … we were getting to places too fast and overran the ballcarrier and he would cut back. We have to be more sure tacklers because if you don't tackle on defense, you're not going to be able to stop anybody."

Anytime a team misses more than 10 tackles, it usually means that it did not have a good defensive game.

Understatement alert again. The Times' Lonnie White continues, "With two games left, the Bruins (5-4) still need a victory to become bowl eligible."

We at FKD don't usually agree with the Times' columnist ,T.J. Simers, but some of his recent comments seem spot-on.

We begin with a fundamental disagreement with Dan Guerrero, UCLA's athletic director, who has no clue what he's talking about.

I suggested the loss to Washington State in the Rose Bowl was huge, maybe monumental, when you consider it cost the Bruins a sixth win, which would have made them bowl eligible with two games remaining against teams they will not be favored to defeat.

I expected him to nod his approval, or grunt like USC's Mike Garrett, but he said, "I don't agree."

I said the loss to Washington State was a crusher because it put the spotlight once again on the failings of Coach Karl Dullard, who has compiled a two-year record of 11-5 before the month of November begins, but who is now 0-6 after Halloween.

"It was a loss," Guerrero said.

It was a loss! The Bruins were favored by more than two touchdowns.

"What does that mean?" Guerrero said, and giving him the benefit of the doubt, at this point I think he was only playing dumb.

"That's where we are," he said. "We're a young team, and on one side of the ball there's a lot of unpredictability. As a program we were knocking on the door for the 25th berth [in the top 25], but we're not there yet."

With all due respect to Mr. Guerrero, these kinds of comments are exactly the problem with UCLA football of late. When the only expectations you have are low expectations, your expectations are likely to satisfied [that was kinda philosophical - ed. Shut up.]

Bill Plaschke piles on:

The parched UCLA football faithful stared at it for weeks, crawled toward it for days, this shimmering pool of hope amid six years of desert.

Their new team was rebuilding. Their new coach was succeeding. Their old karma was returning. A bowl bid was waiting.

All of it was coming together Saturday against overmatched Washington State, 62,000 folks showing up to shed their frustrations and joyously leap head-first into …

More sand.

This Bruin season may be another mirage, and today the Rose Bowl is coated in the dust to prove it.

On the scoreboard, Washington State 31, UCLA 29, in a game that wasn't remotely that close.

In the air, the angriest boos since the last days of Bob Toledo.

In the background, a stadium that was half empty in the final minutes.

In the stands, Ben Olson, a nationally celebrated quarterback recruit who didn't leave early, and that's a bad thing.

In the toilet, a bowl game, there being little reason to think UCLA can reach the mandatory six-win mark with its final two games being at Oregon and against USC.

On the hot seat, Karl Dorrell?

Ouch. Plaschke goes on to speculate that Dorrell isn't on the hot seat this year, but perhaps next year he will be.

To put it simply, next year will be too late.

We at FKD dread the consequences of prolonging Coach Dorrell's already dubious career.

In other news, Steve Spurrier has removed his name from consideration for the Florida job (there's a program that doesn't tolerate mediocrity), and has also reportedly declined a job with the Miami Dolphins. We hear rumors that Spurrier may be interested in the UCLA job. Stay tuned.

We are expecting big changes

2004-11-09T20:32:00.000-08:00

More details to come soon.

Blog FAQ

2004-10-26T21:17:00.000-07:00

What is a blog?

A blog is a diary on the web in reverse chronological order. We update ours almost every day with links to news stories surrounding any issues related to UCLA football, basketball or anything UCLA in general that we care about. You are free to come on by and leave comments, thoughts, and participate in a discussion that we feel is vital to the best interest of the greatest public university of the World.

Who posts on this blog?

The people who write the front-page 'posts' are UCLA alums and students who are Bruin football/hoopoholics. Anyone is free to comment in the comment area off the main page, as long as you register a username and adhere to our community rules.

How do I post a comment to a story?

You have to register with blogger (http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8894211&postID=110021323117170484) to post comments.

To post a comment: find the blog-entry you wish to respond to, and then click on “comment.” Simply scroll down the post and click on "Post a comment" near the bottom of post. This will open a new comment box. Put the body of your comment in the large box. Use any html formatting you want to.

What are the community rules?

This is a Bruin sports community. There are real people behind the online aliases. At FKD we welcome all perspectives, so long as you are civil and respectful to the other users on the blog. However, we are not going to tolerate any kind of hanky panky from Trojans. We want to make sure that this is a civil place where real discussion can occur, and to that end, we will delete comments that are profane, racist, or excessively boorish. There are ample places on the internets for heated partisanized name-calling - this is not one of them. We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. Usually we will give users who violate this policy warning, and may shut down threads that become excessively heated.

We love the work we do, and want to share it with a larger UCLA community, and take in lots of different perspectives. We know that discussions can are sometimes, er, spirited, and expect a heated tone from time to time. Mostly, we expect people to treat others as they would like to be treated.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard.

FAQ

2004-10-26T21:16:00.000-07:00

Q: Who are you?
A: FKD is composed of UCLA football fans. Concerned ones at that.

Q: No really, who are you? We would like to call, interview, contact, or otherwise generally speak to you/harrass you.
A: At this time, we are not going fully public. Some might consider this cowardly, or discount the opinions expressed by FKD as a result of this decision. At the appropriate time, all will be revealed. Mwahahaha

Q: Why do you hate Karl Dorrell?
A: We don't. We just think he should be fired.

Q: Why do you think Karl Dorrell should be fired?
A: In short, he never should have been hired. He was not fully qualified, and there were better, more qualified candidates. However, given that he was hired, at this point, we at FKD feel that he has given us every reason to believe his tenure as UCLA's head football coach will not be a successful one. We prefer that he be fired as soon as possible, and a capable replacement be found as quickly as possible.

Welcome to Fire Karl Dorrell

2004-10-26T20:55:00.000-07:00

First, I'm sure Karl Dorrell is a very nice man. By all accounts he is. But that does not change the fact that he should be fired. In all fairness, he probably should never have been hired, so it's not entirely fair to blame Coach Dorrell's failures entirely on him. However, his short tenure has proven unsuccessful, and he is unlikely to be successful. If the current state of affairs is allowed to continue, UCLA's football program will descend from its current state of mediocrity to, well, we don't want to imagine. Much more coming soon.

Fire Karl Dorrell

More Encouraging News from the Football Program

A Rose By Any Other Name

The "talent" excuse again rears its ugly head

It's baseball time

Today's USC Football Crime Blotter

What are your Expectations for this Football Season?

Update on *alleged* Sex Criminal Eric Wright

UCLA is So Lucky to Have Coach Dorrell!

Thirty pieces of silver

Networking effects and blogging

GDFASDRFASDFSADF

Happy St. Patrick's Day

Mav's crunching numbers again

"That was fun"

Ben Howland on the Jim Rome Show

Back from vacation

No affirming UCLA's Actions

CFN Gives Coach Dorrell a Little Shout Out

Huge win over OSU

The Underbelly Strikes Again

ESPN Hates UCLA

Eric Bieniemy takes over as Recruiting Coordinator

Stanford game previews

Uh oh, Dorrell hires another NAU buddy

Big win over Cal

It's official, Da Bears

UCLA Basketball Blog

19-0 run buries Bruins

"Be at your best when your best is needed."

More subdued game day roundup

Blindo, Fat Tuesday was yesterday

A little on James Keefe

Hey Blindo

More signing day

First signing day post

More on Signing Day Eve

Signing Day Approaches

The Expectations Game

Interesting article by Pucin

Thanks to Yoni

Bad loss

Blogging comes to the corporate world

Plaschke does a nice profile on Farmar

Coffee is for closers

Contact the Athletic Department

MSM is dead

MaverickBruin has futher thoughts on the Vegas Incident

Mackovic analogy on Bruingold

The word has gone out...

CFB News is Catching On

All Is Not Well With The Underbelly

Happy New Year

Fire KD related sites

Et tu BRO?

Maverick is en fuego

12-13

Pathetic

Brian Dohn has an interesting article

Ben Olson Commits

Head coaching candidates

Stanford, UW get coaches

DG reups KD

Public Service Announcement: Keep the laptop away from your junk

How about those 6 wins?

Guererro rapidly losing credibility

It's the Vegas Bowl

A .500 coach

6-5 is not much better than 6-6

Reggie Bush

Nothing to lose, everything to gain

Matt Clark wants payback

A look at the BCS top 10

The Dominoes are Going to Start Falling

Talent and Recruiting

WIlliamham resigns at ND

A message to our new readers

Bruin Football Tradition

Howland and crew win again

Congrats to the hoopers!

Update on alleged Sex Criminal Eric Wright