Same old ...

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 12:15 PM PST in Football

We are down 14-22, scoring two TDs in a span of two mins. We just may come back to win this game. But that doesn't take away from the fact we looked disgustingly unprepared and pathetic out of the gates. Simply inexcusable. Sure it is easy to blame the players (something the Lavin lovers did heartily during those horrible seven years). But it doesn't excuse for the fact UCLA looked unprepared, offguard, and now having to scratch and claw their way back against yet another mediocre football team. There is one person who is responsible for this:

This is another open thread.

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Dorrell is animated!!!!

rofl

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 12:20 PM PST reply actions

Markey

Looks like MJD is not going to be the starting TB next season.

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 12:26 PM PST up reply actions

Help me understand this

I'm not pleased with the slow start. Whether it was Dorrell's coaching or the DO's 3 INTs, they looked pretty bad in the beginning.

That said, how can you blame the coach for a slow start, but not give him credit if they come back and win?

If we went 12-0 and came out slow each game, we'd (or at least I'd) be happy. The point, I suppose, is that it matter who wins and prejudging things doesn't make sense to me.

by brewinTK on Dec 30, 2005 12:31 PM PST reply actions

that is silly ...

It is up the coache to make sure the team comes out focused and the opposing team is well scouted. And I got news for you - no team will go 12-0 if it comes in week in and week out so unprepared and unfocused.

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 12:34 PM PST up reply actions

what's even more silly

is thinking that your team should come out and win every game 42-0 or else it sucks and/or the coach is a failure.

That said, your not addressing my point. Dorrell certainly deserves blame for poor preparation. But he also deserves credit if they make adjustments and come out with a win. Credit/blame should go both ways, that's all.

by brewinTK on Dec 30, 2005 12:37 PM PST up reply actions

Uhm ...

who is expecting the team to win 42-0 every game?

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 12:38 PM PST up reply actions

Fair enough

I think you get my point, but you didn't say that, so my apologies.

That said, you still haven't addressed my point, which is that credit/blame should go both ways. It's not fair to blame the coach for a slow start (mostly in the form of INT's) and then not give him credit if the team comes out with a win.

Let me be clear, I'm not suggesting you've said this, but some people are prone to blame the coach for the bad things, and then say the players bailed him out when things go well. I just don't think that is fair.

So, to be perfectly clear, wouldn't Dorrell deserve at least some credit if UCLA comes back and wins?

by brewinTK on Dec 30, 2005 12:50 PM PST up reply actions

Dorrell will deserve some credit ...

If UCLA does indeed come back to win this game, but it wouldn't mitigate for the fact that we had to sratch and claw to win a football game against another mediocre football program. What we see is yet another bipolar performance by a UCLA football game, just like the basketball team under Lavin days. The blame for that should fall on KD.

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 12:54 PM PST up reply actions

We have gone over this number of times ...

We are a talented enough football team for not having to sratch and claw in every single football game. We have that discussion/posts over here ad nauseum. Don't feel like I have to rehash over how we have been underachieving given how much talent we have in the program.

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 1:02 PM PST up reply actions

Really?

Can't you just concede that the players deserve at least some blame for the slow start? DO threw 3 INT's, which, as has been pointed out, was principally within his control.

This is just the other side of the coin of what I was saying before. Both the players/coaches deserve their fair share of praise/blame.

The coach/team should be judged at the end of the game. If the Bruins win, when we are done sorting out the good/bad things that happened over the course of the game, we may well conclude that, all in all, the players/coaches did a good job.

At least I will.

by brewinTK on Dec 30, 2005 1:09 PM PST up reply actions

Just exactly where ...

I wrote something that totally exculpated Drew Olson for his three picks? Can you point to it? All we are trying to point out that the buck ultimately stops at KD's desk. Sure DO should shoulder some of the blame for today's horrid start ... but it is mainly the HC's fault for having his team come out so unprepated week in and week out (specially in this case with a three week time period to "prepare" for this game).

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 1:27 PM PST up reply actions

Are you kidding?

Your main post says:

"There is one person who is responsible for this" followed by an image of Dorrell.

I suppose I could have been wrong to assume that that "one" person was Dorrell, but also included DO, but I don't think that is a fair reading of your post.

That said, I agree that the buck stops with Dorrell ultimately, and if we loss, he deserves ultimate blame. I also believe he deserved ultimate credit if we win.

by brewinTK on Dec 30, 2005 1:36 PM PST up reply actions

Talent

Well actually it is you who is just making shit up that we don't have talent. We have enough talent to be a top-10 football team. And if you continue to make asinine arguments without facts and stats, you will get banned and then you can whine about it in those access-driven message boards. It is you who is arguing without citing to facts.

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 1:15 PM PST up reply actions

Click on that link ...

Read the post and then follow the links embedded in that post, and then come back, and try to counter with some facts/recruiting stats backing up your silly assertions of us not having an enough talent. I am done with you.

by Nestor on Dec 30, 2005 1:41 PM PST up reply actions

Geez

I don't want to butt in, but isn't kinda harsh for you to threaten to ban someone just because they disagree with you?

Also, I don't think its quite right to say any subject is "decided" and therefore "off limits," particularly when its a fair subject to debate (and, frankly, almost anything in America is).

Besides, I've read the material in the links, and it hardly definitively establishes that the Bruins today have top 10 talent. For one thing, the recuiting stats you cite, at best, show we have top 15 talent ("Total: UCLA: 14.57"). In addition, recruiting ranking hardly directly translate into present day talent levels. Guys transfer, get hurt, and more often, just plain don't live up to expectations.

by OldBob on Jan 1, 2006 6:37 AM PST up reply actions

hold on

Nestor,

So you are saying that you can focus your team to not intercept, when one player, the QB, is responsible for it?

by justwatching on Dec 30, 2005 12:46 PM PST reply actions

Disagree

NU defensive players are sitting on the screen, just like they were in the UA game. It took Cable a whole quarter to realize that NU couldn't stop the run.

Yeah, Drew is partly to blame, but NU knew the play was coming, just like UA defenders did.

by Ajax on Dec 30, 2005 1:39 PM PST up reply actions

if KD is to blame for 3 INTs...

... then KD is also to credit for DO's ridiculous TD-to-INT ratio this year. But nobody here was giving KD credit for that...

The team looked AWFUL in the beginning. It's not solely KD's fault, though. Anybody could see that. Three interceptions in 10 minutes is three interceptions in 10 minutes.

If its all about the coaches, why dont we just eliminate the players entirely and just have the coaches play Madden every week?

by njbruin on Dec 30, 2005 1:18 PM PST reply actions

No one is saying

it's solely KD's fault. That would be ridiculous, just as it's ridiculous to acuse his critics of making that argument.

Can we just put that nonsense to bed now, please.

The bottom line is that KD is ultimately responsible and accountable for everything, because he is the head coach.

That means too much credit for things like the beginning of the season when the team was probably lucky to escape unscathed as long as it did, and too much blame when the team stinks it up like it did the last two years, against Arizona, USC, and for the first quarter of this game.

It's not entirely fair, but that's the way it is.

Now that we're past all that, we can get back to substance.

by Odysseus on Dec 30, 2005 1:23 PM PST up reply actions

Tell that to

Nestor =)

by justwatching on Dec 30, 2005 1:35 PM PST reply actions

Coach

I think that Coach Dorrell has earned himself another year.

by 5214 on Dec 30, 2005 6:34 PM PST reply actions

KD

The Bruins just went 10-2 and people are calling for his head? Granted, several of those wins were closer than they should have been and the losses to UA and SC were ugly, but nobody can deny that it was a successful season. Sure, KD is learning on the job and he has had his ups and downs, but the bottom line is that UCLA will never break the bank to go after the Nick Sabans or Steve Spurriers of this world.

by chaphill1 on Dec 30, 2005 7:20 PM PST reply actions

So we should settle for...

...annual nationally televised ass-rapings at the hands of our cross-town rivals? Not to mention UA!

Let's face it. The stars lined up for Dorrell this season.

by Ajax on Dec 31, 2005 6:57 PM PST up reply actions

Uhm ...

Getting Dan Hawkins or Urban Meyer in 03 would not have required UCLA "to break the bank." In other words ... getting a HC who has proven himself in the mid-majors featuring strong programs with great foundation, would not have required UCLA to fork up big money. What our problem with UCLA is getting a coach like KD is ... yet again we are stuck with an unproven commodity who is at best just slight better than average, and doesn't have the program anywhere close to regaining its elite status from the McNowne years or early Donahue years.

by Nestor on Jan 2, 2006 8:47 AM PST up reply actions