T.J. Simers Backs Off Dorrell

by alcor805 on Oct 17, 2006 8:28 PM PDT

I was anticipating a scathing article from Simers this morning. Attacking Dorrell for giving up with 4+ minutes on the clock and punting the ball away. He eluded to it in his Sunday column.

But when I opened the paper today I found an article on horse racing. I hate his articles on Horse Racing. They make me want to go back to bed in the morning.

Anyway, if you skip down 22 'mini' paragraphs into his column you'll find this afterthought:

AS FOR Karl Dorrell and whether UCLA opted to finally surrender to Oregon on Saturday, he said his plan called for the Bruins to remain aggressive to the very end. I believed him after listening to his explanation, and worry now I'm the one who is surrendering.

I take this as T.J. backing off. He hears more than he prints and he probably knows where Dorrell stands with the Alumni and Administration.

Perhaps BN does represent the opinion of most Bruins fans. Or maybe Simers just has pity for him at this point.

If he had written a full page scathing review of KD's coaching skills, some of us might have broken out the torches.

The only concrete fact here is that horse racing articles suck.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

i was as appalled as you were

i expect an article ripping dorrell and we get one of those cutsie simers articles about horses. i didn't even read the damn thing.

plaschke likes to write cute, sentimental articles, but simers thinks of himself as being cute. he likes to joke about being the reason teams do good or bad, or emphasize the weird, supposedly cute banter he has with our local athletes; the ones who don't get offended by his remarks - jeff kent, lasorda, milton bradley etc. he acts like the jabs he takes at them and their responses are part of some special, pseudo dysfunctional relationship that exists between only them. he rips all the other athletes who don't view his remarks as funny; the ones who refuse to trade back in the gay ass, weird banter he loves and thinks is so cute.

many times he replaces real articles for personal love fests like these to, i don't know, show how cool he is for knowing these people on a supposedly personal level. i don't care. when he writes real articles i actually like him once in a while and i thought that he was going to use his wit to rip dorrell in a real article. like everyone else at the times he backed off.

if dorrell was the head coach at usc, they would be ripping him like they ripped paul hackett. obviously the times doesn't care about ucla football.

by babyblue98 on Oct 17, 2006 9:09 PM PDT reply actions

in my honest oppinion

as a student, i dont think many students are thinking of KD being fired...i mean, say for sophomores and freshman, he is coming off a10-2 year (although we all know that all the playmakers are gone) so they feel like they should at leave give him a chance. as to the upperclass men, we have seen where he has been and where he has gone, coming off a successful season, and not beating top 25 programs is very dissappointing, and is a call for Head Coach and/or offensive coordinator replacement

by bluejoe on Oct 18, 2006 12:47 AM PDT reply actions

and

the DG did bring in Salvage and Howland...so there is an upside to him, as Dorrell might be just an abboration, but he at least did keep the program clean.. now we just need a winner.

by bluejoe on Oct 18, 2006 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions

bluejoe

I think you are right. But that's where you students need to come in and do everything you can to bring a reality based perspective on our program to your fellow colleagues on campus.

Preach it brother.

by Nestor on Oct 18, 2006 4:34 AM PDT up reply actions