In or Out (of KD's Pants)?

by Nestor on Nov 20, 2006 10:06 AM PST in Football

After the Cal game we heard a lot about how KD, the offensive guru took control over the reins to reignite the dead Bruin offense. From PE.com:

During most games, UCLA coach Karl Dorrell has his play sheet tucked into the front of his pants as he roams the sideline. On Saturday against Cal, that was not always the case.

Dorrell said he was much more involved in the play-calling against the Bears and estimated that he may have helped call as much as 20 percent of the game. Typically, offensive coordinator Jim Svoboda takes care of that task, but with UCLA's offense struggling of late, Dorrell decided to step in to help get things going.

"But that's (having the play sheet available) what was needed. I wanted to help the offense, and that's my expertise. I'm an offensive coach. I wanted to help them as much as I could, and there was an improvement this week."

Dorrell, who said he had to "get in play-calling shape," said that for the first part of the season, he had tried to spend time with the offense, defense and special teams units.

He said that he will be slowly diminishing his roles with other parts of the game to focus on the offense, which has scored touchdowns on just 14 of 32 red-zone attempts this season, the second-worst percentage in the Pac-10.

"What I did was me organizing the plan and organizing our thoughts in between series and things like that," Dorrell said. "I was instrumental in helping the whole flow work out."

Although in public KD mentioned in he was figuring into about 20 percent of the playcalls, apparently he has been involved lot more. In any event since Dorrell is a much hyped WCO genius, you'd think the offensive "flow" as would be much approved afer Dorrell took over? So I decided to look into the numbers.

Here is a break down of the Bruin rushing offense in the first 5 v. the last 3 (the 3 games in which apparently KD has been lot more involved). Numbers from cfbstats.com:

Bruin Rushing Offense (First 8 v. Last 3)

	Att.	Yards	YPC	YPG	TDs
First 8 Games	265	962	3.63	120.25	5
Last 3 Games	100	410	4.10	136.67	4

Obviously you can spot the improvement in ypc and ypg. However, that number is somewhat eschewed by garbage time during Cal game, after the Bruins were effectively destroyed by a score of 35-10. Markey ripped off a huge 70 yard TD run during the fourth quarter when the outcome of the game was certain. Prior to that big run Markey barely had around 60 yard rushing during prior 3 quarters. And given the horrible rushing performance against ASU in which the Bruins didn?t break 100 yards against the 6th ranked rushing defense in the Pac-10 (going into that game), right now from the numbers at least we haven?t seen much progress in Dorrell?s predictable run-up-the-gut vanilla rushing offense.

Which brings us to the passing game. Here are the breakdown in Bruins passing performances in our first 8 v. the last 3:

Bruin Passing Offense (First 8 v. Last 3)

	Att.	Comp.	Comp. %	Yards	YPG	YPC	TD	Int.
First 8 Games	256	149	58.20	1608	201.00	10.79	10	9
Last 3 Games	87	48	55.17	642	214.00	13.34	4	3

Again there isn?t much sign of progressive in this category either. The completion percentage is down (Olson?s injury is a factor in this case). The total yards per game has improved by a meager total of 12 yards (from 201 to 213). That number was boosted by the two huge passing plays from Cowan to Breazell last Saturday. There hasn?t been any improvement in the all important category of production of TDs per game and cutting down on the ratio of TD to Ints. In fact if you take away the two pass plays against ASU, the Bruin offense was basically stuck in neutral gear against the Fun Devils hapless defense.

Another important to thing to note. The ratio of rushing to passing plays. If anything the Bruins have gone slightly more conservative calling more rushing plays in our last 3 games (53 percent of the times) compared to the first 8 (51 percent of the times).

And the product on the field looks mediocre. It hasn?t shown the ability to sustain drives by putting together a mistake free, fluid, multi-dimensional offense which keeps opposing Ds on their heels. There is no flow to this offense as it still seems to be depending on its defensive team-mates to bail the team out from it?s impotent performance on the field.

And yet Dorrell?s minions are out there talking about progress?

I have no problem with Cowan starting against Southern Cal given the fact that he is 2-0 in last two games (whatever that?s worth). However, if the offense continues to be stuck in neutral and show zero signs of life, then Dorrell should show guts and think about bringing in Olson to reignite this listless unit.

Then again will Dorrell show that courage? Yeah we saw that fake punt against ASU (in a game that didn?t mean much ? sorry if we are not impressed by sloppy wins to get to Pineapple Bowl). But are we going to see Dorrell exhibit some real courage and his much ballyhooed offensive genius in the most important game of the season? Beacase as of today from the number at least it's pretty clear whether Dorrell keeps that playshit in or out of his pants it really doesn't have much impact on the flow (or lackthere of) of Bruin offense.

GO BRUINS.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Another Emotion Laden Ouburst ...

from a Dorrell opponent. NOT.

Great work. It's posts like this one that put a lie to the claim that this is a negative site with nothing but getting rid of Dorrell in focus.

In fact, all year long -- even before he flushed this season for us -- the anchoring posts on this site have been based on fact and critical analysis.

Posts like this make Bruins Nation a truly special place.

Thanks.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Nov 20, 2006 11:23 AM PST reply actions

Time for a change . . .

Actually, in more ways than one. If Olson is ready and 100%, he gets the reps tomorrow, and is readied for the SC game.

Unlike several other teams in the conference (Arizona comes to mind, as does the hated SC squad), the hallmark of Dorrell's teams has been stagnation in lieu of growth and improvement through the season. To analogize to the most comparable coaching experience - Terry Donanhue's - he took 5 opportunities against SC before finally winning one, and that one came on a tipped ball that Jeff Fisher probably still as nightmares about). This will be Dorrell's fourth, and a loss is expected with the only question being margin of defeat. In TD's experience, he was beaten by a bad bounce in 76, a smarmy PI call in 77 which negated a great comeback effort in 77, a bad fumble on a return play deep in Bruin territory which cost the 78 game, and an utter blowout in 79. Dorrell's been blown out twice, and had his moral victory last time out in the Rose Bowl in 04. Yes, he's a nice guy, and stoicism is not a negative (anybody like that jerk Stoops in Tucson? He needs meds), but he deserves his walking papers if the sun sets on 12/2 with another lopsided loss to pompom Petey's bunch. Hope DG has at least stayed in contact with Skippy Neuheisel, and I wish he had the $$ available to talk with Larry Coker.

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 20, 2006 12:22 PM PST reply actions

TD era

I watched the Freeman McNeil game with my son amongst 30 or so SC gamers in Orange County at a bar. We went giddy and the pain in the faces of the "faithful" was noteworthy.

TD's issue was, basically, he knew defense, but not offense, and his thin skinned approach made for interesting times with Homer Smith, the man who made a difference. TD recruited, first defensive athletes, and then offense. Remember Jerry Robinson was a wide receiver before moving to LB.....

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Nov 20, 2006 4:20 PM PST up reply actions

Geez... an article about a card in KD's pants...

...when what this offense really needs is a KICK in the pants.

MIM

by Meriones on Nov 20, 2006 2:15 PM PST reply actions

If Olsen Doesn't Start...

In the spirit of fair and balanced posting [Logan5 has already taken heat for highlighting Big Ben's many shortfalls this season], just a reminder to those weighing in on the QB contro and and the merits of starting Cowan vs. Olsen:

While most here are probably in favor of Olsen starting vs. SC (and whatever toilet bowl we we decline thereafter), let's get it right: KD should start whoever poses the biggest threat to the enemy. Period.

I've heard Ben's win/loss record (3/1 Olsen, 2/4 Cowan) being thrown about as evidence of his superiority, but that ignores the much weaker opponents he faced (just look at their records).

Even with the losses (and the high OC handicap placed on both QB's), I still have Cowan scoring higher on the "potency" scale. If Ben does start, I can only hope like hell the "vs. UTAH" Olsen shows up.

Either way, the only constant is KD, who is sure to disappoint by either leaving Cowan in place for fear of ACTUALLY having to make a decision -- OR -- he'll start Olsen to pacify us even though Ben may not have the clear edge...

by theREAL_LOGAN5 on Nov 20, 2006 2:22 PM PST reply actions

I thought the fake punt

was a little too risky. But it turned out to be a good call.

by cv on Nov 20, 2006 3:41 PM PST up reply actions

It was too risky

And that's the problem with him. He doesn't get it. This would be our conversation with him:

BN - Dorrell, stop being so damn conservative.

KD - Okay, how about I go for 2-point conversions in the first half?

BN - NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!! What the hell is wrong with you moron? Nobody does that. We just want you to play to win, not play to lose. Don't act like your protecting your 2 point lead out there.

KD - Oh, now I get it. Hey, I promise I'll go for it on 4th and 2 deep in our own territory. That's not protecting the lead, right?

BN - No, really, what the hell is wrong with you? Do you hear yourself?

KD - I tune in and out.

"What me worry?"

by BruinFan1 on Nov 20, 2006 5:21 PM PST reply actions

Too easy

It's easy to make fun of KD, but please, a little respect. Being a head football coach at a major university is a very tough job. I don't think he's a dumb person (he did manage to get hired after all), or an idiot, or anything like that. He just has little experience and is an unproven coach who is not good at managing games right now. Just not a good coach, and that's enough to complain about. Let's drop the name-calling, it is tacky and childish, though I understand the need to vent.

by tasser10 on Nov 21, 2006 9:13 AM PST up reply actions