Mandel's Mailbag: Two Words

by Achilles on Nov 15, 2007 1:02 PM PST in Football

How the heck can college football increase the number of games in a season, keep the same bowl eligibility requirements (six wins), and the Pac-10 still not manage to produce enough teams to fill its bowls?
--Jeff G., Ellicott City, Md.

Two words, my friend: Karl Dorrell.

Stewart Mandel

By the way, major props to tasser who actually beat me to this story in the diaries. Nice work, man. I'm old and slow. I'll catch on this Internet thing, yet.

Tweet Comment 24 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I'm not a Dorrellista

No. Really.

Although any criticism of CTS is welcome at this point, I have to confess I don't see how CTS is the reason "the Pac-10 cannot produce enough teams to fill its bowls."

If CTS-lead teams lose often enough, wouldn't that help other teams get to the magic "bowl eligible" status? Or is he saying that CTS is winning too many?

But I'm really not a Dorrellista. Really.

by Fox 71 on Nov 15, 2007 1:20 PM PST reply actions

It's because

CTS lost to two out-of-conference teams that he should have easily beaten...otherwise he would already be bowl-eligible, even with only one win in those two games.

by tasser10 on Nov 15, 2007 1:24 PM PST up reply actions

Oh. I get it.

by Fox 71 on Nov 15, 2007 3:15 PM PST up reply actions

Also

kd's propensity to win games that he shouldn't adds another degree of complexity to the mix

by bruinbunz on Nov 15, 2007 5:38 PM PST up reply actions

Respectfully..

..not complexity, just a confused, unorganized, leaderless coaching staff.

by whp68 on Nov 15, 2007 11:39 PM PST up reply actions

Hey Fox!

I'm not a Dorrellista either, but I do get %*&#@! sick of ANYONE from Sports Illustrated (or ESPN for that matter) talking trash about all things powder blue and gold. Its gone on a long time before Coach Excitement ever enrolled as a student in Westwood and continued on chronically ever since.

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 15, 2007 1:31 PM PST reply actions

In this case

Mandel was fully on the UCLA bandwagon when the season started, citing all our returning starters and our favorable schedule. But then he was subjected to further Dorrellian madness, losing games we should win, winning games we should lose, and he has finally seen the light and given up. And I guess you haven't been watching ESPN lately, gushing about K-Love and Bruin hoops. It's all about marketing my friend. Good product equals no talking trash.

by tasser10 on Nov 15, 2007 1:43 PM PST up reply actions

msm punchline is good news:

theres no better way to predict when someone is out the door...

than when they become a national media punchline.

by radiorahim on Nov 15, 2007 1:55 PM PST reply actions

A KD Haiku for Bruin Nation

With Ducks and Trojans
Dorell's job ends with two L's
Just like his last name

by GinFizBear on Nov 15, 2007 2:04 PM PST reply actions

A KD Haiku for Bruin Nation (without typo)

With Ducks and Trojans
Dorrell's job ends with two L's
Just like his last name

by GinFizBear on Nov 15, 2007 2:05 PM PST up reply actions

technically

Dorrell's job would end with 5 L's ... but great Haiku anyway!

editor, DumpDorrell.com ... formerly posted as DumpDorrell

by BruinCore on Nov 15, 2007 5:34 PM PST up reply actions

OT--Barry Bonds indicted

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3112487

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 15, 2007 2:35 PM PST reply actions

Spot On

We had a lot to do with no filling the Pac 10's bowl slots because we were expected to fill one at the very least. Think about all the pub from the MSM we got during the preseason. Mandel was BIG on UCLA being a darkhorse candidate for the BCS Title Game. He wasn't the only one either.

I have no ill feelings towards Mandel for this statement because it is the truth. I'll never crucify anybody for speaking the truth.

by BlueReign on Nov 15, 2007 3:20 PM PST reply actions

Yes, I also heard the preseason UCLA talk

o 11-0 going into the SC game.
o Surprise team in the BCS title game.
o A very dangerous team.
o Blah
o Blah
o Blah

All this talk neglected the KD factor. "Bowl eligible" is as lofty as he is capable of achieving.

by bluegold on Nov 15, 2007 3:33 PM PST up reply actions

SI had one other good comment

from the Charlie Weis is a crappy coach article....

"Nebraska's Bill Callahan (who led the Oakland Raiders to a Super Bowl) and UCLA's Karl Dorrell (a former Denver Broncos position coach) are likely down to their last days. Their teams, much like the coaches, have been marked not only by their underachieving record but a visible lack of emotion."

by bornagainbruin on Nov 15, 2007 3:26 PM PST reply actions

If Guerrero reads this stuff

and comes away unconvinced, I swear, I will let him know loud and clear. It's quite simple: football under KD is JUST NOT FUN. Robbed of a great college experience, are the students. Just ask Yoda.

by tasser10 on Nov 16, 2007 8:11 AM PST up reply actions

SI comment

Since Dorrell is the only coach in the WORLD who has lost to Notre Dame this year, the quote in unequivocably accurate (UCLA would have had 6 wins)

by Gary72 on Nov 15, 2007 4:34 PM PST reply actions

Go Duke (and Stanford)..

..beat ND and keep that record intact.

Jeez! I can't believe I am rooting for Stanford; I hate Stanford!

by whp68 on Nov 15, 2007 11:44 PM PST up reply actions

SI comment

Since Dorrell is the only coach in the WORLD who has lost to Notre Dame this year, the quote is unequivocably accurate (UCLA would have had 6 wins)

by Gary72 on Nov 15, 2007 4:35 PM PST reply actions

Arizona just beat Oregon

34-24, w/o Dixon for most of the game. Guessing we hear some dorrelistas claim that the AZ loss 'isn't so bad' tomorrow.

by bruinhoo on Nov 15, 2007 10:01 PM PST reply actions

Crap!

If Dixon doesn't play against us next week . . . we have a decent shot at winning that game. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. I swear I hate the fact that I can't decide whether or not I want us to win(soley based on our coach sticking around if we do). THANKS KARL DORRELL!!!!

by TheStick on Nov 15, 2007 10:11 PM PST reply actions

Dixon out

Dixon looks done to me and maybe Stewart too. I guess that should even the playing field. Leaf ought to be sacked four or five times, the game will be just within our reach, the crowd will roar and then doh! Another Dorellian moment. This could be another painful one. Think about it; if the walk-on catches that ball, we beat Arizona State and now we would have "our fate in our own hands" facing a Dixon-less Ducks at home! This season sucks!

Go Bruins!

by BruinAl on Nov 15, 2007 10:30 PM PST up reply actions

I'm not so sure about Stewart

I haven't seen any stories about his possible injury, but his seems less than severe. He only came out in esentially the second to last series, and Oregon needed to score twice in the last one, so there was no point in having him in when deep passes were needed. Leaf seemed to be potentially more hurt than Stewart, though he kept playing. Dixon, though, definitely looks done.

by jaffa on Nov 15, 2007 10:56 PM PST up reply actions

I watched with the sound off, as usual

so I was neither distracted nor influenced by anything the announcers said. I was really surprised at how bad Leaf was. He had no touch on long passes or on short passes and he didn't seem all that willing to take a hit on the option. Oregon's offense looked pretty bad once Dixon went out. Having said that, they still win the game if No. 4 or No. 6 (can't remember) catches the touchdown instead of letting it bounce off his number for the INT. That's a 14 point swing.

Oregon's Dixon-less offense against our defense next week? I'm not sure. Can our defense score enough to give us a win? If the defense gets one TD, we might get 20 points. I don't think that will be enough even with not Dixon to contend with.

by Fox 71 on Nov 16, 2007 11:30 AM PST up reply actions