The Backfire

by Nestor on Nov 19, 2007 4:36 AM PST in Football

So Karl Dorrell’s latest desperate stunt of throwing out the race card is not working out so well (for him). And let’s make it clear, until Dorrell himself disavows the comments he made to Streeter (throwing Kurt under the bus like he has done to everyone else in the program over the years to avoid any modicum of responsibility) we are going to assume this latest despicable move is all him. And, thankfully, the Bruin Nation has spoken up and has generated an intense back fire that is enabling everyone around the country to see right through Dorrell’s disgusting and despicable behavior.

Dorrell’s move was so horrid that he shot up to number 1 in Coach’s Hot Seat rankings even though his team was not in action:

1. Karl Dorrell – There was a very troubling development in Los Angeles this past week when a reporter with the Los Angeles Times, Kurt Streeter, sat down with Karl Dorrell and they decided together that Dorrell is not being treated fairly by the people who calling for Dorrell’s ouster. In the article Dorrell went as far to say, "I don’t feel I have gotten a fair shake." Shame on Streeter and Dorrell for playing the race card at this moment, because to imply that Dorrell is being held to a higher standard or is not coaching on a "level playing field" because he is black is an outrageous allegation! By any standard Karl Dorrell has done a mediocre job at UCLA, and if you compare him to the coach that preceded him in Westwood and was also fired, Bob Toledo, Dorrell’s record is worse. After coaching 60 games at UCLA, Dorrell is 34-26 (.567) and Toledo after 60 games was 37-23 (.617). Dorrell has two games remaining on the ’07 schedule, Oregon and at USC, and after 62 games at UCLA Toledo’s record was 39-23 (.629). In all Toledo spent 8 years at UCLA and his winning percentage was .605 and he was fired for doing a very mediocre job, and Dorrell should be fired as well if he cannot win his last two games of ’07. Getting back to Kurt Streeter’s article on Dorrell not getting a "fair shake" I hope that both of these men realize that playing the race card every time a black coach does a poor and mediocre job only jeopardizes the opportunity for more black men to get head coaching jobs. If an athletic director or president might be worried that he will have a difficult time firing a black coach because he has done a poor job (see Jerry Baldwin case), then that will lead directly to black coaches getting passed over for head coaching jobs in the future. A few of us here at Coaches Hot Seat have run into Karl Dorrell on numerous occasions and we have defended Karl as something more than just a football coach, but no longer. This is OUTRAGEOUS and UNACCEPTABLE for Streeter to infer that people are racist because they think Dorrell has done a mediocre job at UCLA (he has) and that he should be held accountable for that mediocre job. If Streeter somehow believes that people are scared because of "political-correctness" to send Dorrell packing for the job he has done in Westwood, then he is sadly wrong. Dorrell, like any other man, white, black, yellow, green, blue, orange, or whatever race you want to dream up to divide people with, can end this speculation on his job by winning his last two games. It is just very sad that Dorrell has decided that he cannot stand up like a man and get his team ready to play Oregon and USC, but rather play the race card in a pitiful effort to save his own hide. Shame on you Karl Dorrell, because you should know better. As far as Streeter goes, we fully expect things like this…

I mostly agree with that post except for a major point. At this point in time, Dorrell needs to get out of Westwood, even if he wins the last two meaningless games. Dorrell and his lackeys have been able to move the goal posts the entire season and throughout his career. Everyone before this season was pointed to this as the year UCLA would contend for a BCS game. And in a season which represented the perfect opportunity to sneak into the championship game (which Kansas is on the verge of doing), Dorrell blew that chance. And when Dorrell blew the chance of a BCS appearance, everyone talked about how he could salvage the season by winning the Pac-10. And when that was gone, it was about winning the last 4 games. And now we are supposed to just sit down and be okay with him coming back if he wins 2 meaningless games, and in the process of doing so gives the middle finger to the entire community of UCLA alums, students, season ticket holders, and the fans. We don’t think so.

We will make it clear again. Dorrell needs to go even if we pull out meaningless wins against Oregon and Southern Cal.

Going back to Sunday’s disgrace, I think it is worth to share with everyone some of the best responses we have seen on BN, that has metastasized the ongoing fire storm, which should keep going until Dorrell issues a public clarification on what he exactly meant.

bruinhoo made the salient point on how Dorrell’s move will negatively impact African American coaches around the country.

In terms of coaching, if the race card is used successfully to save a mediocre coach, or to bring public opinion or media pressure onto an AD, what lesson will be learned by others? What if 3 years from now, the Athletic Director at another major D-1A school faces an otherwise tough decision between 2 coaches who he believes to have equal chances of success, one of whom being of color. Think of the possibility that after a 5-7 or 6-7 season, an underachieving coach (guess who?) was able to save his job because of the threat of a wave of bad press, even cries of racism? Or that this coach was fired in spite of a slash and burn pr campaign criticizing the decision as racially motivated.

If you are this future AD, who would you hire?

Then there was uclahy who previously argued UCLA should only look at Dorrell’s record in deciding to fire him:

I posted KD should be fired for his record alone.

Now I think he should be fired for implying that anyone who wants him fired is a racist who doesn't believe in a "level playing field."

What a load of crap. That is an insult to the people that hired him, to the tradition of UCLA, to the memory of Jackie Robinson [a true national treasure and UCLA hero who would never cry such BS to defend his own lack of performance], and the fans who have suffered the past five years wishing and hoping and praying that Mr. Dorrell would somehow prove us all wrong and show us he could coach D1 football.

Instead, he plays the race card, and none too subtly in the front page of the LA Times Sports section. Give me a frickin' break!

To make just one obvious point, KD. It is obvious you have overlooked or misjudged the talents of one truly-hard working African American player who you have mishandled horribly for his 2+ year career at UCLA. In case you missed it, his name is Osar Rashaan, and the only reason he is playing now is because of the injuries you complain about when it is clear he should have been playing high up the depth chart at QB from the beginning! Does it matter what race you are if you're a crappy coach?

Just ask OR, you moron. I was wrong. It's not just your record that sucks. You have no more integrity to me, no sir. Not when you play the race card to defend your indefensible record.

How dare you.

I never want to hear your BS anymore. No "level playing field," right, as long as you're the coach at UCLA it will always be tilted AGAINST US!

And from always Class of 66 who as usual posted his sage response:

I truly believed that KD had enough integrity to not play the card -- or to not act in complicity with an accomplice who did.

I thought the last vestige of KD's dignity would be saved by his forgoing the play.

Today, in my eyes, he lost that last vestige of dignity.

I've said often that I'll not gloat or be happy when KD is fired. I would be sobered by the "lost opportunity".

But, that was yesterday and this is today. I cannot feel sorry for a man who allows his name to be used in a racist attack on my alma mater and on all of the people who have carefully crafted fact based arguments on why he should be fired.

Good riddance.

More on Dorrell’s lack of dignity from Fox 71:

I believe the latest example is his statement to Mr. Streeter, the alleged journalist. We don't know exactly what he said or the context in which anything was said, but we do know what Mr. Streeter says was said, and we have nothing from CTS which suggests that Mr. Streeter is simply making things up. For CTS to claim that he is being unfairly judged because of his race is a blanket statement, with no qualifications. He therefore directed that statement at me. I suppose there are some who would be flattered to be called a racist, but I am not one of them. It is insulting, and it attacks my integrity. For CTS to make that sort of statement about me without having met me is the kind of claim that kept Blacks from voting or that generated Plessy v. Ferguson. It is an insult to my intelligence as well, implying as it does that I would not criticize CTS if he were White.

I will not sit idly and let CTS make personal attacks on me. He is doing to me (and to you and to everyone else at the BN and in the world, frankly) what he claims has victimized him. It's not right, and I will not let it pass.

And on the off chance that CTS might choose to read this one post out of millions, I say Shame on you, CTS. You have failed the integrity test, in my opinion.

And from NickBruin:

If Dorrell really had integrity

which his recent comments show he's lacking, he'd make the following comments.

I'm thankful for the opportunity that UCLA has given me. I've worked hard to bring the program up to a certain level, both on and off the field. Off the field, I've done that. On the field, I have not met the expectations that are expected here at UCLA. UCLA is a great school and deserves a winning program. If they choose not to retain me at the end of the year I will not hold any ill will towards them, but will be thankful that I was able to coach at such a great university.

But no, we've got to hear him play the race card. That should be an insult to everyone, whatever your race is. Because you know what Karl, I'm white, but my road has not been easy either. I've had to work my ass off to get to where I'm at now, and nothing's ever been handed to me. Not a damn thing. And I know what the expectations are in my job, and I better meet them. Instead of owning up to your situation like a man, you have to spew this crap!

Lastly, DumpDorrell.com lays out what Dorrell needs to do today:

Karl Dorrell needs to come out publicly immediately and quell the rage in Bruin Nation regarding his comments. He needs to publicly state that UCLA has given him a great opportunity that most coaches would never get in their lifetime … that UCLA has given him every opportunity to succeed and that he is grateful. Dorrell needs to remove the cloud of suspicion he has placed over the greatest legacy of diversity of any university in the world - a university that gave the nation and world Jackie Robinson and Ralph Bunche. Dorrell needs to make it clear he is not leveraging a potential discrimination lawsuit in an ugly scornful game of bettering his bargaining position.

Dorrell will get that opportunity this afternoon in his weekly Monday afternoon press conference. We sure hope the beat reporters, for once, show some of modicum of professional responsibility by raising the only topic that is raging through the Bruin Nation.

Meanwhile, I also think it is worth it to share what your thoughts on this weekend’s development with Dan Guerrero and Chancellor Gene Block. Email them at dguerrero@athletics.ucla.edu and at chancellor@conet.ucla.edu and please make sure to let them know that you will be behind them 100 percent when they make the ultimate right move by getting rid of the most despicable and despised head coach ever to lead one of the major athletics programs at the school of Jackie Robinson. I also think it is very important for them to hear from us for their own record, enabling them to build an even more powerful argument that they have the support of the UCLA community when they make the right decision based on his overall on and off the field record at UCLA. Please make sure to note your graduation class or your current class or if you are a season ticket holder under your name. And, of course, we would love for you to share what your wrote to them here in our comment threads.

Let's keep the backfire going.

GO BRUINS.

Tweet Comment 43 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Great Post

My response is this DG. I won't set foot inside the Rosebowl until this sham of a coach is history.

by BruinAl on Nov 19, 2007 6:05 AM PST reply actions

Observations

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but isn't it interesting timing that Streeter's desperate defense of Dorrell, entitled "Don't Dump Dorrell," appeared in the LAT one day before the Dump Dorrell ad is scheduled to appear in the Daily Bruin?

It is also interesting how the MSM journalists always deride the blogs as being "insignificant," and yet, the MSM guys seem to pay a lot of attention to these "insignificant" blogs.

Interesting, huh?

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 19, 2007 6:22 AM PST reply actions

My e-mail to Chancellor Block

Dear Chancellor Block:

When I was 12, I became enamored with all things UCLA. I was thrilled beyond belief to be accepted at UCLA. I was proud beyond belief to have graduated from UCLA.

Now, I am ashamed of UCLA. UCLA has been labeled as "racist" by its football coach, who was quoted as having said that he is not being given a "fair shake" because of his race. Either UCLA is a racist institution (which would come as a surprise to Jackie Robinson, Arthur Ashe, Ralph Bunche, et al.) or it is not. If UCLA is a racist institution, it will sit quietly and accept this insult from its under-achieving football coach.

But if UCLA is the great university that I love, it will meet this charge head on.

I say to the football coach "Shame on you. You were given an opportunity that you did not deserve, and failed to justify the confidence which was placed in you."

But to you, Chancellor Block, I say "Shame on you" if you allow my alma mater to be slapped in the face by the charlatan who poses as a football coach, and who has just been stripped of his patina of respectability and integrity.

by Fox 71 on Nov 19, 2007 6:29 AM PST reply actions

"convenient stereotypes"

That part of Streeter's article is what troubles me.

"Some of you just don't know what to make of a coach who does not fit into your convenient stereotypes."

What the hell does that even MEAN?

Streeter should make a post where he outlines exactly what these stereotypes are. If he wants to call us racists for not supporting Dorrell he should be a man and say so. If he wants to wipe away Dorrell's mediocre record and the uninspiring team he puts out on the field and instead say his troubles are because he is black then he should say so.

by njbruin on Nov 19, 2007 7:04 AM PST reply actions

What Streeter doesn't get

Is that I looked at Lavin with the same disapproval as I do Dorrell. I can remember looking at Lavin during the games, and thinking this is the best UCLA can do? I thought how great it would be to have a real coach leading the Bruins. Streeter's a typical journalist hack! i think we all know what he meant by that stereotype comment. I too would love to see his explanation.

by NickBruin on Nov 19, 2007 7:32 AM PST up reply actions

You only disliked Lavin

because he had black hair, ya friggin' racist!

by vanaaron on Nov 19, 2007 10:09 AM PST up reply actions

The impact of a letter..

My Dear Mr. "71",

Your fine message might bear a greater impact were it a concomitant letter (i.e., "snail mail"), mightn't it?

..it's easy to consign these types of messages to the trash or tune spam filters to relegate them to electronic eternity; mail bags of protesting missives do not succumb to any "delete" button.

An adjunctuve thought: return any plea or solicitation for funds or contributions you recieve from UCLA with a terse note to the effect, "Hire a competent football coach, then we'll talk.."

All my mailings from the Anderson School of Business are answered this way. I should think that, were enough of these envelopes returned with this modest request (especially the season ticket offers), it would make an impression on the university if pervasive enough.

Regards,

WHP '68

by whp68 on Nov 19, 2007 7:14 AM PST reply actions

From what I have heard

these emails do make a difference and that DG reads lot of them.

by bluestreet on Nov 19, 2007 7:46 AM PST up reply actions

You're probably right, whp

It's easy to send an e-mail - just a few minutes of typing and a click. A snail mail letter takes more effort, and probably makes more of an impact.

I think I'll invest the $3.00 or whatever it is and mail a letter to the chancellor.

(I have already withheld the donations and told the solicitors why.)

by Fox 71 on Nov 19, 2007 8:02 AM PST up reply actions

I understand the sentiment...

... but its not really Anderson's fault the athletic department screwed the pooch on the football coach. My math degree has given me much of what I have now, but the football coach gives me some entertainment one day a week. I couldn't in good conscience withhold donations simply on the grounds of athletics.

by njbruin on Nov 19, 2007 8:39 AM PST up reply actions

I disagree

Like it or not the reality is the kind of profile our football team or our basketball team has can impact the overall profile of our alma mater.

I don't think it is a coincidence that applicant numbers, overall fundraising tends to take a jump, when a school puts together successful football/basketball programs.

And in this case we have an individual who is now using his high profile perch as the head coach of the football program to defile the impeccable reputation of UCLA when it comes to its commitment to diversity.

I think the way Karl has sullied UCLA by playing the race card, goes beyond football at this point.

And we as alumni should take a hard stand and demand accountability from our administrators in face of this kind of disgusting action.

We can't let this pass.

by bluestreet on Nov 19, 2007 8:46 AM PST up reply actions

The Only Time I Hear From UCLA ...

is when they want money.

Over the last two years, I've sent DG communications expressing my concerns over KD.

I've NEVER heard back from him, or anyone else -- not even a form letter.

So, now I simply send a note in the "donation envelope" or tell the phone solicitor that I won't send a penny until KD is gone.

Sorry it has to be this way -- but they treat me like a check book, not an alum with an opinion.

So, for now, my checkbook is closed.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Nov 19, 2007 9:30 AM PST up reply actions

Marketing?

I know they don't have anything directly to do with this Dorrell fiasco. But, they are part of the same institution (UCLA) and if enough people decline to contribute to anything from that school giving as their reason the athletic department's inability to field a good football team and/or get a welt-bekannt coach, then these guys will start to make the connection.

Over on DumpDorrell.com, some guy got slimed by one of the old Biz School fossil professors telling him to buzz off and heaping a world of condescension on the "kid". A few polite-but-firm flames from the DD site denizens had that old guy back, hat in hand, with an apology for his rudeness. Apparently, someone wised him up about respecting the paying public.

..don't kid yourself, you'd be surprised how many influential grads in the corridors of commerce are ardent supporters of UCLA. Wasn't there some mention here on BN about the Pauley refurb being stalled unless Dorrell is given his papers? You'd also be surprised how much easier it is to get a donation out of an Anderson grad if the football team is kicking names and taking asses instead of sucking dead elephant fecal matter. Let's face it, us old rich guys like sunning ourselves on a warn, Saturday afternoon in the Rose Bowl; we also like it when the Bruins kick the crap out of Stanford, Cal, the Arizonas, the Oregons, and the Washingtons plus whoever else wanders in to play in our house. We also go nuts when those pathetic cardinal-and-gold droids see their one claim to fame (college football) go down the toilet each year. Tell me you didn't get stoked during the 90s?

Anyway, it's like chicken soup: it can hurt.

by whp68 on Nov 19, 2007 12:57 PM PST up reply actions

that's cool

If you want to do it you could, its obviously your money. I would bet more people agree with you than me. I just wouldn't tie my donations to what the AD was going.

Of course, if the athletic department was hitting me up for cash I would balk until Dorrell was gone. Of course.

by njbruin on Nov 19, 2007 1:37 PM PST up reply actions

Everyone

Whether you email or mail a letter to the Chancellor and DG, make sure you indicate that you cannot support the school financially while Dorrell is still coach.

Nothing speaks louder than money.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 19, 2007 8:06 AM PST reply actions

Streeter's Article was Stupid.

There is nothing else to be said about it. Completely ridiculous, almost like he was hired by the Times to do one piece and then get fired for screwing it up. It's almost comical.

That said, It is clear Streeter intended to do a piece about race, and play the race card. And he should be destroyed for it. But I think he used Dorrell at the same time. I keep looking at the piece in the Times and on the blog, and after doing so, I cannot come to the conclusion that KD PLAYED the race card.

KD has every right to answer questions about race if they are asked by a reporter, but no statement KD made clearly indicated to me that he was playing the race card. Certainly not in the La Times article - which is the only thing I care about--a blog is a blog and should be treated as such.

Anyway, KD should be fired, obviously. But I am not ready to get up in arms about KD playing the race card yet. Streeter played it, sure, but he had an agenda and I am not convinced KD was on board. I am giving KD the benefit of the doubt on this one at this time. Not that it mattters, the race card is so ridiculous in this case that it is almost funny to play it.

Also, I disagree with those who are now calling KD a jerk and all that. He is a horrible coach that should be fired. But just because he is trying to save his ass and think about his career (funny to even use the word "career" actually), well I don't think that makes him a jerk. I think that is just a man in a sink hole, realizing his impending death. It is what it is, survival. A lot of coaches have done that.

by rfirpo on Nov 19, 2007 10:09 AM PST reply actions

This is not rocket science

And KD didn't have to be a genius to understand he was being baited to give a race card response. All KD had to do was simply say, "look Kurt my performance at UCLA and why people are not happy with it has nothing do with race and I will not go there."

And it was not an accident that Street was given an hour interview with KD. KD has been chickenshit in recent days staying away from radio interviews and addressing alum section after the game. He gave this guy access and I don't think it was by accident.

You are reaching to defend KD on this just like you had been reaching to argue that Dohn was not reporting it straight.

by bluestreet on Nov 19, 2007 10:18 AM PST up reply actions

Agree with your hypothetical response

that was obviously the way to go. And I also agree with your point about rocket science. KD has to be more aware.

However, race comes up in college football coaching all the time (and in the pros), and just because it is mentioned doesn't mean the race card has been officially played by KD. I think we can all agree black coaches are underrepresented. And if that is true, why? If there is an ugly answer to that question, then we can expect friends of incompetent black coaches to bring it up when black coaches are on the hot seat, even if it's stupid.

Maybe KD did give Streeter access to write a race piece. I just don't think so.

Nice Dohn reference, though I doubt I was reaching in either case. I like to work on the outside of the mob looking in, even when I mostly agree with the mob. It allows me perspective, though less comraderie. Thank god I have friends at home!

by rfirpo on Nov 19, 2007 3:08 PM PST up reply actions

...then KD is equally stupid

When he utters a phrase like "not being on a level playing field" as it relates to his UCLA job, he MUST understand that it reeks of racial overtones.

If KD did not want to go anywhere near a race card, then he should not have said those things for the record for all to read.

by bluegold on Nov 19, 2007 10:18 AM PST up reply actions

Exactly

the **&&^% knew what he was doing.

by bluestreet on Nov 19, 2007 10:26 AM PST up reply actions

KD = not smart. Check.

by rfirpo on Nov 19, 2007 3:09 PM PST up reply actions

Disagree

As one of the few posters here who has defended anything that KD has done/is, and who had felt that despite various issues KD was an honorable, decent guy, I have to disagree. I recall that a few seasons ago he made a single comment in the press about being a black coach and I was troubled about it but ultimately dismissed it from consideration because it was such a singular occurrence. With this Streeter article, the one previous comment, and the absolutely ridiculous assertion offered by KD about the playing field not being level, I don't see any other reasonable interpretation other than KD believes that the criticism and calls for his ouster are race-based.

If KD feels that the comments were not properly captured, or lacked context, I would expect him to address the issue. He has not done so. As he has failed to "clarify" the comments, he must stand by them. Given UCLA's outstanding record wrt racial matters, and the incredible history of its minority alums (a record specifically cited by Kareem as one of the reasons he selected UCLA), KD must know that his assertion is false, and yet he makes it anyway. That speaks of a lack of character, and a lack of integrity.

I don't blame KD for trying to save his job. But I do blame him for apparently trying to save it by tarring the school that graduated him and hired him, as well as its fan base, as ignorant racists. A man of character and integrity is a man who is self-aware, and I expect KD to see that he was given five years to prove himself, and while he has done well in some areas, overall he has not met any of the tangible goals laid out by the AD. And because of his obvious failures on the field, I expect him to handle his prospective departure with grace and dignity, and to focus on coaching without becoming embittered toward a school that gave him a chance to prove himself for five years and paid him well while he did so. By making such an outrageous assertion KD has shown, even to me, that he has no character or integrity worth discussing. No honorable man would stain his name by trafficking in such nonsense.

by ucladj89 on Nov 19, 2007 12:32 PM PST up reply actions

I agre with most of this, except

that I don't read KD's quotes as calling the fan base ignorant racists. I think that goes considerably too far.

by rfirpo on Nov 19, 2007 3:11 PM PST up reply actions

Well, yes...

I agree he never called UCLA's fan base ignorant racists. That's why I didn't write such a thing. However, by saying that the field isn't level, he is tarring the UCLA fan base (as well as the school) as such, because the clear implication is that those who are criticizing him are doing so because of KD's race. That is what I wrote, and I think it's a fair interpretation given the comments as written.

by ucladj89 on Nov 19, 2007 3:23 PM PST up reply actions

Money Quote

I found Streeter's comment that UCLA played competitively against Wazzu, Az and ASU to be the epitome of mediocrity. The next ad should include this money quote to drive home just how low Bruin football has sunk under KD....from BCS bowl to playing competitively against the likes of Wazzu and AZ.

by kdout on Nov 19, 2007 10:19 AM PST reply actions

It utterly amazes me

the arguments Dorrellistas give to keep the status quo in Westwood. That Streeter article was junk, but if you read some of the comments on his "site", you would be equally disappointed.

Alums and season ticket holders are actually happy with the The Thinker and our team's play. They actually accept that we win games against big-name opponents only to lose against small ones. They actually liked the reign of Terry Donahue? They don't want to see CTS gone because of the effect on recruiting.

I'm seriously at a loss here folks. How can anyone stomach to watch a football team that is so poorly coached? A team with such superior talent and experience that it should be winning or (at least) seriously challenging every team it faces.

On another note, has anyone seen the Daily Bruin ad that was supposed to come out today?

by hspigskinfan on Nov 19, 2007 10:57 AM PST reply actions

Some of those "supporters"

are Trojan plants. I am pretty sure about this. I remember during the Lavin days, how Arizona supporters would go on other sites saying nice things about Lavin and even go on radio shows arguing why UCLA should keep Lavin, and then come back to Zona message boards to brag about it.

by bluestreet on Nov 19, 2007 10:59 AM PST up reply actions

Again, a key to knowing if you have a good coach

Is there anyone, anywhere from another school calling in to plead to keep Howland? How about people calling in to plead to keep Carroll?

Yet people did it all the time with Lavin. And they do it again with KD.

by Free the 16 on Nov 19, 2007 2:32 PM PST up reply actions

Alumni Playerrs

This is one group that, for the most part, can't "stomach to watch a football team that is so poorly coached".

by bornagainbruin on Nov 19, 2007 1:33 PM PST up reply actions

OT--Oregon line

Dixon's injury has apparently thrown the sports books for a loop. The line is all over the place for the Oregon game.

Oregon is favored by anywhere from 1 to 4.5 points. I'm sure the line will settle down by game time.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 19, 2007 11:56 AM PST reply actions

Wyoming Redux

This is exactly like 2004...Toast beat Oregon to become "bowl eligible", only to go to some crappy bowl game and get beaten by Wyoming...after the "moral victory" against U$C.

by tasser10 on Nov 19, 2007 12:22 PM PST up reply actions

I checked out Streeter's blog

then I took the time (no small feat) to poll the responses. 320 are in favor of dumping Dorrell, and 81 are in favor of keeping him. some posts did not get counted becuase they were respsonding to somebody else post, or they did not state a position either way. Trojans who asked for Dorrell to stay and admitted their allegiance got counted towards the dump dorrell total. Interestingly some of the Trojans while agreeing that Dorrell should stay, still felt the Race Card was BS and said so emphatically.

Finally Kurt Streeter himself posted this himself. Somebody please block post fix this for me. Sorry, I suck at HTML.

Kurt Streeter said...
Just kidding guys. Karl has an an indefensible record, no matter what his skin color is, it is awful. So disregard my post, I was just checking if anyone is insane enough to agree with this tripe.

November 17, 2007 10:39 PM

A coach is someone who can give correction without causing resentment. John Wooden

by MexiBruin on Nov 19, 2007 12:22 PM PST reply actions

Unfortunately

I cannot tell if you are being sarcastic, but that "post" by Streeter was just a joke by some random poster. Streeter obviously didn't post that comment.

Otherwise, thanks for counting up the "Yays" and "Nays." I also found the Trojan comments interesting.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 19, 2007 12:31 PM PST up reply actions

Wasted moments in our lives

I also polled the posts. I did it a little different from Mexi. I was counting the people who agreed with the posts or otherwise supported CTS, so anyone not in that group went on the other stack. Out of 176 that I counted, 17% were in favor of CTS. So it was about one out of six supporting him. Doing it Mexi's way makes it about one out of four.

I decline to waste any more of my life counting votes on this idiot's blog.

And I agree with Barnes - that wasn't Streeter posting.

by Fox 71 on Nov 19, 2007 1:34 PM PST up reply actions

Actually I did get it wrong

It was 320 to 41. Another thing: many of the posts in favor of Dorrell keeping his job also mentioned that they believed Dorrell should keep his job FOR ONE MORE YEAR. That seems to me like even the Dorrellistas are finding it impossible to defend the man.

A coach is someone who can give correction without causing resentment. John Wooden

by MexiBruin on Nov 19, 2007 10:20 PM PST up reply actions

Haha

sorry guys, that was me.

by Tydides on Nov 19, 2007 1:50 PM PST up reply actions

Seriously?

Pretty darn funny, actually.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 19, 2007 2:33 PM PST up reply actions

Well I had to have some fun with it

I mean the content of the post is barely worth responding to.

by Tydides on Nov 19, 2007 2:37 PM PST up reply actions

My email to Chancellor Block, et al.

Chancellor Block, Administrative Vice Chancellor Blackman, and Athletic Director Guerrero:

It is time to demand excellence at UCLA.

As a UCLA alum and football season ticketholder, I am dismayed by the inability of an institution like UCLA to consistently field a winning football team.

It has been fifty-three years since our football team won its one and only national championship. During that time, UCLA has won 96 of its 100 NCAA titles including all 11 Men's Basketball championships.

It is time to end the mediocrity in football.

Five years ago, Athletic Director Guerrero said, "We need to raise the bar. We need to start winning Pac-10 championships again. We want to have a national caliber program here. We certainly think we should be one of the top programs in the country."

This is a statement upon which all UCLA football fans can agree. Unfortunately, five years later, we are no closer to that goal.

At the beginning of the season, Athletic Director Guerrero laid out some very specific expectations: "The important thing this year is that we don't beat ourselves, that we play with consistency, that we're an excellent second half team and that we improve as the year progresses." Because these expectations have not been met, the individuals responsible for meeting these goals must be held accountable.

There are not any excuses which can be acceptable for this lack of performance.

Finally, in light of a recent Los Angeles Times column which raised the issue of race, I want to say that the issue of race cannot be allowed to obfuscate the situation. In fact, I believe that Mr. Dorrell should probably be dismissed immediately from his position with the university for making the statements he made to Kurt Streeter at the Los Angeles Times. He has disgraced the university as well as himself by making the implication that his situation is about anything other than wins and losses. As an alum, I am embarrassed....no make that disgusted by the fact that he would suggest that UCLA with its proud record of diversity would not "give him a fair shake" because he is black. If Mr. Dorrell were winning championships and fans, boosters, alums and donors were calling for his removal, then perhaps he might be right, but for him to say that he hasn't received a fair shake after five mediocre seasons is inaccurate and downright wrong.

I, for one, do not care if our head football coach's skin color is purple with green polka dots. I care that our standards are as high for our football team as they are for our basketball team.

The time has come to end the fifty-three years of college football mediocrity. The time has come to demand excellence in all sports at UCLA. The time has come to end the Karl Dorrell era. The time has come to hire a proven, successful, experienced head football coach.

Sincerely,
Joe Piechowski `94
Thousand Oaks, CA

by JoeP on Nov 19, 2007 12:54 PM PST reply actions

Well Done

sjh

by Class of 66 on Nov 19, 2007 8:12 PM PST up reply actions

DUH-rell is an idiot

What DUMBFUCK playing the race card really shows is that he's as clueless about the PR game as he is about the game of football. What does he think the reaction is going to be when he calls anybody who questions his "accomplishments" a racist? Or when he says he never gotten a fair shake at UCLA?

by Tommy Bruin on Nov 19, 2007 1:07 PM PST reply actions

My email to Dan Guerrero

Mr. Guerrero,

I am writing to you concerning the state of our football program. Just so you know, I am a 37 year Bruin fan, a season ticket holder, and donor to the athletic fund.

I want to voice two concerns to you, and ask that you take them into consideration. The first has to do with the recent comments by Karl Dorrell in yesterday's LA Times, regarding not getting a fair shake. As a Bruin fan, I am deeply offended by those remarks. I have always judged Karl Dorrell by the job he is doing on the field, and also the job he is doing off the field, which on several occasions I have commended him for. For him to insinuate that his job performance is tied to his skin color is both insulting and offensive. I have been in Karl Dorrell's corner up until our loss to UTAH, which I will comment on in a minute. I've been a staunch supporter of his, and wanted him to succeed. I want you to know that I can no longer support him, because of these comments, and the inconsistency we see on the field. If his comments were taken out of context by the Times, then he better clear that up.

Secondly, I can no longer support him as the coach of this team because of the product we see on the field. Each year convenient excuses are used why we underachieve. This year the injury excuse is being used. While injuries have hurt us, it does not explain the total lack of preparation for the UTAH game. That game summed up the Karl Dorrell era in a nutshell. INCONSISTENCY!! This was to be our year, when we'd make a run at a BCS bowl, and possible national championship. What do we do? We go into UTAH and get thumped. Where was the sense of urgency in that game? Why was our offense and defense so horrible in that game? That was a game we should have won, along with Notre Dame. My point in this is I don't see a championship attitude instilled in our football program, nor do I see the proper fundamentals taught, especially on the offensive side of the ball. If Karl Dorrell is retained, I don't see it getting any better, even with the recruiting class we have coming in.

Mr. Guerrero, the ball's in your court. I know your expectations for the entire athletic department are high. Why should football be any different? I understand there are different hurdles for football, but as I've learned in life, where there's a will, there's a way. Myself, like many other fans, just want to see UCLA football relevant again. That's all I ask.

Sincerely,

Nick Faraclas
Redlands, California

by NickBruin on Nov 19, 2007 1:34 PM PST reply actions