cross-posted from DumpDorrell.com
Brian Dohn is reporting that Eric Scott will meet today with Dan Guerrero and that a decision on his reinstatement is expected later today. The decision as has been long suspected will be to reinstate Scott, as Dohn confirms with his sources. If this indeed is going to happen, Guerrero would be wise to make it publicly clear that there will be a "zero tolerance" policy on Scott getting in trouble. Hanging around the wrong crowd when trouble goes down, regardless of his culpability, should be enough to get Scott dismissed. If Guerrero must reinstate, that is the minimum condition that would have to be placed on Scott.
We of course disagree with bringing Scott back. Too many questions about the integrity of the hiring process are left unanswered. How a program that prides itself on Character and Integrity allows these questions to linger is beyond our comprehension. A clean program would first eliminate any appearance of impropriety and that surely has not occurred here. Further, if Eric Scott were honorable in his intentions to be a coach at UCLA, and if he truly believed he has departed from his past behavior, he would have disclosed his conviction record to Dorrell and Guerrero, which both men have said did not occur, instead of intentionally or unintentionally trying to game the system by remaining silent on the issue.
What a shame. If it goes down this way, the football program will have hit a new low. A 5-time arrested, 3-time convicted coach on our sideline. A coach with recent arrests and convictions and a rap sheet that goes back 12 years. There is no story here of atonement or of making things right in his life. Rather the opposite, this is a person who hasn't learned and is living and behaving the same way now in his 30s, even AFTER he was given an enormous gift of an opportunity, than when he first was arrested and convicted 12 years ago. Scott was hanging around with Jesus DeAlba who was expelled from a college Scott helped him get into for burglarizing several dorm rooms and a football facility and who was charged in the incident with possessing a weapon. And there is the matter of Scott being around an incident that involved several weapons and a very large quantity of drugs. The opportunity Scott was given carries responsibilities that affect far more people than himself. He embarrassed the very people who gave him this opportunity due to his bad judgment. And he tarnished the image of the University, not just the football program and the "First to 100" athletic program, and that affects the ability of the University to carry out its mission.
No one has answered for the Bruin community what will Scott do if he finds that one of our players is carrying a weapon in their car to practice, to school, to a party on campus, or to the Rose Bowl. What will Scott do when he sees a player or a member of a player's posse carrying a bag of drugs to campus, or to a party, or to the Rose Bowl? Does he have any moral authority to stop such activity? Obviously now he doesn't. Does Dorrell have any moral authority to tell a player he is off the team for carrying a concealed weapon?? For breaking the rules even?? Dorrell's moral authority has definitely just lost some of its muscle. For whatever its worth, that hurts the team, the athletic department and the University. If and when trouble happens this year, things may play out differently than in the past simply because Scott is in the locker room and on the sideline. This season we may see the "clean program" tag get challenged ... publicly (again). As Kevin Kiley of DKLA, a sports radio program on ESPN radio in LA, said yesterday "reinstating Scott is most likely going to define Dorrell's career." He added, if Dorrell doesn't win this year the Scott reinstatement could cost him his job. That about says it all.