The recent announcement of the lawsuit being brought by Reeves Nelson against Time Warner and George Dohrmann has generated some passionate debate, as did the article itself when it was published. It was thus confusing for me personally when, upon hearing of the lawsuit, my initial reaction was disgust. After all, isn't this what we all wanted? An airing of the facts? A conclusion to a sordid open question surrounding an already tarnished basketball program. This kind of stuff must be like chum in the water for the lawyers amongst us, but I'm not one of them. I have my fan and alum cap on.

So why disgust? Because from my perspective, neither party is worthy of support.

On one hand, you have Dohrmann, who his critics claim has a vendetta against UCLA; a claim at least partially validated by his history, and which makes him a thoroughly unsympathetic and unlikeable figure. The lawsuit claims he has played fast and loose with the facts, abdicating his responsibilities as a journalist and smearing UCLA's name in the process. Read through any article here on BN about the LA Times to see how we feel about writers who do this.

Then there's Reeves Nelson; marginal talent and major a-hole, who is looking for the payday he won't be getting from the NBA not because the claims about him aren't true, but because he claims Dohrmann didn't sufficiently prove and substantiate the stories about him. That he could potentially be rewarded here with millions for being a jackass but not that big of a jackass makes me sick. Financially, the article could end up being one of the best things to ever happen to him.

So no matter who wins, UCLA and Bruin fans lose. Great country we live in.

A pox on both of your houses.