Karl Now On Notice & A Little Dose Of Reality

by Nestor on Oct 30, 2007 4:03 AM PDT in Football Comment 27 comments

DG comes out and officially puts Dorrell on notice (emphasis added throughout):

Athletic Director Dan Guerrero directly addressed UCLA's inconsistent football performances for the first time Monday, mostly stating the obvious: that a Pacific 10 Conference championship and Rose Bowl berth are still within the Bruins' grasp.

But there was no ringing endorsement for Coach Karl Dorrell. Instead, Guerrero said, "I will be very interested to see how we finish the season. And you can use that."

His message seemed clear.

The Bruins have four games remaining -- three against ranked teams -- and their performance from here on out may determine whether Dorrell will remain as coach.

UCLA, which is 5-3 overall, is 4-1 in Pac-10 play and only a game behind conference leader Arizona State. The Bruins play at Arizona on Saturday, then have No. 6 Arizona State and, after an off week, No. 4 Oregon at home before finishing up with No. 13 USC at the Coliseum.

More on DG’s message for Dorrell from Brian Dohn:

Two days after UCLA lost 27-7 at Washington State, Guerrero was predictably vague in discussing Dorrell's status, particularly since the Bruins (5-3, 4-1 Pac-10) are in second place in the Pacific-10 Conference, and are still in control of their own destiny in regards to the league title.

"The weekend in Pullman (Wash.) was difficult for us," Guerrero said. "We are all disappointed with the performance and with the outcome of that game, but the reality is we still have our destiny in our hands. We have four tough games, two on the road, two at home, and obviously we're going to need to perform at a high level to win those football games.

If you want to read between lines, one could interpret as DG notifying Dorrell that he will need to pack up his belongings if he doesn’t deliver UCLA’s first Pac-10 title since 1998.

Here is how I see things shaping up from a practical point of view:

0-4: Lose all four games, Dorrell is gone
1-3: Lose 3 out of 4, Dorrell is gone even if that sole victory comes against Southern Cal or Oregon.
2-2: I think Dorrell is still gone with a .500 record. A 7-5 record will generate enough heat on Guerrerro and Dorrell, that DG will not be able to sustain the pressure and fired KD.
3-1: This is where things start getting dicey. If UCLA finishes 8-4 this season, and if that includes a victory against Southern Cal, we could be in the proverbial gray area in terms of whether or not DG will fire KD. Of course everyone here will be in total agreement that KD will need to go. But it may not be as clear cut case for DG if we finish the season winning 3 out of our last 4 games. Then again if that sole loss is a blowout loss, that changes the equation against Dorrell as well.
4-0: DG will have a hard time firing any coach who has won the Pac-10 championship. That’s a fact we have to live with.

The idea of a doofus like Dorrell wrecking our program for another year is not a pleasant note. But that’s the reality we are staring at right now.

For his part here is what the Doofus had to say:

"It doesn't affect me because I don't directly deal with that," Dorrell said. "I'm not a participant on all the things that are out there, (like) reading everything. I am really focused on what I have to continue to work on and try to accomplish this year (with this) football team.

Uh yeah. Whatever Karl. Keep saying your sweet nothings. And by the way Bell’s injury (which I will maintain could have been averted if he wasn’t allowed back into the game after he was helped off the field) will not be an excuse for rest of the season.

So the bottom line is Karl is now officially on notice. The more UCLA wins rest of the season, the more chances get higher for Dorrell to survive at least one more season to completely destroy UCLA football, just like Lavin did in his last season.

I hate Karl Dorrell for putting all of us in this position in Bruin Nation.

He deserves zero sympathy for sucking total life out of UCLA football.

So don’t think about feeling sorry for a loser like him.

GO BRUINS.

0 recs | Comment 27 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

We could make history

This Bruin team could indeed make history. We could put an end to the current BCS system, and get a playoff instituted.

We are like the last place team in some low level conference that wins its tournament and gets into the NCAA's, and then knocks off a number one seed. That has to be TV's worst nightmare - when it's revenue-generating number one seed gets taken out.

If we win out, we will have ruined one BCS bowl game for TV, and that might mean a change in the way things work.

And yes, I'll be watching the Bruins in a BCS bowl this year with Jessica Alba.

by Fox 71 on Oct 30, 2007 4:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Close

That team you mentioned:

was coached by Steve Lavin.

by Nestor on Oct 30, 2007 4:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed on both counts.

This is a perfect post, and Nestor's response was also perfect. UCLA is such a comedy right now, I find myself laughing.

And by the way, there ain't a snowball's chance in hell that we are going 4-0. If we win two games, that would be a miracle. I think there is a 60% chance we lose this week.

Finally, here is a stat my buddy passed along, a stat which he heard on the radio Sunday night from some guy named Greg Roberts. The last 14 times UCLA was favored on the road, not only did they not cover, they lost the game. hmmm, maybe a coaching change is in order.

by rfirpo on Oct 30, 2007 8:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Greg Roberts is wrong

In just this season alone (Stanford & Oregon St.), KD has won a road game as the favorite.

by McCloskey on Oct 30, 2007 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

There are plenty of good reasons to can KD

We don't need to start spreading obviously false ones; it undermines the case.

by McCloskey on Oct 30, 2007 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great point on the stat

it seems so obviously untrue now. I'll see if I can't track down the correct stat. And this could be my friend screwing up, as opposed to Greg Roberts.

by rfirpo on Oct 30, 2007 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oops - rookie mistake

It's is not the same as its, no matter what trOJans think.

by Fox 71 on Oct 30, 2007 4:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Can't find it.

I looked. I can't find anything to indicate that anyone in the MSM said, "Hey, Dan, a couple of follow up questions. You said you would be interested to see how we finish the season. Does that mean you were not interested in how we started? Just kidding, of course. My real follow up question is obvious - what exactly do you mean?"

It reminds me of the phrase that came up during Watergate. (I don't think that bit of Geezerology needs to get explained to the kids, do you '66?) Somehow it got out that the Nixon White House loved the phrase "non-denial denial." Guerrero with his powerful "and you can use that" (probably with fist pounding on table) gave a dramatic "non-statement statement."

Just exactly what is it that we can use, Danny? That you're interested in football? Well, to an extent, that's news, because you have shown no interest in football since you signed His Clownship back in 2002 and began the Reign of Error. And you can use that! (I pounded my fist, then pulled my glasses off. I get stirred emotionally when I use two figures of speech in the same sentence. Sorry, I have to take a moment to regain my composure.)

by Fox 71 on Oct 30, 2007 5:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Here's what concerns me

N is correct that DG has emphasized the last four games of the season.

I think most everyone on BN wants Dorrell out now, no matter if we win the rest of the games. (I know, I know, there are always a few Dorrellistas out there squeaking, "We can still win the Pac 10, we can still win the Pac 10"). We have seen enough to know that, in what should have been our Perfect Season, Dorrell will find many ways to screw it up. It's only going to get worse next year.

I know this is blasphemy, but if there is any chance that Dorrell can save his job at this point (and it appears, from DG's comments, that there is), then I will not be disappointed if we lose the rest of our games. Just don't lose to the Suc.

by Barnes2JJ on Oct 30, 2007 5:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

"We control our own Destiny"?

We are only in a position to win the Pac 10 title because OTHER teams have lost games they should have won.

To truly control your own destiny, you win all of your games -- you don't count on subpar performances by other teams.

To truly control your own destiny, you "fire out" (hear that CAD) from the very first down of the season to the very last.

To truly control your own destiny, you have a game plan for EVERY game you play -- a plan tailored by the coaches to counter the other teams' strengths.

CAD is buying into the "our season is the next 4 games" crap that CTS loves to spout.

Sorry, but, my season started 8 games ago. I've had to sit through 3 of the worst, most inexplicable, most humiliating losses in Bruin history -- and some of the ugliest wins possible.

Here's a simple question CAD -- Before this season started, would you have proferred a standard that set the goal at: Play inconsistent, uninspired football for the first 8 games; lose to three doormat teams; play poorly in your wins; play without directon, consistency or passion. And, hope that the other teams in the conference lose games they should win.

I thought the standard was -- with this talent and this experience -- go into the sc game undefeated, a top 10 team, and competing for high national ranking.

I thought the goal was to stay close to the top 10 all season long -- not to drop from the rankings only to become the subject of laughter and derision.

If you would not lower the bar at the beginning of the season, why will you lower it now?

We have done everything we can to destroy this season. The fact that we are still in the Pac 10 race has nothing to do with the fact that we are controlling our own destiny and everything to do with the fact that we have been extremely lucky that THINGS OUT OF OUR CONTROL have put us in this position.

Does a failing business man who has run his business into the ground and is on the brink of financial disaster CONTROL HIS OWN DESTINY because he has purchased a lottery ticket?

If somehow, that wise investment in the ticket pays off, does that make us say -- "Gee, I don't care what his books look like, I don't care about the total history of the business, he's solvent now and that means he is and WAS a good businessman"?

We are where we are because of "chance" occurrences. We have not played ourselves to the top. We have lucked ourselves there.

"Control our own destiny"?. What a bunch of meaningless crap.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Oct 30, 2007 5:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Control Destiny?

DUH-rell is in the same position as the guy who just drove his car off the cliff. He hasn't hit the ground yet; he can still turn the wheel, he can put the brakes on, he can honk the horn, so in that sense, I guess you can say that he's in control. In reality, though, it's already over, he's just along for the ride down now, and it's going to be ugly at the end.

by Tommy Bruin on Oct 30, 2007 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

AD DG's comments on UCLA's football season.

I'm surprised that Dan Guerrero's response to this question.
Why rise to the bait & respond.
He has the end of the season to make an evaluation. It seems to me to be unprofessional.
Just an opinion.
No excuse for the loss at Wasu, or for that matter the losses to Utah & ND.
But DG should be above answering to speculations.
Just an opinion.

by jim masterson on Oct 30, 2007 6:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I disagree, Jim

I don't think the CAD could afford to continue to make it appear that he is unaware of the football situation. He knows what happened to the athletic director at Nebraska. We also assume he is a professional and is interested in doing his job, which is to direct the athletic programs at UCLA. Our major revenue producing program, and the only one really visible at the moment (sorry, Rye and Jaffa, but you may be the only two guys with passion for soccer and water polo, but that's just the way it is) is foundering. I think he had to say something because there was a lot of talk about how his job was in jeopardy because he was taking no action about football.

That, by the way, is the only positive I take from his non-statement statement. I think he's hearing what's being said in the blogosphere.

I'm just disappointed that the MSM didn't pin him down just a little.

by Fox 71 on Oct 30, 2007 6:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In essence, WSU,ND,Utah losses

mean nothing if KD manages to eke out a Pac10 title, even a shared title. This is what I have been fearing all along...it is near impossible to eradicate roaches like Lavin and KD.

by bluegold on Oct 30, 2007 6:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Now more than ever

We need to ramp up the pressure even more on DG.

If Dorrell is the head coach past 12/3, DG will need to get fired.

by bluestreet on Oct 30, 2007 6:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Amen, brother

by Fox 71 on Oct 30, 2007 7:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bingo

You nailed it.

by Barnes2JJ on Oct 30, 2007 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not all that comforted

by DGs words at this point. I understand he's being vague and noncommittal, but what concerns me is that he seems to indicate that KD has the ability to vindicate himself and "right the ship" in the last 4 weeks, instead of having his mind already made up.

I would've much rather him say "I won't tolerate mediocrity" or "I have very high expectations and we are not living up to those expectations"

I think we can also put to rest any notion of DG firing Dorrell before the end of the season.

Lastly, it is not hard for me to envision 2-2 (7-5) being good enough to save his job; especially if those wins are "feel good" wins (like against SUC or a BCS championship-bound Oregon or ASU).

Be very afraid, my friends, be very afraid.

"If I don't do my job, I will get fired" -Karl Dorrell

by godblesstyus95 on Oct 30, 2007 8:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

or

he could have not provided any comments and let Karl dangle.

by bluestreet on Oct 30, 2007 8:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think that DG

finally commenting on the situation helps. He basically (IMO) is saying that a Pac 10 championship (or share of it) is NEEDED to save KD's job. Because it is still mathmatically possible - he needs to make a comment on the 1% chance that KD wins out. And as much as we all hate KD - I just don't see anyone getting canned after winning the conference. The key word however is "mathmatically" - hell, my beloved Rams are still mathmatically alive at 0-8.

Realistically, however, there is no way I see this team going 4-0 or even 3-1. I think 2-2 or worse seals it depending on how bad the losses are. And if history repeats itself - KD doesn't lose close, he loses by big, wide margins. That should also help in showing DG that our DC isn't head coach ready...

by gorams77 on Oct 30, 2007 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, gorams

you have a good point. Make sure you have Jessica Alba back home early after your party to celebrate the Rams winning the conference, because she and I have a date to celebrate the Bruins winning the Pac 10. It's mathematically possible, I suppose.

by Fox 71 on Oct 30, 2007 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I got a diff take

I would love nothing more than to get rid of KD right now but I believe DG is strategically being as vague as possible. However, "you can use that" speaks volumes to me. I took it as a sneaky jab against KD that an upper-cut is coming and a little hint to the long suffering Bruin fans that he is aware of the situation. DG coming outright using strong definitive statements would do nothing but undermine UCLA football as a whole in all facets. Or I could be smoking some good stuff.

by BlueReign on Oct 30, 2007 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mantra

Well coached teams do not lose to Utah, ND and WSU and then beat Cal, ASU, Orgegon and $C. Why does DG have to wait until the end of the season to see that?

The time for DG to make a new installation is now.

by Bruin77 on Oct 30, 2007 8:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

If Karl Dorrell bothered to read what his critics have been saying about him for the last four years on the internet, he might have picked up on some relevant coaching basics like... oh, I don't know... telling his receivers to stand past the first down marker when they catch the ball.

by kevinthebruin on Oct 30, 2007 9:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Amen to that. I was annoyed to no end watching

the Wazzu game and yelled at the set "Why do the Wazzu receivers cathc the ball BEYOND the first down marker and Bruin receivers stand and catch the ball at least 2 yardw BEHIND the marker? The difference was Wazzu getting repeated first downs while the Bruins repeatedly punted.

Not to mention the repeated dropped passes. How is it Bruin receivers can't get the basics of holding on to the ball?

by bruinhawk on Oct 30, 2007 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's all in the coaching

The receiver coach is busy burgularizing apartments in Norwalk, how can you expect him to teach the receivers things like catching the ball or what to do on third down?

by Tommy Bruin on Oct 30, 2007 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I see your point. The receivers coach really

should be the defensive backs coach. His experience is better suited for teaching the team how to pick off passes and stripping the ball. In short, how to "steal" from the opponents : )

by bruinhawk on Oct 30, 2007 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs