Mandel, Sweet Mandel

by tasser10 on Nov 14, 2007 12:30 PM PST Comment 8 comments

We here are often harsh on writers in the MSM, who often write without doing any research and never ask tough questions. Stewart Mandel is not always right, but he is often far more knowledgeable about the game than a lot of other writers. This week, in his Mailbag, he has a couple of gems.

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.

It was great meeting you last week at your book signing for Fiesta Bowl volunteers. However, I must admit some disappointment. I was shocked to see Arizona State on the short end of your "Upset Special" pick last week. Never mind that UCLA was coming off two straight losses, but just two days earlier you were on Arizona soil! Being so close to Tempe, did you truly not hear the heartbeat of a team that knows not the meaning of the word "quit?" [...]
--Ari Spiro, Phoenix

[...]

But yeah, I did bomb on that Upset Special. I was convinced that the aforementioned Dorrell was going to pull off one last out-of-nowhere upset before he leaves town. (And of course, he still could, so beware, Oregon and USC.)
A few things here:

- Aside from earning a paycheck that he does not deserve, Toast is now directly costing UCLA AND the Pac-10 revenue that would otherwise come from going to a bowl game.

- So, so, so very sad that UCLA is now relegated to pulling an "out-of-nowhere" upset when it comes to potentially beating Arizona State. How low we have sunk my friends.

- "before he leaves town"...I hope it is as foregone a conclusion as Mandel makes it out to be.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 8 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

How sad

The entire nation sees what a pathetic joke of a football program we are, and what a joke of a head coach we have. Yet there are still Bruin fans out there that say we need to give him another year.

by NickBruin on Nov 14, 2007 1:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

BUT THE RECRUITS

THEY WILL LEAVE!!

Every argument ever based on keeping him is rooted in the future, as if these people are Miss Cleo or something. All evidence based on the past and present point to a horrible coach that needs to be fired.

by Tydides on Nov 14, 2007 1:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I almost prefer

the argument that Dorrell is well-dressed and therefore should stay versus the recruits argument.

Yes, we may have a very good recruiting class coming in next year. Ok, fine. However, number one, these guys are freshmen. Most freshmen are not superstars, let alone starters, let alone second-stringers. Number two, Dorrell and his staff have not exactly produced a wealth of NFL talent. In other words, you can have the greatest recruits in the world but it's what you do with them that really matters.

The bottom line is this: We could go 0-12 and the Dorrellistas would still clamor to give Dorrell another chance. Nothing will change their minds.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 14, 2007 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That's a great line by Mandel

Certainly it is true in this case. Had we beaten a pathetic Notre Dame team we would be filling one of those bowl spots.

That being said, much of the reason why the
Pac-10 can't fill its bowl tie-ins relates to the fact that every team in every other conference added a nonconference game against the likes of Louisiana Tech while Pac-10 teams added a conference game. Instead of every team getting an extra win, only 1/2 of our teams do. If WSU had replaced its game against USC with a game against Idaho, WSU would probably be bowl eligible. For example.

People in the media do not recognize this major difference between the Pac-10 and other leagues. It's not surprising that the general public also misses the point.

by BruinsRule on Nov 14, 2007 1:45 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Someone has noted the extra conference game

and its effect on Pac-10 teams. I believe it was/is Brian of Mgoblog (purveor of the Blogpoll as voted upon by BN and DD), who finds Pac-10 teams undervalued by 0.5 win as a result.

Sadly but not surprisingly, the MSM has not the power of logical reasoning to make the same finding.

by bruinhoo on Nov 14, 2007 1:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Undervalued is right

The 0.5 fewer wins means 0.5 more losses. The additional 1/2 loss hurts the conference in national polls, which (though I haven't done the statistical analysis to prove this) are largely a function of pre-season ranking and number of losses.

by BruinsRule on Nov 14, 2007 3:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks Rule

I never even thought about this.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Nov 14, 2007 6:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Great catch tasser

Mandel has been great this year. From his observations on Dorrell to one of the few MSM reporters beside Yahoo Sports reporters covering Bush gate. He is doing great work.

by Nestor on Nov 14, 2007 3:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs