Dorrell's Playing Of Race Card Was Predictable

by Nestor on Nov 18, 2007 12:31 PM PST in Football

I hope no one here is surprised that Karl Dorrell has offically decided to play the race card before leaving UCLA. And, no, the reporters and columnists are not playing the race card for him. They are doing it because, to me, it is pretty apparent that they are being goaded to do it by Dorrell himself.

Is this the first time we have seen the hint of the race card from Dorrell? No.

Race card was evidently in play when Dorrell was hired in Westwood. Once again let's got back to Jason Whitlock's seminal article on the hiring of Dorrell (emphasis mine throughout):

But what really caught my attention and raised my skepticism was the Los Angeles Daily News' account of how and why Dorrell landed the job. Dorrell did absolutely nothing wrong. The newspaper story just made me question exactly what the UCLA athletics department was thinking.

According to the L.A. Daily News, "Dorrell is viewed as young, handsome, fit, energetic, bright and, of course, African-American."

Take out the adjective "fit" and it sounds like I could've been UCLA's new coach. I don't think Larry Coker, Frank Beamer or Ralph Friedgen were ever young and handsome or, of course, African-American.

But the L.A. Daily News quoted a source close to the search as saying, "In today's day and age, having an African-American football coach represent your university has the potential to pay incredible dividends for the university. It's a whole brand new ballgame now."

Michigan State is still waiting to collect on those incredible dividends. What, is Trent Lott proposing legislation for kickbacks to universities with young, handsome, fit, energetic, bright and, of course, African-American head football coaches?

And the L.A. Daily News story wrapped up with this valuable bit of insight: "According to a source close to the search, Dorrell, dressed in a stylish dark suit and white shirt, had an extremely impressive interview" with UCLA's chancellor.

Why not just go out and hire Denzel? He did a great job in "Remember the Titans."

I hope Dorrell can coach football. Because I'm not confident the people he'll be working for know a damn thing about football. They won't be any help. Greg Robinson should've never been a candidate. Mike Riley, the other finalist, shouldn't have been a candidate either. He's never won anywhere and, obviously, judging by the jobs he's turned down, doesn't want the responsibility of being a head coach.

The Bruins return a great deal of talent and are expected to contend for the Pac 10 title next season. I pray Dorrell didn't just step into some ... stuff. Because if he's not ready, if he's unsuccessful at UCLA, black assistant coaches will be hearing his name, not Willingham's, every time a high-profile job becomes available.

And that is the truth. Before anyone pipes up nationally on behalf of Karl Dorrell and how he has allegedly not been given a fair shake at UCLA, just think for a moment how what Dorrell is doing now will play into the minds of athletic directors around the country, when they are in position to make a decision on whether or not hire young African American head coaches. What Dorrell is doing right now will actually hurt the prospect for more African American coaches being hired in college football than helping it.

Oh, and following his hiring, Dorrell continued to hint or subtly play the race card issue a few more times before this weekend to make excuses for his below average performance as the UCLA head coach. Remember this comment to TSN's Matt Hayes leading up to 2005-06 season:

Then came the e-mails, the hurtful, embarrassing and, yes, threatening e-mails. This is what happens when the guy across town recaptures the glory and the Bruins are losing to the Fresno States and Wyomings of the world.

"If they could've hanged me," Dorrell says, "they would've."

Call me cynical. But I still don't believe it was a coincidence that Dorrell used the word "hanging" nonchalantly. He knew exactly what he was doing in making that statement. He was setting it all up for what we have seen in subsequent years. He knew he did not have the experience and the competence to be the head coach of UCLA football. And then there was this from T J Simers of the LA Times earlier this season:

Before beating Northwestern to cap a 10-2 campaign, Dorrell suggested he might never get a fair shake because of his race -- the only race concerning me, though, was the one he was losing to cross-town rival USC.

So it is amusing to see lot of people shocked that Dorrell is playing the race card.

This was just about as predictable as the performance of a Dorrell "coached" football team that underachives every season. Unfortunately, as mentioned above, Dorrell's actions will end up hurting the cause of African American coaches in college football than helping. And in the process, Karl Dorrell has done something that was unthinkable even days ago: he has shown himself to be an individual that is more shameless and selfish than Steve Lavin.

GO BRUINS.

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Desperation

The Dorrellistas have argued everything: Injuries, cleaned and pressed shirts, nice guy, 10-2!, top recruiting classes, clean program, and now the race card.

After insulting and bashing Dorrell unmercifully for 5 straight years, T.J. Simers takes a long swig from his bottle of Scotch and slurs, "Keep him."

Now this guy Streeter (who?) jumps on the bandwagon and says the program is mostly clean and they win 6 games a year (wow!) out of 10 (actually, 12 or 13), so he should be spared.

I say again, if your doctor was only successfull 57% of the time, would you keep him?

I don't care how nice Dorrell is: He is not a good coach. It's not a crime to be a bad coach. Good grief. He just should be doing something else.

Why can't the apologists recognize this? He would be better off doing something else.

by Barnes2JJ on Nov 18, 2007 12:43 PM PST reply actions

Streeter's Blog

Is becoming hilarious reading, btw. Seems that folks have pretty well sniffed him out. It's sort of turning into his own personal Utah game. Or Notre Dame '07. Or Arizona. Or Wyoming. Or Notre Dame '06. Or Fresno State. Or Florida State. Or Wazzu. Or.... (Post truncated for sanity's sake.)

by Fedup on Nov 18, 2007 12:56 PM PST reply actions

Fine, let's treat Dorrell like everyone else...

... and see what another coach did in HIS first five years at a UC school.

I wonder why Streeter, a Cal grad and former college athlete, does not compare Dorrell's record to that of Jeff Tedford's?

Maybe it's because Tedford went 43-20 his first five years, and also didn't have too many stories about his players getting arrested, or any of his assistant coaches having criminal records, or having to go through four offensive coordinators in five years.

And oh, maybe the part about Tedford winning 3 Bowl Games in 5 years, including the Holiday Bowl, contradicts Streeter's purposes.

Incredible.

I don't know how "Machiavellian" Dorrell is, simply because I haven't seen anything resembling the creativity, long-range planning, or cunning that the adjective implies.

Still, the tone taken by Streeter in his piece is incredible to me.

"Because I'm tired of it. Year after year after year after year having to choose between the lesser of 'Who cares?'"

by Meriones on Nov 18, 2007 1:02 PM PST reply actions

It's like watching a punch drunk fighter

Streeter and Co. are taking an unholy beating...on their own blog no less. There needs to be a mercy rule, a TKO declaration. I almost feel sorry for them because they can't adequately defend themselves anymore.

by Tydides on Nov 18, 2007 1:04 PM PST reply actions

Are they even trying?

By my rough approximation, I think supporting/ even-halfway supporting comments were outnumbered on his blog by 12 to 1.

Has Streeter even written a follow-up post?

"Because I'm tired of it. Year after year after year after year having to choose between the lesser of 'Who cares?'"

by Meriones on Nov 18, 2007 1:11 PM PST up reply actions

No, but he's willing to answer

His article says that he's willing to discuss these points, so obviously his idea of discussion is to remain silent as the majority tear his article, his reputation, and his fellow Dorrellistas to shreds.

by Tydides on Nov 18, 2007 1:15 PM PST up reply actions

Streeter Bailed on His Own Blog

At least so far. Pretty interesting considering his vow to respond in his post. As MSM, perhaps he think he only needs to update it once a day...

by Fedup on Nov 18, 2007 1:14 PM PST reply actions

If anyone can play the race card

its Ty Willingham. Weis has lost more games than him over 3 seasons and they gave him a 10 year deal.

by joeb @ Bruins Nation on Nov 18, 2007 1:26 PM PST reply actions

Has DD already written up their next ads?

If not, I think we need something like this:

------------------------------------------
DOESN'T UCLA DESERVE A BETTER FOOTBALL COACH?

In 2001, after its football team posted a 1-10 record, Cal hired Jeff Tedford as its new head football coach.

Five years later, Cal won a share of the Pac-10 title. In those five years, Cal had a record of 43-20 (.683), and won three out of its four Bowl Games, including the Holiday Bowl.

In 2002, after its football team posted an 8-5 record, UCLA hired Karl Dorrell as its head coach.

Almost five years later, UCLA has posted a record of 34-26 (.566), and has not finished higher than third in the Pac-10. In those five years, UCLA has also lost three out of its four Bowl Games.

DOESN'T UCLA DESERVE A BETTER FOOTBALL COACH?
-----------------------------------------

Just a thought.

"Because I'm tired of it. Year after year after year after year having to choose between the lesser of 'Who cares?'"

by Meriones on Nov 18, 2007 1:29 PM PST reply actions

So much for Mr. Nice Guy

There should never be another word uttered about what a man of character and integrity Karl Dorrell is. Implying that UCLA is racist and has treated him unfairly in order to keep his job when he's proven over 5 years that he's totally incompetent and should be fired makes me sick. It puts him in the same league as OJ Simpson - when it comes time to face the consequences for your actions, try to weasel out of it by playing the race card. If playing the race card means slandering the reputation of UCLA, so be it, if it helps you keep your job and collecting that fat-ass check.

Karl Dorrell is the opposite of a man of character and integrity. He is a man who will do or say anything to save his own ass, even if it means turning on and slandering those who gave you the chance of a lifetime.

by Tommy Bruin on Nov 18, 2007 1:32 PM PST reply actions

Karl's comments really leave a mark

I am not sure how to express the way I feel about this. I am very proud of being a Bruin and I feel somehow compromised by this really bad development. The issue at the heart of this is much bigger than football itself. This is the most discouraged I've felt in a while about following UCLA football.

I am glad you guys are doing a good job covering it and I will continue to check in and read your commentary about it here.

------ formerly bruinmikeh

by bruinduro on Nov 18, 2007 1:57 PM PST reply actions

Streeter Got What He Wanted

He used Dorrell to drive traffic to his blog.

It worked.

Unfortunately, dropping the race card hurt KD. But, I'm not sure Streeter cares. It's clear he's out for himself.

And, Dorrell was too dumb to see he was being used.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Nov 18, 2007 1:58 PM PST reply actions

Streeter isn't even a sports columnist

He has worked for the LA Times for a couple years, but before this summer wrote in the California section.

by SuperBruinMan on Nov 18, 2007 2:51 PM PST reply actions

The LA Times couldn't care less

...which way the wind blows. It's a story either way for them. I believe this what we're seeing is the standard art of "negotiating through the press."

by Fedup on Nov 18, 2007 3:08 PM PST up reply actions

Yeap

Negotiating through press and burning all bridges while at it.

by Nestor on Nov 18, 2007 3:43 PM PST up reply actions

Unbelievably so.

I'd love to know what DG thought when he read the piece over his morning coffee.

by Fedup on Nov 18, 2007 3:48 PM PST up reply actions

judging by reactions so far

Beyond BN ... In other Bruin online communities ... Lot of long term Dorrellistas were disgusted by the piece. I think if anything this will hurt KD and forever make him a toxic figure in the world of UCLA athletics. And couple of cheap wins in the remaining games will do nothing to abate the ill feelings.

by Nestor on Nov 18, 2007 3:55 PM PST up reply actions

It takes a special kind of idiot

To unite places as far apart ideologically as DumpDorrell and BN and places like BruinZone. BZ is absolutely trashing this article. Kurt Streeter is that special idiot.

by Tydides on Nov 18, 2007 4:05 PM PST up reply actions

Also

I liked how one of the now-online-homeless Dorrellistas was touting BruinZone as a place where cranks gather. The endtimes are near my friends.

by Tydides on Nov 18, 2007 4:07 PM PST up reply actions

You can almost feel a change in the wind...

From a propoganda standpoint, this has to be one of the great backfiring blunders of all time. Talk about a miscalculation. I think Streeter actually felt he'd be Dorrell's personal pied piper and lead all the 'silent supporters' out from their hiding place. Funny - they were never there in the first place, and all he did was piss everyone off.

What a year. What a situation. Maybe I'll go watch a tivo'd Ben Ball game.

by Fedup on Nov 18, 2007 5:08 PM PST up reply actions

Yeap

Streeter article is getting shredded on BRO by people who have been hardcore Dorrellistas. It gives me hope.

by Nestor on Nov 18, 2007 5:37 PM PST up reply actions

As of about 8:30 Tampa time

There were 176 posts on Streeter's blog, and 30 (17% agreed that CTS should be retained.) I'm surprised that the Dorrelistas could only get 30 posts up.

I wonder how many of the 83% were fence-sitters until CTS/Streeter played the race card?

And having Streeter as an ally is apt for CTS, because in a couple more games, he'll be a "Streeter" himself, as in "on the street" and an absolute pariah.

I am not surprised that CTS made such a stupid strategic move. He's a stupid person. And I still haven't seen any hard evidence that he actually got a degree from UCLA. The empirical evidence from his quotes in the press suggests that he could not possibly have obtained a degree from the same place where I got my undergraduate degree.

by Fox 71 on Nov 18, 2007 5:41 PM PST reply actions

Informed comment from the romper room

regarding Streeter's "nearly 6 out of 10" wins being the UCLA standard assertion, and from a professed "non anti-Dorrell camp member" no less. Lays out the level of success of UCLA coaches from Toledo back through the 1940's. The compilation of data is nothing particularly new (OI believe that DD has had the historical comparison of Dorrell with past Bruin coaches on his site for some time), but seeing someone calling out an ..."obviously uninformed ...ahem ... "writer"" that is covering KD's ass on that website is refreshing, I must say.

by bruinhoo on Nov 18, 2007 5:57 PM PST reply actions

Upon reflection

Upon reflection, I agree that Dorrell, by agreeing to have Streeter act as his agent, has now become toxic. Who would want to hire this man if the consequence is a racial diatribe if one attempts to remove him. For most athletic organizations, the answer would be not to hire him in the first place. Of course, based upon his body of work, I am unsure why anyone would consider him in the first place. I guess it says something when SDSU would not want him, but our alma mater would not only interview him but hire him. Let's hope that 5 years later with a different Administration, it has matured and will seek the best person available for the position of head coach, regardless of race and/or university from which he graduated/attended.

by Gary72 on Nov 18, 2007 6:16 PM PST reply actions

Another question

How do you think the players on the team will respond to this? Regardless of race, really. Do you think that they will be disgusted by this stunt by KD? They, of all people, know that KD is in over his head. They have played football long enough to know a fake. So, do you think they will be offended that KD is, once again, blaming others for shortcomings? If it's on the field, it's the assistants or the players. If it's off the field, it's those big bad racist people. It's never Karl. He's perfect, just like the crease in his pants.

by tasser10 on Nov 19, 2007 9:11 AM PST reply actions