Dorrell's 5-Year Record: Little More Than a Flip of a Coin

by Meriones on Nov 6, 2007 1:15 PM PST in Football

Just wanted to follow-up on both Achilles' recent post on Keisser's Press-Telegram column and bluestreet's response to Simers' latest Page 2 piece.

Exactly how this would happen I have NO idea, but just for sake of argument, let's assume that this year's CTS-run team manages to eke out a single win out of its last 3 games, all of which are against ranked teams, and ends the year at 6-6. Thus, by the sheer, almighty grace of Heaven, CTS' record would be this:

2003 -- 6-7 (L - Silicon Valley Bowl)
2004 -- 6-6 (L - Las Vegas Bowl)
2005 -- 10-2 (W - Sun Bowl)
2006 -- 7-6 (L - Emerald Bowl)
2007 -- 6-6 (hypothetical, not counting Bowl Game)
TOTAL: 35-27, or 56.45%.

Flip a coin, and you have a 50% chance of it coming up heads or tails. A 1 in 2 chance.

After 5 years with CTS, it's still not all-that-much better than a coin flip (i.e. a 1 in 2 chance) as to whether a CTS team is going to win or not. Take out 2005, and it's exactly that. 25 and 25. A freaking coin flip.

By contrast, compare CTS' first 5 years to the 5-year records of some other Pac-10 coaches:

U$C -- Carroll -- 54-10 = 84.38%.
Better than a 5 out of 6 chance.

Cal -- Tedford -- 43-20 = 68.25%.
Better than 2 out of 3.

Oregon -- Bellotti -- 39-20 = 66.10%.
Just a hair under 2 out of 3.

UCLA -- Toledo -- 35-23 = 60.34%
Just about 3 out of 5.

Even Toledo was more likely to win during his first 5 years than CTS. I'm not saying that 60% SHOULD be the baseline, but come ON.

Just winning at Coach Bellotti's level means winning an average of 8 out of 12 games every year. If in one year you get 10 wins, you may have a 6-win year to balance it out. Still, I wouldn't mind THAT kind of spread: heads, you go to Vegas; tails, you might win the Pac-10.

Under CTS, however, we've had ONE 10-win season for THREE 6 or 7-win seasons. At the rate we're going, we'll be LUCKY to make it one 10-win season against FOUR 6-win seasons.

I think the AD's office was perfectly fair to give CTS 4+ years, just as I think that the evidence is now clear enough.

By the Humanitarian's 5th year, $C had tied for 1st his second year, and won it outright THREE TIMES thereafter (and this was all after a 1st season of 6-6, capped by a loss in the Vegas Bowl.).

In Tedford's 5th year, Cal at least TIED for 1st.

On his best day, CTS hasn't finished a season better than THIRD.

I hate seeing any man or woman fired, but at this point, I would like to see a BETTER coach HIRED...

... without taking any wooden nickels in the process.

Tweet Comment 55 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Something for McCloskey to look up?

In CTS's 5 years at UCLA, we have never finished in the top-2 in the Pac-10. That joke "10 win" season was only good enough for a 3rd place finish.

When was the last time a UCLA coach has a 4-5 year stretch w/o a top-2 finish in the Pac-10?

by bluestreet on Nov 6, 2007 1:30 PM PST reply actions

Found it!

Never in the Pac-8/10 era, but William Spaulding's teams finished outside of the PCC top-2 from 1928-34. Of note, 1928 was the year that UCLA joined the PCC, the first conference affiliation for the university's athletic teams.

by bruinhoo on Nov 6, 2007 2:09 PM PST up reply actions

Huh

Good stuff hoop. So in other words,

In the modern history of Pac-8/10 era no UCLA head coach has ever gone through a 4 year period without finishing in the top 2 spots in our conference until the Dorrell started started in 2002

Is that accurate? If it is, seems like a big deal to me.

When did PCC become Pac-8?

by bluestreet on Nov 6, 2007 2:14 PM PST up reply actions

When you put it like that...

... CTS REALLY looks like Lavin.

Yeesh.

"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 6, 2007 2:15 PM PST up reply actions

Should be accurate

went through the year-by-year results in the media guide, which list UCLA's conference finish for each year. Assuming the media guide is correct, this is accurate.

Toledo did not have a top-2 finish in his final 4 years (1999-2002). After Toledo, and Dorrell's current run, in no other period has this been true since 1934, no matter how many coaches led the team in a period of time.

by bruinhoo on Nov 6, 2007 2:22 PM PST up reply actions

Aaah

Forgot about the last four Toledo years. That undercuts my point I think.

by bluestreet on Nov 6, 2007 2:25 PM PST up reply actions

Not if you make it a 5 year stretch under a coach.

by bornagainbruin on Nov 6, 2007 3:48 PM PST up reply actions

I know this isn't advanced mathematics, but..

Combine Toledo's last 4 years and CTS 5-year debacle (barring a miraculous finishing stretch), and we have NINE consecutive years without finishing either 1 or 2 in conference. NINE YEARS!

It's mind boggling that such a wonderful athletic program would put up with such mediocrity for so long.

by Herschy on Nov 7, 2007 11:19 AM PST up reply actions

PCC

The PCC lasted until 1958. Due to issues between conference members that I don't know off hand, UCLA and several other PCC members formed the AAWU, which lasted from 1959-1967. Pac-8 was formed in 1968.

by bruinhoo on Nov 6, 2007 2:25 PM PST up reply actions

That's correct

Here a listing of each coaches conference finishes (2nd place or better) in his first 5 years, sorted by best finish:
Spaulding
no top 2 finishes

Horrell
1st, 2nd

LaBrucherie(4 year term)
1st

Sanders
1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd,

Barnes
1st, 1st,

Prothro
1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd

Rodgers (3 year term)
2nd, 2nd

Vermeil (2 year term)
1st,

Donahue
2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd

Toledo
1st, 1st

Dorrell
No top 2 finishes

Since Spaulding, every coach (with at least five years) has finished in the top 2 twice in his first five years... Except KD, who has never done it.

And the conference has been:
1916-1958 PCC
1959-1967 AAWU
1965-1977 Pac-8
1978-current Pac-10

by McCloskey on Nov 6, 2007 2:41 PM PST up reply actions

Perfect

by bluestreet on Nov 6, 2007 3:51 PM PST up reply actions

McCloskey never ceases to amaze me

If I'm on the "Millionaire" game, I want to take McCloskey's phone number with me.

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2007 5:53 PM PST up reply actions

This gem from McCloskey needs to get added

to the list of 19 things. Every Bruin coach since 1932 has had at least two finishes of first or second in the conference in his first five years except CTS.

by Fox 71 on Nov 7, 2007 4:40 AM PST up reply actions

Regardless of coach

before the current stretch dating from the Toledo era (1999-), at no time did UCLA go more than 3 consecutive seasons without finishing 1st or 2nd in conference since the before-mentioned period under Spaulding.

by bruinhoo on Nov 6, 2007 2:17 PM PST up reply actions

Actually

if you flip a coin it could end up on its edge making it a less than 50% chance of heads or tails.

by joeb @ Bruins Nation on Nov 6, 2007 1:36 PM PST reply actions

Meriones if the Bruins win the last three

won't they be 8-4 not 6-6?

by cv on Nov 6, 2007 2:05 PM PST reply actions

Meriones never mind i just re-read your post

Doh

by cv on Nov 6, 2007 2:07 PM PST up reply actions

No problem, I'll clarify it.

Thanks.

"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 6, 2007 2:09 PM PST up reply actions

While We're Comparing...

Donahue's record for his first five years was 38-17-2 (.684) similar to Tedford. Now I know some will want to tear me a new one for the mention of his name, but those are the numbers.

by Calchas on Nov 6, 2007 2:18 PM PST reply actions

Uhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmm

Donahue took over a UCLA football program that had just won the Rose Bowl beating a Woody Hayes Buckeyes team, and had its superstar coach off to the Eagles.

Tedford took over a joke Cal program that won 1 game the year before he took it over.

I think there was a bit difference in their respective "situations."

by bluestreet on Nov 6, 2007 2:21 PM PST up reply actions

In any event, one thing is clear.

CTS' winning percentage during his first five years is less than BOTH that of Tedford AND Teflon Terry.

Let's face it -- after nearly 5 years, are any of us really comfortable that UCLA will likely win any given game?

Are any of us confident that a CTS-coached team is a well-prepared, well-motivated, well-practiced, well-coached team?

That's the question that we've all answered already.

"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 6, 2007 2:28 PM PST up reply actions

Then I'll get ripped, too

His first game was on the road against Number One Arizona State, which we won. I thought things were going to be pretty good at that point.

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2007 2:23 PM PST up reply actions

"Teflon Terry"

Not only beat #1 ASU in Tempe in his first freakin' game, he went into Columbus the same year and Tied a Woody Hayes Buckeye team in year one.

Oh, and he pulled this off with a QB who had spent prodigious time riding the pine for two plus Seasons under Rodgers/Vermiel (who only stayed two years).

Oh,and Bluestreet, before anointing Vermiel (who did I mention only stayed 2 seasons before bolting to the NFL?) please remember that his same Bruin bunch dumped one to Ohio State at home in the same season, and lost to an absolutely sucky Husky squad at home that same season ('75). Not trying to say that TD inherited a Holmoe-esque program (a la Tedford), but he racked up some good numbers and some big wins in his first few years. Unlike, ahem, the current occupant of the HC's office.

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 6, 2007 2:46 PM PST up reply actions

FYI the QB who rode the bench actually had to

start the second half of the '74 season as starter John Sciarra had his leg broken in the Cal game. He was Jeff Dankworth who was a mediocre talent at best. HE led the Bruins for the entire '76 season which still featured the triple option. His performance against 'SC in '74 and '76 led ti almost identical blowouts.

Sciarra came back for the '75 season, which besides the losses you mentioned also included a tie with lowly Air Force. He did redeem himself with a wacky high turnover (11 fumbles) win against 'SC and upsetting the Buckeyes in the Rose Bowl.

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 3:10 PM PST up reply actions

And he tied Woody Haye's Buckeyes in Ohio

actually using a fake punt to keep a drive alive! Pretty good for a rookie coach.

His Bruins were even favored to beat John Robinson's (his rookie season)'SC team IRCC and they came in too overconfident getting blown out and looking bad in the process.

The Bruins morale was shot having to go play Bear Bryant's Alabama in the Liberty Bowl when they had expected to be playing in the Rose Bowl for a second year in a row.

I knew Donahue just might not be a top coach when the pathetic Bruins got smeared by a sharp Alabama team that night, and scored its only touchdown, (and couldn't even convert the PAT) in the 4th quarter when the game was already out of reach.

Donahue didn't really deliver as a coach until the 82 season and peaked with Troy Aikman in 87-88.

CTS doesn't even approach the underachieving Donahue's accomplishments. I'd hate to think what the program would look like after 20 seasons under CTS. Five years has been too long.

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 3:02 PM PST up reply actions

the 1976 $C was tone-setter for the Donahue era

IYR, Theotis "bigfoot" (father of Trey) Brown was rumbling up the middle on a pretty good gainer when his ball-carrying elbow whacked into the back of one of his own players, knocking the ball into the air and right into the arms of Dennis Thurman. Thurman caught it in full stride (only a mid air fumble recovery could be returned by the D in those days) and flanked by two trOJans, he bounded into the end zone for the first score. Kinda shocked the Bruins under the circumstances.

The team scored 2 4th quarter TDs to make it respectable, but not close. The following year included the Johnny Lynn Pass-interference-that-wasn't in the waning minutes of the 4th quarter, with UCLA clinging to a 27-26 lead. New life on the flag for the trOJans, a field goal from Frank Jordan (?) and wham-o, Donahue was off to an 0-2 start against the trOJans, scratching his head and feeling almost cursed.

Quirkly things continued to happen in the rivalry to snatch Bruin defeat from the jaws of Victory. Such as Achica's FG block in '81 (a chip shot for Norm Johnson), or Eric Ball's goal line fumble in '85 (he did kinda redeem himself five weeks later in the '86 Rose Bowl, tho. That crappy non-call of facemasking by Rodney Peete on Eric turner, who picked off a Peete pass in the end Zone and was on the way to a 100 yard TD int return when grabbed at the end of the 1st half, coupled with Affholter's juggling "catch" at the end of the same game in '87. Alfredo Velasco bouncing a FG off the cross bar for a would be game winning total in '89's tie game.

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 6, 2007 3:25 PM PST up reply actions

You know it - funny thing is what happened to

bigfoot, IIRC, also happened to Wendell Tyler(I think) in the '74 "SC game! In both games the Bruins could have won the conference title by beating 'SC. I recall the Bruins keeping the score close as the end of the first half and were in 'SC territory when those freak funbles happened. After that, it was all 'SC in '74 as well as '76. And so goes the Donahue era, sometimes fun, usually frustrating, especially when he lost games to 'SC when he was favored to win! Come to think of it, Donahues wins against the Trojans usually came when the Bruins were underdogs.

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 3:38 PM PST up reply actions

Hawk - sure about the year?

1974 was kind of a crappy year for the Bruins in the game. Think the final was 34-9. IIRC, the only Bruin TD was right near end of the first half, and "Batman" Woods blocked the PAT . . . .

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 6, 2007 3:45 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah I know - I'm sure I'm right about the

fumbles. I was at both games and it was just amazing to me to witness in '76 the same freaky fumble that happened in '74 and forever changed the momentum of both games.

I'd have to say it would have been equally shocking if the Bruins HAD beaten the Trojans in '74. They were loaded with talent.

'74 was indeed a crummy year for the Bruins. But not as crummy as this year - so far.

CTS, at least has 3, perhaps 4 to make this a better year than '74.

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 3:54 PM PST up reply actions

At least 3 to 4 GAMES, that is...

despite the outcome of this season, I expect the outgo of CTS. Hopefully.

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 3:56 PM PST up reply actions

P.S. - as crummy as '74 was for the Bruins, who

finished the season 6-3-2, they were still playing 'SC for a share of the conference title, and gone to the Rose Bowl had they beaten the Trojans. Both UCLA and 'SC WOULD have finished PAC-8 play with identical 5-1-1 records had the Bruins won. Cal had tied 'SC that season.

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 4:03 PM PST up reply actions

Also, remember in '80 that tipped pass by

'SC's Jeff Fisher into Freeman McNeals hands that got Donahue his first win against the Trojans after 4 consecutive losses. Considering that the Bruins were ranked #2 and poised for a national championship midseason, only to lose back to back to AZ and Oregon, that win probably saved Donahue's job. Losing a 5th consecutive game to 'SC and TD wouldn't be the Bruin legend he is today:)

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 3:47 PM PST up reply actions

Alfredo Velasco...

... and I dated two girls who were roommates back in '86. Something else goofy WRT his crossbar kick in '89, it was a long field goal try made longer by a running play loss on third down that was supposed to set up the FG (rather than taking one last shot at the end zone). We were underdogs that day, came in at 3-7 iirc.

by haywood nighttrain on Nov 6, 2007 5:31 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah yeah.

A $uC fumble near the goal line, and a Bret Johnson to Scott Miller pass on the first offensive play put the ball near midfield in the closing minutes, you could hear the crickets from the $uC seats.

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 7, 2007 5:58 AM PST up reply actions

thank you

Sean Wills, for that 3-yard loss on third down, he ran into the line and then tried to bounce it outside.

I had no idea what happened when Velasco kicked the ball, as the seats we had in the Coliseum were so far from the action you needed a telescope to figure out what was going on.

by ucladj89 on Nov 7, 2007 9:13 AM PST up reply actions

hey, dj, I know those seats . . .

I was sitting in them for the beginning of end of the doughboy (Toledo) era - 27 - 0 against $uC in '01.

Never understood why DeS Foster got suspended 5 games for driving someone else's SUV, but not even a handslap for Paus for concealing 2 DWI's.

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 7, 2007 9:32 AM PST up reply actions

if you were in the same seats

you should have been IIRC somewhat close to the Poli-Dixon missed reception that turned into a pick 6 because he gave up on the ball when it went through his hands. What a horrible end to such a promising season!

by ucladj89 on Nov 9, 2007 10:33 AM PST up reply actions

Not To Correct Your Geezer Memory

but I beleive ASU was #2 in Donahue's first game. Nebraska was #1 in the opening game of 1972 when the Mark Harmon lead Bruins upset them 20-17.

by Bruin77 on Nov 6, 2007 4:39 PM PST up reply actions

ASU was No. 1 according to someone

Maybe it was Sports Illustrated.

Also, someone mentioned the 11 fumble game. I remember that one. It was dreadfully cold and windy. I have never been so cold outside of Arrowhead Stadium in mid-winter. Anyway, we fumbled 11 times, lost 8 of them, but won 26-22. That was an exciting game.

by Fox 71 on Nov 6, 2007 6:03 PM PST up reply actions

"not so fast my friend"

(oh Gawd, I'm quoting Corso)

It was 25-22, Fox. It was colder than Barbara Bush's . . . anything.

I remember vividly being hit with a bombardment of vintage trOJan bullsh*t about McKay's bunch (it was his last season) being in close enough for the tying FG toward the end, but, "We're $C, we don't go for the tie, we play to win." blah blah blah.

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 7, 2007 5:54 AM PST up reply actions

OK, Brother Corso

It looks like the game was more exciting than I remembered.

I also remember there was a huge crowd in the mens room because that was the only place it was warm. The Crapaseum ran out of coffee cups. They had coffee that they wouldn't serve because they didn't have cups, even if your brought your own cup back. I'm getting cold again just thinking about that game.

by Fox 71 on Nov 7, 2007 6:57 AM PST up reply actions

Yeah, I was sitting in the last row above the

student section, standing practically the whole second half doing my best to stay warm. It was so windy it played havoc with the Mausoleum thermometer. Kept glancing at it as it swung back and forth like a windshield wiper. Never knew it could get so cold in Southern Cal.

As I recall McCay shunned going for a FG as the Trojans got into Bruin territory as the game ended. Story goes he didn't want to end his career with a TIE to the Bruins. It was going to be win or lose. Happily 'SC lost.:)

by bruinhawk on Nov 7, 2007 7:42 AM PST up reply actions

It was either the thermometer or the clock

whichever is on the press box side. It was really flipping back and forth. I was kind of hoping it would come off and hit me and put me out of my misery. No one expected it to be so freakin' cold, and everyone was wearing short sleeved shirts.

by Fox 71 on Nov 7, 2007 12:30 PM PST up reply actions

whoa there, sonny . . .

who're you callin' a "geezer?" Not quite past the half-century mark (yet). Go shovel dirt onto somebody else, please!

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 7, 2007 9:39 AM PST up reply actions

There's nothing wroing with being a Geezer

I just got back from playing golf. It's my tune up round for playing golf tomorrow. Then off to rehearsal with all the young, pretty choristers. Being a geezer has its benefits.

by Fox 71 on Nov 7, 2007 12:27 PM PST up reply actions

Fair point, although...

... if you count it as purely percentage of his total games that ended in WINS, then TD won 38 out of 57, for a 66.7% winning percentage.

68.4% would be 39 out of 57, so you probably just missed a button or something.

"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 6, 2007 2:25 PM PST up reply actions

pct calc

M,
To factor in ties, I believe you give 2 pts for a win, 1 pt for a tie, 0 pts for a loss. Divide the total by the potential max (2 x the number of games played.) If I'm wrong on this, let me know.

Valid point earlier re: Teford; Vermeil had key seniors in '75, but hardly left the cupboard bare.

by Calchas on Nov 6, 2007 2:39 PM PST up reply actions

Ahhh, I had not realized that...

Thanks. Admittedly, I think I've only seen that point system used in NHL box scores, but I will gladly concede that that's a valid possible way of adding it up. I stand (well, actually sit) corrected.

"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 6, 2007 2:43 PM PST up reply actions

It's how the NCAA does it

A record of 19-0-1 is not a winning percentage of 1.000
It's .975

by McCloskey on Nov 6, 2007 3:11 PM PST up reply actions

Thanks for the info.

Guess I'm one of thsoe younguns who don't know squat about ties in football... "'TIE?' What do ya mean, 'TIE?'" :lol:

"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 6, 2007 3:21 PM PST up reply actions

OT not introduced until '96

And let me explain about the "defense cannot advance a fumble" rule, too. Don't remember when that one changed, tho'

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 6, 2007 3:26 PM PST up reply actions

No Prob

The point remains that we all agree that Doofus hasn't measured up to any of them. And it's not simply the percentages that matter, but the spectacular flops his team have foisted upon us.

As has been pointed out before, even the desperate comebacks in the 10-2 season were mostly against crummy teams that we had no business trailing to begin with.

by Calchas on Nov 6, 2007 2:55 PM PST reply actions

and 10 - 2 still included

14 - 52 in Tucson (oops)
and

19 - 66 in the Mausoleum (ick)

a REALLY UGLY pair of losses by any measure

The Mad Bruin

by lostnacfgop on Nov 6, 2007 3:27 PM PST up reply actions

Those losses really takes the shine of the 10-2

finish that year. Those are seared into my memory more that those last minute wins.

by bruinhawk on Nov 6, 2007 4:09 PM PST up reply actions

Wow!

Sorry you had me when I read "Take out 2005, and it's exactly that .25 and 25. A freaking coin flip." IT's STARTLING that the record could very well have been 25% or close to it given that the so many games in the 2005 season were "come from behind wins."

Plus those two losses were shellackings. Fuck Simers, don't take the bait. Everybody in the Pac-10 and Simers would love Dorrell to continue stinking up the conference. Simers needs something to write about and the conference teams love the easy victories.

by apbruin on Nov 6, 2007 8:51 PM PST reply actions