Bruins Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: World Soccer Digest for Soccer Fans!

Is stating facts not allowed on this site?

You can't handle the facts.

Karl Dorrell took over a program that was in complete disarray on and off the field and in a few years time has built up a highly respected program of high quality student athletes.  I stress student athletes, not hired guns.

On the field he went 10-2 by his third year.  Spin it any way you want but a loss is a loss and a win is a win.  10-2 has not happened often in UCLA football history.  In his fourth year he beat an SC team everyone had slotted going to the national title game and probably winning it.  SC is only the most successful program in the last five years.  If you say it took him four years to beat SC you have to remember where the two programs were when he took over the helm in Westwood.  K.D. started way behind the 8 ball and now he is finally catching up.

Last year he also had to deal with grooming a quarterback that hadn't played in a live action game in 5 YEARS, watch him go down and then hand over the reigns to a backup who had never started a game in his life.  But Dorrell still managed to win the last three games and beat SC.  

The only coach in UCLA history to lead his team to four straight bowl games is Karl Dorrell.

Only one losing season in 4 years (6-7), his first season.

The recruits coming in are only getting better.  UCLA football is being talked about again.  

You talk about the teams we lost to what about the teams we beat.  One of the only schools in recent history to beat USC, we beat Oklahoma and Cal twice all in the short time Dorrell's been here.  

Dorrell isn't looking for the quick fix.  He's thinking long term.  He wants to do it the right way and he's building the stepping stones to do so.  The stepping stones that lay a foundation so that when we do reach the top we won't be a one year wonder and fall off the cliff. We may stumble back a few steps but we'll get right back up.  

Coaches use to have time to establish themselves, to instill a mentality like Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno.  They didn't win right away, nor did Tom Osborne.  It took Tom Osborne almost twenty years to win a national title and he's one of the greatest coaches of all time.  Bo Schembechler at UM went 1-4 in his first five Rose Bowls.  Sustained greatness takes time and Dorrell hasn't even been here five years and you're ready to throw him out the door?  After all the signs that we're going in the right direction.

And again if you want empirical facts look at the last two years: 10-2, Beat SC with a backup quarterback. Nuff said

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 34 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Hmmmmm
The subject title of the diary seems to have changed as well. It used to say something to the effect of "You Can't Handle The Truth."

by BruinFan1 on Jun 20, 2007 7:35 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Isn't it a little misleading
to say that Dorrell is the only coach in UCLA history to lead a team to 4 straight bowls because didn't they recently in the last 15 years start having "bullshit bowl" and "nut bowl" etc.?

by bruin95 on Jun 20, 2007 7:41 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Two points to that
  1. Exactly right, until relatively recently (no earlier than the late 1970's, I believe), the Rose Bowl was the only Pac-10 eligible game. Lookk at the teams from the mid-late 1960's that battled USC for Pac-8/10 championships and ask if they would have made the Holiday/Sun/Walnut bowl.
  2. Even within the excluive Rose Bowl era, the game had a no-repeat rule for a time, stating that no team could play in back-to-back Rose Bowls. While I can't say that a UCLA team was prevented from participating in 4 straight games due to the rule, it did keep our teams out on occasion (notably the 1954 championship season).

by bruinhoo on Jun 21, 2007 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

and another thing
I remember Toledo refusing some of the lower tier bowl invites at the end of season.  If they weren't good enough for UCLA football, he didn't send his team there.  

by bruin95 on Jun 21, 2007 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What?
The Nut Bowl wasn't good enough for our guys?  (Of course, the disease of "bowl inflation"--way too fricking many bowls for teams that eke out 6 wins, even if they have 6 losses--just keeps spreading like the plague.)

Even more humiliating and infuriating:  not only will KD GO to every Nut Bowl we are invited to, he LOSES in those crappy games to inferior teams?

How 'bout dat Bill & Ted?

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 21, 2007 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

IT'S ALSO WRONG.
Donahue took us to EIGHT straight Bowls in the 80s, and he won 7 of those in a row.

M

WHY NOT US? WHY NOT NOW?

by Meriones on Jun 21, 2007 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ahem...
Let the beat down begin.

For your reference, Bill and Ted (from DumpDorrell.com):

Karl Dorrell's Record (updated as of 12/27/06)
  1. 1-3 against Southern Cal.
  2. No Pac-10 championships.
  3. No BCS bowl games.
  4. 1-10 on the road against teams with a winning record.
  5. Worst starting 3- AND 4-year record of any UCLA football coach since WW2, including Bob Toledo who was fired.
  6. Worse winning percentage than Bob Toledo, who was fired.
  7. 3-11 against ranked teams.
  8. 2-7 against top 10 teams.
  9. Only 6 conference wins against teams over .500.
  10. 19-14 in the Pac-10.
  11. 8-17 against teams with a winning record.
  12. 10 losses to unranked teams.
  13. He has a losing record after October, 6-12.
  14. Embarrassing losses to Wyoming, Fresno State, Arizona, Washington State at home and Southern Cal.
  15. Only 1 big game win.
  16. Revolving door for assistant coaches.
  17. 80% of Bruins fans polled on Bruinsnation.com disapprove of the job Karl Dorrell is doing.

As you say: "Nuff said!"

by godblesstyus95 on Jun 20, 2007 7:52 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

SuC 66- UCLA 19
My most humiliating moment ever as a Bruin.

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 20, 2007 8:03 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

By the way
The year we got pounded 66-19 by SuC is the same year we went 10-2.  We went into the SuC game ranked 11th in the nation.

Obviously, we were highly overrated going into that game.  11th ranked teams do not get humiliated to that extent.  I can live with a loss, if the team shows up and plays well, which it did not.  And, if you watched the game (live or in person), you would know that we were completely overmatched from start to finish.  We were never in that game from the very start.  We should have forfeited after the first quarter.

'Splain that one to me, please.  Was it just all the players' fault?  Some key injury you'd like to point out?

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 21, 2007 8:34 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Worse than Humiliating
I was at the game sitting in the SUC alum section. Myself and a buddy were the only people wearing blue in our section of that ugly, old stadium.

Regardless of what people think of Dorrell, I'm certain he's out after this year anyway. If he has a winning season with a big bowl win (please let him win o lord) then he's off to the NFL. If he fails the the Admin will spin that 'Dorrell could not produce with an experienced team, and we felt the time was right for a new direction.'

I just hope he wins big then leaves for the NFL. Let's start campagining for Rick Neuheisal (spelling?) now!

Victory or until next year!

by ncrpz2 on Jun 21, 2007 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was also there
in the end zone facing the peristyle, or whatever it's called.  I was surrounded by SuC fans, many of whom were (no surprise) incredibly verbally abusive (which really thrilled the women in our group).

I'm all for hiring Rick N.  Whatever it takes to get us back on track.

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 21, 2007 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Funny thing too
In my section there was some drunk 'suc alum yelling something to the effect 'duuuudddddeeee, they can't even play with us! Why are they heerrrreeee. Fight on!' he was doing this the entire game. It was annoying at the time, but I look back now and chuckle a little.

Sorry, I felt like sharing a little story.

Victory or until next year!

by ncrpz2 on Jun 21, 2007 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Unfortunately
what the drunk SuCster said was true.  Looking back, UCLA never should have even taken the field.

It was literally like a crappy high school team going up against a real-live college program.  Or Nebraska versus Who Dat State back in the old days, when it would be 49-3 at halftime before the scrubs came in (for Neb) and rolled up another 20 points after the break.

Hey, misery loves company.

by Barnes2JJ on Jun 21, 2007 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

hm
I thought I was annoyed by all the dorrell bashing, but thanks for reminding me how much more I hate his supporters.  All your twisted facts are pretty much fubar'd by these facts:
  1. 1-3 against Southern Cal.
  2. No Pac-10 championships.
  3. No BCS bowl games.
  4. 1-10 on the road against teams with a winning record.
  5. Worst starting 3- AND 4-year record of any UCLA football coach since WW2, including Bob Toledo who was fired.
  6. Worse winning percentage than Bob Toledo, who was fired.
  7. 3-11 against ranked teams.
  8. 2-7 against top 10 teams.
  9. Only 6 conference wins against teams over .500.
  10. 19-14 in the Pac-10.
  11. 8-17 against teams with a winning record.
  12. 10 losses to unranked teams.
  13. He has a losing record after October, 6-12.
  14. Embarrassing losses to Wyoming, Fresno State, Arizona, Washington State at home and Southern Cal.
  15. Only 1 big game win.
  16. Revolving door for assistant coaches.
Just like Lavin, it's not about the teams he beat, it's about the teams he loses to...and badly.  Lavin seemingly beat a #1 team every year, but he also lost to cal states and exhibition teams.  So it doesn't matter that KD beat Cal twice (at home) and a rebuilding screwy Oklahoma without Adrian Peterson (at home).  He's 1-10 against winning teams on the road! not ranked teams, not great teams, but teams that managed to lug their carcass of a season over the .500 mark.  
  1. 6-7 while losing the last five games is not a good season.
  2. 6-6 with a loss to a Wyoming team that hadn't seen a bowl for somewhere near a century is not a good season.
  3. 10-2 is a good season.  Except when you lose to freaking Arizona by 38 points and get to watch while those pricks rush the field like they just won the national championship, and then go on to lose to sc by...wait for it...47 points??  Plus, the wins that we did get that season were miracle comebacks through the sheer talent of MD, DO, and ML, and not on coaching prowess (which dug them in the hole in the first place by conservative bs plays).  DO and ML weren't even KD recruits.  If all were fair in the world of college football, we would have lost to Washington, Cal, WSU, and Stanford, because really, we had no right winning those games based on the first 35 minutes or so of play.
  4. 7-6 with a home game smack down by a crappy WSU and what amounts to a home game loss to struggling FSU is not a good season.
So there you go.  I'm sure you're content being in La La land, blinded by...hell I dont even know why, how, or by what you could be blinded.  When UCLA finally gets a good football coach, you can thank the people who aren't buying the bs that you are spewing.

Side note: seriously, your post is really a wakeup call to me.  I've more or less silently put up with the KD bashing, even though it wasn't something I wanted to be hit over the head with every day.  I voted that I thought it was a bit much -- one can only take so much negativity.  But in light of your post, I'm glad BN is staying on his ass and seeking his removal, because if we relied on "fans" like you, we'd be watching UCLA Basketball lose to Team Shiznit and Cal State Nobody, instead of watching Kevin Love, DC, JS, LRMAM, LM, and everyone else tear teams apart on their way to greatness.

by ranelar on Jun 20, 2007 8:20 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Nice post
The timeliness of this clueless diary almost seems too good to be true ;-)

This is a wake up call to all of us that there are Bill and Teds out there, Dorrellistas, if you will, purveyors of mediocrity, willing to watch 7-6 seasons year after year, a miracle win against SUC once a decade, and sh*tty bowl appearances, and actually think we're headed in the right direction.

They're out there, folks. That's what we're up against!

by godblesstyus95 on Jun 20, 2007 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

well said
"It took Tom Osborne almost twenty years to win a national title and he's one of the greatest coaches of all time."

I've only got about 100 yrs to live, and I'm 1/3 of the way through that. I sure hope we don't give every new coach 20 yrs to try to get things going.

Dorrell may eventually pull things through, and it looks like he's got at least 1 more year to try, but based on prior performance, I highly doubt it's going to happen at UCLA... maybe in his 2nd or 3rd head coaching job down the line (if he gets that chance). I'll give him credit for at least having more potential than Lavin.

by bruinforever on Jun 20, 2007 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yikes!
Ranelar, I think you wrote the post I had in mind.

Seriously, whoever penned this ode to KD's mad skillz can't be serious. This had to be a joke.

by ucladj89 on Jun 21, 2007 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

WOW
there is just so much trash in this post it would take a massive comment just to reply to all of it. I dont have that kind of time.  But let me offer a few responses.

"Bo Schembechler at UM went 1-4 in his first five Rose Bowls."
For the record, we would shut down DumpDorrell.com if Karl Dorrell was 1-4 in Rose Bowls!!!!  Why? Because that would mean that Dorrell won the Pac-10 most likely AND gotten to the Rose Bowl .. things that have been far out of his reach.  Apparently, this guy says that 1-4 in Rose Bowls is a negative for Schembechler when "going to 4 straight bowls" is something to glorify for Dorrell.  What a nut.  Forget that Dorrell is 1-3 in bowls ... they are no name bowls!!

"Only one losing season in 4" ... as God as my witness I never thought Id hear UCLA football talked about in this manner.

"Dorrell is building the program in the right way" ... wow. 4 OCs in 5 years. Nearly every assistant coaching position is on his 3rd coach. Worst 3 and 4 year starting coaching records in UCLA Football since WW2!! 1-10 on the road against teams with a winning record. On and on and on the "empirical facts" refute that ridiculous and untenable position.

"hasn't even been here 5 years and youre ready to throw him out the door?"  YES!!  At nearly $1 million per year he is STEALING from UCLA.  Are you effing nuts?? What do you suggest?? Give him 10 years and $10 million to fail??? I'll take that job and you can hate on me all you want!!! I have just as much experience as Dorrell had when he was hired. NONE.  There are coaches out there NOW, YESTERDAY, that have actually PROVEN themselves at smaller programs. Oh, say, for example, Urban Meyer who won a national championship in what ... 2 years. Why? Because he succeeded at smaller programs as a head coach.

Ok, I have to stop there ... this is the first post I have seen on BN arguing the case for keeping Dorrell and I dont want to overload the computers.  

by DumpDorrell on Jun 20, 2007 8:30 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Regarding 10-2, beat SC
These occurred separately in two different seasons, not in the same season, which would have been much more meaningful.  But, I guess just like a man with a large bald spot to hide, you have to spread the meager amount of hair over as large an area as possible.

by bluegold on Jun 20, 2007 8:43 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Looks like
this post has been shredded to pieces already.

I am too tired to write a boilerplate response. I will have just one tip if anyone is looking for material on how to rebut the arguments on Dorrell inheriting a program in bad shape. Just type in "talent excuse" in the search button and see how we have addressed that argument in last two years. And that's just for starters. We have also addressed the academics excuse, the budget excuse, the "being young" excuse and whatever else blindos have thrown at us in last two years.

Its pretty easy to look them up.

by Nestor on Jun 20, 2007 8:50 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

OH, ENOUGH OF THIS...
"You can't handle the facts."

Let's roll, people.

"Karl Dorrell took over a program that was in complete disarray on and off the field and in a few years time has built up a highly respected program of high quality student athletes.  I stress student athletes, not hired guns."

Opinion, not facts.  Show me some objective data, people.

"On the field he went 10-2 by his third year.  Spin it any way you want but a loss is a loss and a win is a win.  10-2 has not happened often in UCLA football history."

Fine.  How many 12-game regular seasons has there been in UCLA history?  Hmmm?  And how did the Bruins do in the year AFTER going 10-2?

"In his fourth year he beat an SC team everyone had slotted going to the national title game and probably winning it.  SC is only the most successful program in the last five years."

Fine.  And how many victories over other winning teams does Dorrell have after October during his career?

"If you say it took him four years to beat SC you have to remember where the two programs were when he took over the helm in Westwood.  K.D. started way behind the 8 ball and now he is finally catching up."

Funny you mention the 8-ball.  How many wins did Toledo's last Bruin team finish with?

"Last year he also had to deal with grooming a quarterback that hadn't played in a live action game in 5 YEARS, watch him go down and then hand over the reigns to a backup who had never started a game in his life.  But Dorrell still managed to win the last three games and beat SC."

Note:  he handed the REINS to a QB who was a redshirt sophomore, and already in the system for 2 years prior to last season.  Explain why he had pass accuracy under 50% for most of his games.  

"The only coach in UCLA history to lead his team to four straight bowl games is Karl Dorrell."

INCORRECT.  Terry Donahue coached UCLA to EIGHT straight Bowl Games (1981-88), and won SEVEN in a row.  (1982-88)

"Only one losing season in 4 years (6-7), his first season."

Which was immediately followed by a .500 season, at 6-6, including ending the season with 2 straight losses -- $C and the Bowl game.

"The recruits coming in are only getting better.  UCLA football is being talked about again."

Yes, it is.  And several pre-season assessments include mention our incosnsitency -- on offense and in coaching turnover.

"You talk about the teams we lost to what about the teams we beat.  One of the only schools in recent history to beat USC, we beat Oklahoma and Cal twice all in the short time Dorrell's been here."

Texas beat $C -- and they got a championship for it.  Cal beat $C, and they are in the running for BCS bowls for much of the season.  We beat Oklahoma -- and how did they finish?

"Dorrell isn't looking for the quick fix.  He's thinking long term.  He wants to do it the right way and he's building the stepping stones to do so.  The stepping stones that lay a foundation so that when we do reach the top we won't be a one year wonder and fall off the cliff. We may stumble back a few steps but we'll get right back up."

And so far we have one 10-wins eason out of 4.  Take away that season, and we have .500 ball in the other 3 years.  

"Coaches use to have time to establish themselves, to instill a mentality like Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno.  They didn't win right away, nor did Tom Osborne.  It took Tom Osborne almost twenty years to win a national title and he's one of the greatest coaches of all time.  Bo Schembechler at UM went 1-4 in his first five Rose Bowls.  Sustained greatness takes time and Dorrell hasn't even been here five years and you're ready to throw him out the door?  After all the signs that we're going in the right direction."

Schembehcler coached in five Rose Bowls, back when the Big 10 and Pac 10 Champs played in it.  HOW MANY PAC-10 CHAMPIONSHIPS have we won?

"And again if you want empirical facts look at the last two years: 10-2, Beat SC with a backup quarterback. Nuff said."

By the same token, (1)  Blown out by 47 points to $C, and (2) blew how many halftime leads?

Do I like seeing any man fired from his job?  Hell no.  But if he's not doing the job he set out to do, the job he's hired to do, the job it is demanded that he do, then it's just NOT the right fit.

That's my OPINION.

You come in HERE talking about facts???

GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT.

MIM

WHY NOT US? WHY NOT NOW?

by Meriones on Jun 20, 2007 9:20 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Correction: The question as to how many Pac-10...
... titles we've won should have asked how many we've won under Dorrell.

M

WHY NOT US? WHY NOT NOW?

by Meriones on Jun 20, 2007 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Like handing the matches.............
to a pyromaniac and telling him not to start a fire.

Bill & Ted are either playing us or they have not read one word on this site in all of the two years of it's existence.

They are certainly not having an "Excellent Adventure" with that drivel.

by artybruin on Jun 20, 2007 9:35 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Bill and Ted...
tried to have an excellent adventure, but ended up on a bogus journey. After reading the responses, I bet he wishes he could take his telephone booth back in time and convince himself not to post this.

by trojan killing greek guy on Jun 20, 2007 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dorrell is no Tom Osborne
It may have taken Osborne 20 years to win a national title, but look at his first four seasons:

      W-L-T  Bowl
1973      9-2-1    Cotton
1974     9-3-0     Sugar
1975    10-2-0    Fiesta
1976     9-3-1    Bluebonnet

Source: Huskerpedia

Osborne and Dorrell both had a 10-2 season, but look at Osborne's other three, and look at the bowl games he went to -- bowl games with prestige.

Karl Dorrell is no Tom Osborne.

by gilbert on Jun 20, 2007 11:57 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Oh. My. God.
The depth of the ignorance in this diary is incredible, but in the end it's appropriate that we celebrate BN's 2 year anniversary with an example of why a community like ours that values substance over style is still necessary. It seems our regulars have done a more than adequate job tearing "Bill and Ted" to shreds. Good work guys.

by Tydides on Jun 21, 2007 12:12 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Someone Fess Up
The original post was a joke, right?
sjh

by Class of 66 on Jun 21, 2007 5:05 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

One step further...
Wake me up...KD was just a bad nightmare, right?

by bluegold on Jun 21, 2007 6:45 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Everyone...allow me to introduce you Karl Dorrell
aka "Bill and Ted".

Really, this guy should write for the Onion. Just Brilliant!!

by norcalbruin95 on Jun 21, 2007 8:01 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

All I have to say is
SHOW ME!

As we have said time and time again, THIS IS THE YEAR! If not now, when?

I truly, truly cannot understand why a fan would not want its team to accomplish more? Isn't 10-2 with a Rose Bowl berth and a win over U$C better than 7-6 with a humiliation to FSU in a nut bowl?

WHY DON'T YOU WANT MORE FOR YOUR TEAM??!!!

by tasser10 on Jun 21, 2007 8:26 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I think I speak for all of us here
when I say we all would leave to eat crow at the end of this year and admit that "Fine, Dorrell got the job done."

I don't know how many times we've said this.  Objectively, however, there's not a whole lot of hope for that to happen.

And I've said it 800 times, but I'll say it again:  The hallmark of a good coach is consistency.  If there is one word that you can use to sum up Dorrell's entire coaching tenure, it isn't improvement, it isn't successfull.

It's inconsistent.  And that was also the hallmark  of Lavin.  To use the basketball analogy, beating 1 #1 Stanford team is great, but it doesn't mean jack when you're losing to Cal State Fullerton.  That sort of 'success' just highlights a simple fact even more lucidly:  that your team has talent, but you have no idea how to effectively coach up that talent.

And that, my dear little friend, is the history of Karl Dorrell.  Respectable talent, completely inconsistent performance.

by CAJason80 on Jun 21, 2007 9:41 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Inconsistency
You hit that nail on the head:

Beat USC, then lose to FSU.
Play #1 SC tough, then lose to Wyoming.
Play ND tough, then get crushed at home vs. WSU.
Lose to WSU at home, then beat Oregon on the road.
Win early in the year (usu. against lesser teams), lose late in the year.
Get crushed in the first half against bad teams (UW, WSU and Stanford in 2005) but come through in the end (it was a fun ride and the end result was a W, but the inconsistency was maddening).

by BruinsRule on Jun 21, 2007 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Osborn not a valid comparason
Gilbert did a good first critique of that misguided pro-dorrell argument. Just to add on a bit:

While Osborn did take nearly 20 seasons to win the NC, he did have multiple season prior in which he entered bowl season a win from an NC. In his 3rd season at Nebraska, he won the Big-8. I hate to quote from Wiki, but, In his quarter-century as head coach, Tom Osborne never won fewer than nine games in a season..

by bruinhoo on Jun 21, 2007 11:44 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bruins Nation, an unofficial daily online scrap book covering the greatest collegiate athletic program in the nation. GO BRUINS.
Start posting about the Bruins »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

4310_802638778316_2519469_46410875_2962006_n_small
The Evolution of a Bruin Fan
Images_small
UPDATE: Rivalry Game Ticket Thread
Morrell_small
Wildcat and the UCLA Running Game
Ucla_small
Everyone needs to calm down about Ben Ball
Trojanssuck_small
An Angel in the Defensive Backfield

Recent FanPosts

Moreyouknow_small
Is this Brian Price's last game at UCLA?
Small
Recap from the Bonfire Rally!
Small
66-19: Only 2 Numbers Our Players Should Be Thinking About This Saturday
Bruinsnation_small
Ben Ball Roundup: Morning After Notes On Bruins Taking Another Baby Step
Moreyouknow_small
Pre-game Guesses: Washington State Results
Ucla_small
Now that we have some facts about ND...
Small
Rebuilding tradition starts right here!
Bruinsnation_small
Ben Ball Gameday Roundup: Dragovic Remains Suspended & Other Quick Notes
Images_small
Non-Revenue Sports Bruin Review and Calendar

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS


Managers

094_small Ajax

Bruinsnation_small Nestor

Menelaus2_small Menelaus

Arron_afflalo1_small Tydides

Brad_pitt_as_achilles_small Achilles

Small Meriones

Telemachus_small Telemachus

Small Odysseus

Blue_bellerophon_small Bellerophon

Authors

Images_small Ryan Rosenblatt

Official Partner of CBS Sports