DumpDorrell ESPN Interview & The Mason Plan

by BruinCore on Sep 17, 2007 4:27 PM PDT Comment 17 comments

cross-posted from DumpDorrell.com. The podcast will probably be available to listen to here after the show.

One of our editors just got off the air with Mason & Ireland on ESPN radio 710. It was a good show ... John Ireland "ate crow" as a result of our last appearance on his show after the SuC game when Mason and Ireland said we should shut down our site. Now Ireland admits that he is firmly on the DumpDorrell side. Mason put to our editor an interesting question, one he dubbed The Mason Plan. The Mason Plan is this: Dan Guerrero fires Karl Dorrell today(!) and makes DC DeWayne Walker interim head coach, as a sort of trial head coaching gig.

Mason asked what our editor thought of the plan. Our editor said that was a bad idea. Mason went nuts, saying several times that he thought it was crazy that DumpDorrell.com does NOT want to fire Karl Dorrell today (he then said he was going to start a site called DumpDumpDorrell.com - hilarious). The reason Mason wants to fire Dorrell today is because it avoids the risk of ending the season with the nuclear record of 9-4 (where DG can't fire Dorrell and the NFL doesn't hire Dorrell away). Our response deserves explanation, which we couldn't really give in the interview.

Here is DD's full response to the Mason Plan:

DG should NOT fire Karl Dorrell today.
Firing Karl Dorrell today carries far too many political costs. The political costs outweigh the benefits of getting rid of Dorrell now before he turns up the nuclear 9-4 season (the one in which DG cannot fire him and Dorrell does not get the NFL callup). Imagine the heat UCLA would get for firing one of a handful of African American coaches after 1 loss in a 3 game season.
Promoting DeWayne Walker to interim head coach would be a huge mistake. Imagine if DeWayne Walker won enough to take the team to 7-5 ... having closed out the season 5-4. Dan Guerrero would be the first AD to fire 2 African American coaches in 1 season! And that would amount to firing nearly HALF the African American coaches in college football today. Yeah, not going to happen.
Firing a head coach this early is never done. When was the last time a coach was fired this early in the season?? We cant think of any time. Now following conventional wisdom for the sake of it is not ever a plan. However, there is a reason why teams don't fire coaches this early in the season. It hurts the program in too many ways. Even if you select an interim from the program, there would be a revolt in the locker room among players who support support Dorrell. They would clash with the players who would be happy to see him go. Keeping Dorrell in a sense creates some unity because it sustains consistency. Firing Dorrell destroys that.
Gives recruits too much time to decommit. Think about what firing Dorrell will do the recruits we have lined up. By firing Dorrell we give them a few months to consider other options, as well as other coaches to pursue them aggressively. By holding onto to Dorrell until after the SuC game, we only give them a few weeks until Dorrell's replacement is named (by which time hopefully Gerrero will have already sealed the deal anway). Sure, recruits could be reconsidering anyway, but nothing solidifies change like a firing.

Those are the reason why The Mason Plan just wouldn't work and why we don't support it. What are your thoughts.

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 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Add this to the reasons

DeWayne Walker's defense just gave up 44 points to an 0-2 team that had averaged 9.5 points in its first two games.

Of course, your other points are valid, too. Interim coaches are not a good idea due to the pressure to hire them after a modicum of success.*

*See Lavin, Steve.

by BruinsRule on Sep 17, 2007 4:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

we mentioned that to Mason

and it is kind of implicit in #4. Mason just wouldn't hear of it. But you are absolutely right. We have not been sold yet on Walker and still arent. SuC was great (thank you Dorrell and Walker for that) ... but what else?

editor, DumpDorrell.com ... formerly posted as DumpDorrell

by BruinCore on Sep 17, 2007 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

*Also see Todd Bozeman

who was hired at Cal in the Jason Kidd era after some initial success. I think he went on to be banned from the NCAA for a couple of years.

by UCngLA on Sep 17, 2007 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

nine year ban for Bozeman

Cal also had 2 seasons retroactively forefitted due to Bozeman's involvement in at least one player being paid (giving us our 32nd win in 1994-95 as a side effect).

by bruinhoo on Sep 18, 2007 6:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Incidentally ... bagging on SuC

Bagging on SuC on THEIR flagship station was a feather in my cap. During the interview Mason and Ireland asked me what I thought about rooting against the Bruins to get Dorrell fired, since their Bruin friends (Ireland is a Bruin) apparently want to root against the Bruins.

I said something like "No, we always root for our team when the game starts. Rooting against your team is like rooting against your kids ... you dont do that (pause) UNLESS THEY ARE TROJANS!"

Mason and Ireland got a kick out of that. I said it on the Trojans station. I cant tell you how great that felt.

editor, DumpDorrell.com ... formerly posted as DumpDorrell

by BruinCore on Sep 17, 2007 5:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

DeWayne Isn't the Only Option

Dorrell can, and should be fired, immediately. But Dewayne Walker should not be made interim. That sets up a Lavin scenario, where he performs well enough to not lose the job. The "interim" coach should only go to someone that will not compete for the permanent job. There are some football people at UCLA that are not currently involved in the program on a day-to-day basis. Bob Field comes to mind or Ed Kazarian. What's Terry Donahue doing for the next three months? Remember, this is just intended to be a caretaker while a thorough and thoughtful selection process takes place. If Dorrell goes 9-4 or 8-5 we may be stuck with him and his embarassing team breakdowns for years to come. Better to write off this season, than the next 3, 4, 5 or more.

by Bruin77 on Sep 17, 2007 5:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Whatever it takes

Dorrell needs to go.

He has already wasted five of my years, and five of everyone else's years who play, watch or who otherwise support UCLA football.

Rebuilding is never easy but the quicker the rebuilding process begins, the better.

Hell, I would go to games just to see Kazarian wave the towel as head coach. He shows more energy and enthusiasm in one game than Dorrell has shown in 5 years.

by Barnes2JJ on Sep 17, 2007 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Typhoid Donahue

DG should take out a restraining order against that loser so that he doesn't come close to Morgan ctr.

Btw great job DD. Any time we get media requests, its coming your way. :-)

by Nestor on Sep 17, 2007 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

interesting take

bringing in a caretaker. It could not TD because we need to get as far away from him as possible. Besides, my guess is Guerrero doesn't like TD around either ... hence, TD going public with his support of Dorrell (saying he didnt know what the current administration was thinking).

Still, who would be the caretaker?? Our offense under a guy with training wheels needs help .. Kazerian just couldnt give that help. Training Jay would seriously blow up without at least Dorrell there, strange as it is to say that. I would rather win a few the rest of the way than put up a big goose egg to really kill the program for a few years.

editor, DumpDorrell.com ... formerly posted as DumpDorrell

by BruinCore on Sep 17, 2007 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Vermeil, Mariucci

Senior coaches who are not working.

And, if we don't "fire" KD, let them supervise or oversee the program.

I disagree with much of what you have said and have written it here in several places.

I would fire hiim, now.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Sep 17, 2007 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

interesting choices

but would they "break the coaching fraternity" and come coach a team whose playbook they dont know? I like the choices and idea though. Vermeil was our coach once!

editor, DumpDorrell.com ... formerly posted as DumpDorrell

by BruinCore on Sep 17, 2007 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The playbook is a factor

But they can look at it (all the 12 billion pages that have been installed) and tell Training Jay that certain plays will not be called. There must be a dozen or so plays that actually have a chance of working.

Remember that a Vermeil or a Mooch or a Schottenheimer is a lifelong football person. It's not like asking one of us to take over. (Although now that Mrs. Fox 71 has opted out, the only viable candidate remains Nestor.)

by Fox 71 on Sep 17, 2007 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dorrell's NFL attitude has backfired

I have been lobbying on the various boards to have Dorrell replaced with an interim coach ala the towel-waver in the hope that we can salvage something of this season. I believe that our team has talent and the assistant's are good enough to get us 9-10 wins but that we lack the drive to be a champion.

Dorrell's NFL attitude has backfired with the college players of today- he doesn't know how to motivate and, if necessary, intimidate his men to get the most out of them. MOST OF THE PLAYERS ON THIS YEAR'S TEAM WOULD NEED DIAPERS IF THEY ACTUALLY PLAYED FOR A REAL COACH.

If you do not believe me, then read the comments from the Utah players.

by MarcoTheBruin on Sep 17, 2007 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I vote for Howland.

If he starts studying now, he will know more about football than KD in about two weeks time. And we sure won't have to worry about his motivational skills.

Second choice would be the recently retired women's softball coach.

Back to another favorite quote by one of my least favorite people, Dr. Phil: "The best indicator or future behavior is relevant past behavior." In a nutshell: those who win now were most likely winning before. You know, like Coach Howland.

by UCngLA on Sep 17, 2007 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Unless 9-4 includes the Pac 10 Title

I don't see what is so magical about that record. 9-4 means no BCS bowl, no top-10 rating, no Pac 10 title, another appearance in some garbage bowl. That is, every one of KD's goal would not have been met. With all the stars lined up in KD favor this season, making only 9-4 should get him canned.

UCLA deserves better.

by bluegold on Sep 17, 2007 7:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I disagree with all 5 points

1.) Why not?

2.) Oh BS, DG can hire a custodian to finish out the season, he doesn't and shouldn't promote Walker. The custodian will be just as affective as Dorrell

3.) That is a huge mistake, bad idea, this guy is way too inconsistent to even be any kind of a coach, especially the head coach.

4.) Yea and suffering one of the worst defeats in over 40 years of your football history to an obvious inferior opponent (with half a team) is hardly ever done or seen either, what's the point here?

5.) Who cares, as if anyone would want to play for this stiff anyway!!

BB41

by bb41 on Sep 17, 2007 11:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I completely disagree also

The political costs would've been greater last year just a year after a ten win season. But now we're two years removed from that ten win season and it's beginning to look like more of a fluke than ever. Not only that but he's given Dorrell five years and we're coming off the possibly the worst lost in UCLA history with all things considered. Other greatest losses in UCLA history are many other Dorrell debacles. Dorrell's name is constantly in hot seat debates from Cowherd if he doesn't win ten to Pat Forde's article if he doesn't perform. He's been given ample time so the political costs won't be great because the evidence is too strong against him as being a bad coach. It's not like we're going to do what ND did with Willingham where he only had 1 truly bad year out of three and they didn't have great political costs for that firing.

Also it's far too dangerous for him to go 9-4. That alone supercedes everything. Remember the number one goal is to get rid of him, everything else will fall into place after that.

As far as recruits go I'm sure they're already reconsidering after Saturday. Hell, firing Dorrell will probably pique the interest of new recruits wondering who we're going to get. Plus WHAT THE HELL HAS DORRELL DONE WITH BRIAN PRICE AND TERENCE AUSTIN? RECRUITS DON'T GET MUCH BETTER THAN THAT.

by Dorrellian on Sep 18, 2007 1:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs