clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

UCLA Ruins

Well that is the headline in the LA Times today. We can cry and whine about pro-SC bias as much as we want, but we deserve this ridicule. And, there is Simers:

Now just how bad is UCLA? The week before, Stanford played UCLA off its cleats for more than three quarters before the Frauds rallied and won in overtime.

Stanford versus USC on Saturday night looked like the scout team matched against the National Champions, 24-0 at the end of the first quarter and 44-7 at the half, and then the Cardinal had to suffer the indignity of waiting before going up the Coliseum tunnel to avoid being trampled once again by the Trojans.

The Frauds, of course, might not win another game this season. As we know now, they were lucky to win as many as they did, coming from behind against the woeful likes of Washington, Stanford and Washington State, a combined 3-14 in Pacific 10 Conference play.

A few weeks ago after a win, Dullard took a surprisingly defiant stand in his postgame news conference, apparently miffed that some in media were not buying the turnaround, including quarterback Drew Olson's seemingly overnight transformation into Carson Palmer.

That got me wondering how Dullard and UCLA might handle success. Well, when you lose to a team that's 2-6 before the game starts and you were ranked in the top 10, I think the answer is obvious.
Yes, I know he is nothing but a court jester of the MSM, but there is not much we can argue with what he wrote there. Dorrell has been exposed again to what he really is:

Just another mediocre football coach.