So the guys over at College Football Resource (a blog which has basically become a good resource full of links to the college football blogosphere), have put up a post taking a closer look at the evolution of Karl Dorrell. It's a pretty interesting (and a loooong) post - making some key points on Dorrell's questionable credentials/experience but also missing out on a few. They end up missing the big picture on Dorrel.
CFR basically tries to zone into three aspect of Dorrell's tenure in Westwood. His resume, his season-by-season records, and the tumultuous coaching changes that have taken place under him during last three mediocre years. I think they hit the nail on its head when focusing on Dorrell's rather mediocre resume full of holes. Of course KD's backers hailed his experienced because he had supposedly great experiences as an OC at Northern Arizona, and at CU and UDub under Skippy. As CFR points out - not so fast:
* Quirky OC duties---This may be a reach, but KD's never been strictly an OC. He's always been an OC and receivers coach. That's a bit unusual. Most OC's, to my knowledge, tend to worry just about the offense, or might add the title of quarterbacks coach. But in all seven seasons where he's been the OC of a team, Karl Dorrell's also coached the receivers.
*Independence---This is what I alluded to earlier. For the five seasons he ran the offense at Colorado and Washington, Dorrell was also under the employ of one Rick Neuheisel. Right or wrong, Neuheisel has been given credit as an offensive guru of sorts. If that's the case, chances are Dorrell's been given questionable coaching latitude by his boss. There are questions as to how independent he has been as an OC; whether he's been in charge of creating and implementing an offense, or whether he was just the manager and puppet for the head coach and what the big man wanted out of the offense. I don't have the answer to that.
Now CFR as mentioned does a good job of pointing out the huge holes in KD's resume, but they failed to recognize a key point while attempting to analyze Dorrel's season-by-season (mediocre) records in Westwood. Here is CFR:
Photo - AP
CFR goes on to provide a lengthy discussion on all the coaching changes in Dorrel's three seasons in Westwood to come up with the incorrect conclusion that Dorrell is a good coach. Dorrell has had some good moments during his three years in Westwood. But so did Lavin. But even after some of the fleeting brilliant moments from last season, one thing is still painfully apparent to those who follow this Bruin program. A basic foundation is still missing from this football program. Again kind of reminds us of those Lavin coached basketball teams that came up with those great wins at Round 2 of the NCAA and the miraculous wins at Maples, only to crash and burn at very end. Even the outside observers who tried to take a closer look at Lavin's program would often erroneously conclude that Lavin was a good coach. They always missed the big picture. Unfortunately for CFR, despite their hard work on taking a closer look at Dorrell missed the big picture as well. Dorrell hasn't showed anything tangible yet that he is a good coach and that he is the answer to reinstalling UCLA as one of the elite football powers from West Coast.