of my first diary changed it's because it was deleted by one of the people who run this website and that's why some of the comments were gone too. Apparently they were too afraid of my post since only one mode of thought is allowed on this fascist website so I reposted it under a different title and the leader let it stay. I also lost the ability to post until today so I was going to have to sign up again under a different name just to defend my old name but the leader has given me speaking ability again. Thank you oh great one. Now on to my post.
In response people saying I can't make the Tom Osborne comparison.
Tom Osborne took over a Nebraska program that just one year prior was coming off of BACK TO BACK NATIONAL TITLES. I think he inherited a slightly better situation than KD and it still took him twenty years to win one.
1-3 against Southern Cal.
As I said Dorrell was given a program in complete disarray and was way behind the 8 ball when he came in while SC has been the elite college football program of the last five years. This ain't the SC of the 90's. This SC is even better than mini Miami dynasty of the earlier part of this decade. Yet Dorrell still managed to be one of the only coaches in the last five years to beat the Trojans and he did it by his fourth year. We are on the rise. By the way Tedford who is by all means a great coach is 1-4 against SC. And he hasn't beaten them since 03. Lucky for him his main rival is Stanford.
No Pac-10 championships.
Since Dorrell only Pete Carroll has won Pac 10 championsips. Bellotti, Tedford are both good coaches but neither have won a Pac 10 title in the last five years. We are dealing with a behemoth in SC that we, UCLA, are finally starting to catch up to because of Karl Dorrell.
No BCS bowl games.
No Pac-10 school has been to a BCS bowl game since Dorrell's been here other than USC. Oregon was 10-1 two years ago for crying out loud and didn't go. We were 9-2 and weren't even considered. This has much more to do with east coast bias and USC. I mean USC is the answer to so many of your guys questions or complaints, it's not even funny.
1-10 on the road against teams with a winning record.
Worst starting 3- AND 4-year record of any UCLA football coach since WW2, including Bob Toledo who was fired.
Worse winning percentage than Bob Toledo, who was fired.
3-11 against ranked teams.
2-7 against top 10 teams.
Only 6 conference wins against teams over .500.
19-14 in the Pac-10.
8-17 against teams with a winning record.
10 losses to unranked teams.
He has a losing record after October, 6-12.
This whole section has to be taken with a grain of salt. We only have four years to judge this by and UCLA was not in good shape when Dorrell took over. I mean i'm sure you can even pile up worse statistics than these for the first four years the new Rutgers coach was at Rutgers but look where Rutgers is now. Like I said Dorrell is in it long term, he's not in for the quick fix. He had to bring in his guys, instill a mentality, handle off the field issues, deal with the Behemoth of SC and he still managed to be the only coach to lead UCLA to a bowl game each of his first 4 years all the while going 10-2 by his third year. Also Dorrell may be 1-3 in bowl games but in his most important bowl game to date, the Sun Bowl, he beat Northwestern.
Embarrassing losses to Wyoming, Fresno State, Arizona, Washington State at home and Southern Cal.
Since when is losing to SC of the last five years embarrasing? A lot of coaches have reasons to be embarrassed then. Fresno State almost beat SC two years ago, they're a respectable team. Arizona and WSU are Pac-10 schools. You're not going to go undefeated in the conference, jesus. Okay so we lost to Wyoming but Drew Olson was also inured that game. Remember Pete Carroll had an embarrassing loss in the Las Vegas Bowl in his first year to some non BCS school. Every coach has a few of those.
Only 1 big game win.
USC, Cal twice, Oklahoma, Northwestern for the Sun Bowl. That's 5 right there.
Revolving door for assistant coaches.
That phrase revolving door isn't correct because no coaches are leaving then coming back. Yeah, some left for the NFL and some were fired. All programs do that so don't make it seem unique in this case. Look Dorrell didn't have that much time to put a staff together when he first got here but now with a few years under his belt he has put together a competent great staff that will be here for a long time. Without this "revolving door" of his first few years we wouldn't have got D Walker.
80% of Bruins fans polled on Bruinsnation.com disapprove of the job Karl Dorrell is doing.
As you guys have stated recently it's pretty easy to ask a pole question in a way where it influences people answers one way or another and the way your pole question was asked and the choices of answers you gave people it was so biased it's not even funny. Plus Bruinsnation does not reflect the average fan. It's a small contigent of rabid Dorrell haters that are not reflective of the UCLA community as a whole and who come here to vent their frustration and bond with other cyberspace know-it-alls.