The Sleeping Beauty beats up on one of the worst teams in the Pac-10 (a team which UCLA has beaten now 6 times in a row at the Rose Bowl even with stooges such as Toledo and the Thinker), and right on cue the morons in the MSM are eating up the "rebound" storyline. Check out the headlines:DI Stats]
To say that somehow Dorrell's program has "rebounded" from winning this game is like saying the "surge" is working based on cherry picking from one month's stats in Iraq. Not only it is foolish and moronic, it is dishonest and insincere, and an insult to the intelligence of UCLA community who follow our program day to day.
We didn't see anything new last night. We saw the same team we have been watching for last few years. A team that is boring and below average in all facets of game (except in the department of FG kicking). Here are some of my thoughts from last night's game.
Our Mediocre Defense
So we have seen our incredibly hyped D take on 4 average to horrendous team and they still look mediocre to average just like their DC.
I am sorry I didn't find anything impressive about a D that gave up 31 points to a below average Pac-10 offense led by somewhat over hyped freshman QB (who I have more on below).
Washington's running game was a joke. I wasn't all that impressed with our D line shutting down a predictable running game (very Dorrellian) that featured a RB (Rankin) who seemed slower than Markey.
And yet despite their advantage in physical talent our safeties were getting routinely burned by Husky receivers, which could have been fatal if not for a clutch special teams play by Matthew Slater.
Another thing about our defense. They are undisciplined. They talk and showboat a little too much for being the 6th ranked defense in the Pac-10 [See D I Stats]. It is really embarrassing.
It is embarrassing to see Dennis Keyes hot dog into the end zone, given what an awful season he has had to date. I know what you are thinking. Why am I easy on Olson why giving Dennis and our defensive guys a hard time. Because these guys showboat and talk a little too much (unlike Olson) for being a mediocre to below average unit.
If these guys were playing under a coach like Howland, that kind of nonsense would never happened. Remember how Howland came down on Shipp last year for showing off a little on a fast break, when he blew a slam dunk instead of laying it in.
The way our defense acts on the field it gives the impression that they are as good as those Hurricane defense from the 90s, when the reality is they have looked below average against a group of opponent who have a combined record of 4-8 this season.
It's a joke.
As I said above our offensive "explosion" last night came against the worst defense in the Pac-10. There is nothing we can really take from last night.
Yeah, Markey and Bell had good nights, as our OL finally found a pathetic DL to overpower. But just like the Stanford game, it really tells us noting.
I think it was telling that when the Law Firm came in, and Dorrell could have given his inexperienced QB an opportunity to throw, he instead opted for his RB to throw a pass into the endzone. Tells you all you need to know about how much confidence KD has in this kid.
And now that we look back it, gee it would have been nice if Dorrell inserted the Law Firm during the last few mins of the Stanford and the Utah game, and give him some valuable reps. But of course that didn't happen. Because Dorrell is a doofus.
He was also being a doofus when after FINALLY for the first time in his 4+ pathetic years in Westwood, his team mounts a first half ending 2 minute drive, and instead of going for a 57 yard field goal, he went for a hail marry which had no chance. You'd think it'd be smart to go with the leg of a kicker, who is hitting his stride, and perhaps go into the locker room with a 3 point lead. Nope. KD made the wrong decisions again. Like I said he is a doofus.
The Quarterback "Situation"
After last night I have the sense that if Dorrell is allowed to stick around for one more year he will ruin someone's career: it will be either Olson's or Cowans. The Thinker got bailed out last night by Cowan's unfortunate injury. Pretty clear now that Olson will start next weekend. But checkout how the Thinker handled the question (via DN linked above):
"The quarterback situation is, there is no situation until we get to talk about the situation," UCLA coach Karl Dorrell said.
Okay there were couple of positives from last night. I have mentioned them in the previous section. Matthew Slater's TD was the difference maker. He saved the day for the Sleeping Beauty.
Ben Howland: Coach Howland's appearance in the FSN booth was the only shining moment of the entire night during the usual horrific performances of Tompkins and Petros. It was nice to hear the voice of an actual "college coach" instead of the clown on the UCLA sidelines. And coincidentally when Howland showed up, the Bruins drove the field (thanks to a Toledo like trick place) and scored a TD.
OMG Jake Locker Is The Bomb Dude!
Uh no. Not yet. This is the third time I have seen this kid play. I think he will end being a very good and may be even a great QB. He has all the tools he needs to be a successful QB, and if TY doesn't stunt his development with his sh!tty WCO, he will go on to become successful. But the Puppies need to calm down their their excitement a bit. Because based on what I have seen so far, he reminds me lot more of Brock Huard than Cade McNowne. Cade and Brock came into college the same time (Cade committed to UCLA after Brock committed to UDub. Brock was the more hyped recruit). Yet it was Cade who went on to become a complete QB with a total package with his passing, running, and that fearless mentality to slam right into and deck opposing LBs. Locker has the toughness, but he has ways to go to even match where Cade was his freshman year in terms of passing abilities.
No Change In Big Picture
Going back to our team. As I have said, nothing has changed. We are in holding pattern. We still look like an average to below average typical Dorrellian team. We look mediocre in all aspects of the game except when it comes to FG kicking. And despite the beat reporters usual lame job of not writing the obvious, there are some people who are thinking out loud what we have been talking about. From Waldner in the Daily News:
Dorrell was 29-21 in his four previous seasons with the Bruins. Far from pathetic. Also far, very far, from exciting.
Dorrell was 10-2 in 2005. Scratch that year and he entered this season with a 19-19 record. Unimpressive. Very unimpressive. The more you examine the program the more it appears 10-2 was an aberration.
The bottom, as in rock bottom, was hit a week ago with an embarrassing (Dorrell's word) loss to Utah.
"We're not going to make this a state of the program type of thing," Dorrell said at the start of the week.
Sorry, Karl, another harsh reality is that it's not your decision.
And it points how will most likely get a head coach, if Pac-10 championship is not on the line (I am talking for UCLA) heading into our last game of this season.
That is why as far as the big picture is concerned there has been no change in "the situation."
But no worries the Thinker is getting his beauty sleep.
Have a great Sunday.