Has anybody else read that ESPN article by Ted Miller concerning Dorrell and UCLA?

This quote sums up the delusional POV for that article:

“It (UCLA) has as good a shot as anyone of winning the conference crown, thanks to a favorable schedule that includes home games with the Bears, Arizona State and Oregon.”

Huh?! Um, Oregon and Cal are clear favorites against UCLA and, I hate to say it, but SC is going to tear UCLA apart.

Clearly, we haven’t done enough to publicize how bad Dorrell has been when writers will stay write articles like that.

Dana … just saw your comment. We have a post on it timed to publish tomorrow morning but thanks for alerting us to the article. Ted Miller is referring to the fact that our tough games, ASU Oregon and Cal, are at home … rather than on the road. That is what he means by favorable schedule. We have been pushing that “favorable schedule” angle on our site and to the media, including Miller, since last year. It’s great that Miller, among others, makes this fact known.

But you pick up on something that Miller clearly leaves out, that we have a 3-0 conference record and 4-2 overall record without having yet played our toughest opponents. Its hard to understand how Miller could leave out the fact that we still have 4 games against top 15 teams, ASU, Cal, Oregon and SuC, AS WELL AS annual Dorrell nemeses Wazzu and Arizona. Stunning that he leaves this bit out, especially since the article is about winning the conference. FWIW, Miller does have Dorrell on the warm/hot seat in his recent column for Seattle PI.

Anyhow, thanks again for bringing that to our attention … and maybe you should send an email to Miller pointing out the deficiency in the article: tedmiller@seattlepi.com

That’s strange that Miller has Dorrell on the hot seat since the title of the link on ESPN is “Despite ugly losses to Utah and ND, UCLA’s optimism about capturing the Pac-10 has kept Karl Dorrell off the hot seat.”

And, then he later writes, “After that 20-6 loss, a fan mob, including many allegedly sane ones, called for Dorrell’s head to be delivered on a platter.”

“Huh?! Um, Oregon and Cal are clear favorites against UCLA and, I hate to say it, but SC is going to tear UCLA apart.”

..the morning line has the UCLA-CAL game off the board despite ULCA’s home advantage

whp there is no line because of the uncertain QB situation for both schools.

Dana- if you follow UCLA football as closely as I’m sure you do, you can read into Miller’s comments to mean that UCLA is the most volitaile and inconsistent program in college football history. It’s not a surprise that he would write KD is not on the hot seat, and then sentences later write that he is on the hot seat. That is the very definition of UCLA football. That’s exactly how it was last year. KD pulled a LAVIN last year. He almost had a chance to pull a Lavin this weekend. If Cal would’ve been No 1, shades of the slick-haired, weasel that was/is Steve Lavin, would’ve covered the Rose Bowl. Lavin made a living out of making everyone angry, suffering death threats, and then going out to beat the No. 1 team in the nation. It made me mad, because it was proof of how TALENTED we were, and how poorly managed we were at teh same time. Many of those Lavin teams have player that are in the NBA right now, and doing quite well, too.

Diego … that is one of the most maddening things about the Dorrell era. It is EXACTLY like the Lavin era and yet people are falling for the same crap Lavin gave them. Maddening.

What’s troubling overall is, UCLA’s history. I had a discussion the other day with my friends and I introduced this statement: “UCLA is the most underachieving college football program in the sport’s history.” In a room of ardent, cheerleading, rose-colored glasses, KD defenders, not a single one of them disputed my claim. It is true! UCLA are the most underachieving football program in history. This is why I aim my attacks at the UCLA administration. UCLA’s position has remained a constant. Los Angeles as a city, UCLA as a school has steamrolled through the 20th century. The school and the city have suffered hardships and triumphs. They’ve teetered at the brink of implosion (see the volatile 60s and riots on campus), but throughout that time there’s been one constant: UCLA football success isn’t important to the University.

UCLA uses football to fuel the rest of its athletic programs, which are excellent; however, UCLA doesn’t care to have the football program become a USC or an Ohio St., for fear that the football program will be the identifying symbol for the school. This is why the Administration has taken the never wavering position that the UCLA should be a BARGAIN coach.

That’s who UCLA hires! We hire a bargain coach, year after year, so that he can take over, have recruiting success based on the name and the Los Angeles talent pool, win a few games, go to some bowls and compete. Overall, the idea is to find a guy that’s not going to cost the school any money and a guy that will not mess the program up too much. Just go through the list of coaches…

This is the VERY profile of guys like Karl Dorrell, STeve Lavin, Bob Toledo.. these are BARGAIN coaches that won’t kill the programs, won’t cost the University money, and will keep UCLA just barely above water; just enough to be relevant and bring in revenue.

I’m tired of this position held by the Administration. My money, my time, my love, my tuition, my book… ALL OF IT went to UCLA. I’m damn proud! But I WANT A REFORM of that policy. I DEMAND that the proper attention be paid to FOOTBALL! I know DAn Guerrero can do it. I trust him. With the help of Chancellor Block, and with the efforts of the guys running this site, we can MAKE IT HAPPEN! I truly, wholeheartedly believe that!!!

GO BRUINS !