The Fate of Karl Dorrell
| 3
|
by Richsox
t finally feels like the Holiday Season here in Los Angeles. An honest to God actual winter storm yesterday, followed by today by clear, cool, breezy weather. So if you happened to be watching the UCLA-USC game you were treated to picture postcard views of the city. Unfortunately, this likely will not turn out to be such a beautiful day for UCLA head coach Karl Dorell, who probably will be canned after the Bruins lost to the Trojans, 24-7. There has been a great deal of discussion about his situation over the past couple of weeks, particularly since a L.A. Times writer named Kurt Streiter took up the case for UCLA not firing Dorrell, and incorporating a rather sober discussion of race (Dorrell is currently one of six black coaches in the NCAA FBS Division) into his rationale. His basic point is that Dorrell has done a good job of coaching the Bruins and deserves the benefit of the date. Implicit in the argument is the fact that it is not a level playing field for African-American coaches - there are disproportionately few of them and, if they fail once, they don't get a second chance (Tyrone Willingham would be the notable exception to this rule). I watched the clock tick down at the end of the game with a heavy heart, because I fear that Dorrell will be fired. When he was hired in 2002, I was ecstatic; Dorrell was a good receiver on some terrific Terry Donahue coached teams in the 1980s. I figured that he would bring back the "gutty little Bruins" overachiever spirit. Unfortunately, that has not worked out. They managed to lose to Wyoming in the Las Vegas Bowl. Even though he was 10-2 two years ago, the best UCLA could muster was a berth in the Sun Bowl. Last year, they finished 7 -5 and lost to Florida State in the Emerald Bowl. Dorrell's job probably was saved only by the fact that This year, the Bruins provided the most incomprehensible inconsistent brand of football imaginable enroute to a 6-6 record; they beat Brigham Young by 10 and lost to Utah by 38. They beat Cal and lost to Notre Dame.
Dorrell's problem is not just UCLA's somewhat mediocre performance over the past five season. His biggest problem is what has happened 15 miles across town, where Pete Carroll was energized the USC program to heights not seen since the John McKay glory days. SC annually enters in the national championship discussion, UCLA doesn't. And the contrast between the two programs is exacerbated by the personality of the two coaches. Carroll is hyperactive, outgoing and telegenic. Dorrell is stoic, usually unemotional and seems to never leave the same spot on the sidelines during a game. Carroll is virtually unbeatable in November, Dorrell's teams do not play well in November. It's all unfortunate because Dorrell is a classy gentleman who, while not necessarily elevating the success of the UCLA program certainly has elevated the integrity of the program. He also is the only major college coach in the country who has to deal with the fact that his team does not play on campus - UCLA's games are played at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, a good 45 minute drive from campus. Maybe that shouldn't matter; UCLA has never had an on-campus football stadium and Donahue's teams did quite well in the same setting.
So, we'll see what happens. Athletic Director Dan Guerrero likely will fire Dorrell. He certainly can justify that decision with numbers. Bruins fans are clamoring for former UCLA QB Rick Neuheisel, who managed to get tossed out of the University of Washington due to his betting habits. Dorrell will retreat to the anonymity of being an assistant somewhere in college or the NFL (he was receivers coach for the Denver Broncos before taking the UCLA job), or perhaps will hook on as head coach with a smaller school. It's too bad.
