"That so many fans want Dorrell out after a 10-2 season is mind-boggling."

Who are the "so many" fans that want Dorrell out?

Brian: considering what went down at ASU, who do you think the team wanted as the starting QB? Are there any split factions between Ben and Pat's supporters on the team?

Sean,

I am stunned by how many people still do not have faith in him. I would say at least half the "fans" that either email me or I talk to at practices, games, ect., have some comment about how long Karl will be at UCLA. Inevitably, it comes down to what is going on at USC.

David,

I'm sure there are some guys on UCLA who wanted Pat to win the job, but there is no such division like at ASU. In fact, I don't think there is such division anywhere else in the country. What transpired at ASU, to me, is bred on coaching leadership, or lack thereof. I think most people around UCLA believe the long-term answer at quarterback is Ben.

Disagree with some of your strawman arguments concerning UCLA fans expectations.

Brian
My only problem with KD is that he does not leave me with a feeling of confidence. He could use a dose of charisma, if he has some, let the fans see it. I am not asking him to mirror Pete Caroll that is not realistic, just quit being sheepish and start showing us the fans some emotion.

Thanks for the answer on Moline.

But can you tell your colleague lonnie white that Breazell runs a 4.3? He said in today's articles that Breazell is not the fastest guy out there. Unless Ginn or R Bush is out on the field, its very likely that Breazell is the fastest guy out there.

Thanks for the response Brian.

I think the lack of faith comes from Karl having only 1 winning season in his first 3 seasons as Ucla coach, and the embarrassing losses to Arizona and USC last year. The 6th and 2nd worst losses in Ucla's modern football era.

Just my $.02

Thank you for responding to my two questions above. However, I whole-heartedly disagree with the second response for several reasons.

First, while it is true that UCLA has won only one national championship in football, UCLA in fact has an otherwise long and distinguished history in the sport. We have several Pac 10 championships and Rose Bowl appearances to prove it. Also, part of what the fans are so frustrated about is that we are so successful in other sports (in fact, the most successful in college sports history) but NOT football. There is no reason why we should not be winning 10 or more games every year. Other schools have similar admission issues (are you saying that SC wins because they have less stringent academic admission rules?) and still win. As for facilities, it is true that our practice field is not ideal, but we supposedly have a state of the art training center on campus and play our home games in one of the most storied venues in all of college football.

Ben Howland almost won the national championship last year with Pauley disintegrating around him. In fact, Ben Howland is the perfect example of people we should be targeting for head coaching positions at UCLA. Before he was hired, he had been a head coach at the D-1 level, was a proven recruiter, and had a long history of success rebuilding and sustaining troubled programs.

I am sorry, but these "excuses" do not make it okay to perform poorly.

Second, I am afraid that 10 wins last season will prove to be an anomaly in Dorrell's tenure. His record against winning teams is still depressingly dismal (5-11). He has an overall winning percentage of .595; a conference winning percentage of .583; conference finishes of tied for 5th, tied for 5th, & 3rd; an 0-3 record against SC; a 1-2 record in bowl games; 4 losses in 3 seasons to teams with sub-.500 records; and last but not least, a record of 0-7 against opponents who finish the year ranked in the top 20. All of these facts and all of the skin-of-their-teeth victories last year tell me that the soft schedule did in fact have something to do with the success last year.

When he was hired, he did not have even a decent resume, but the one thing people could point to is his potential to bring top-notch recruits to Westwood. Unfortunately, each of his recruiting classes has been ranked worse than the last (athough, to his credit, he did get Ben Olson and some solid lineman in last year's class).

Third, he needs to beat SC. I really don't care how good SC is, every UCLA coach is judged in large part based on his record against SC. Nobody is hiding the ball on this one-this was true when he was hired, and it is just as true today. Beat SC. Period.

Fourth, if you think 8 wins is overly ambitious this year, why is it mind boggling that UCLA fans want Dorrell gone? Two 6 win seasons, a 10 win season, and a 6 or 7 win season is not exactly lighting the world on fire. I will ask you in return: is this pattern of mediocrity really worth rewarding with yet another extension?

So, I respectfully disagree with you, but I do truly appreciate your reporting on UCLA football and basketball. You are clearly the best of the UCLA beat writers and I look forward to your columns (especially during basketball season!).

Brian, I've read some people believe that KD needs to go 9-3 and beat SC. What do you think are the chances of that? Also, if KD can't beat SC this year at home next year would seem to be even less likely for victory.

Koach Karl obviously has some deep seeded issues with coach Dorrell. I am amazed by the time he wasted to compile all those stats to trash Dorrell and the bang up job he's done in the past 3 years. Get used to Dorrell, he will be here for a while and he is doing a fine job. This isn't fast food, you can't snap your fingers and demand a national championship in the guys 3rd year as a head coach. Koach Karl is either racist or ignorant or both.

The only point of Koach Karl's that I really disagree with is the notion that each of Dorrell's recruiting classes were worse than the preceding one. I don't put very much stock in recruiting websites at all, but according to Rivals.com, Dorrell's first full class in 2004 was ranked #34 in the nation. His second class in 2005 was ranked #26 in the nation, and the most recent class was ranked #17 in the nation. This year's class will likely not be ranked as high, but that's due to the limited scholarship situation. We're getting some very high caliber players in the class of 2007 that had offers from programs all across the country, including USC. I think this is a positive sign that Dorrell is improving steadily as a recruiter.

However it is hard for me to disagree with much of where Koach Karl was coming from. I don't think Dorrell had the proper resume that one would expect when he was hired on. I think he underachieved in his first two years as coach specifically by losing the two bowl games to mid-major competition. And I do think he has grossly underachieved in not at least keeping competitive with USC. Jeff Tedford has proven to be a thorn in the Trojan's side. Trojan fans have grown to respect him and don't look forward to the game vs. Cal every season. It's the opposite with Dorrell, to the point now where USC expects to blow UCLA out every season, In fact, USC fans celebrated, yes celebrated when it was reported Dorrell recieved a contract extension. That's a total embarrassment in my mind and UCLA fans deserve much better than that. However I remain positive and enthusiastic as a Bruin fan. I think Dorrell has shown signs of improvement as a coach and recruiter, and hopefully that will translate into more consistency and respect nationally.

Woa. I offered a fact-based analysis of why I think Dorrell is doing a poor job. In response, the best you can do is accuse me of being a racist? Because you don't like what I have to say? Shame on you.

You can disagree with my opinion. If fact, I encourage it. Explain with specificty how Dorrell is doing a good job and let's discuss it. But concluding I am a racist is beyond the pale.

Since you are so interested in "all the time wasted" compiling stats, don't worry about it. Somebody else had already compiled them and I found them on the Internet. You see, there are a lot of people who objectively see that Dorrell is underperforming.

Judging by the substance of your response, it is abundantly clear that you did not "waste any time" putting any thought into it.

Dohn's right. UCLA football has never been about winning national championships, and the sooner UCLA fans figure that out, the better off they'll be. :)

In my opinion, "Koach Karl" (starting with his disrespectful play on Coach Dorrell's name), is just an anti-UCLA instigator. He is cleverly sewing dissention and negative energy against the program. The notion of setting ground rules for firing a coach at the beginning of a season after a 10-2 season is absurd -- it makes sense only in terms of someone who basically, does not support the Bruin football program, in my opinion. Please, ignore Koach Karl and maybe he will go away....

BD you are my favorite beat writer, but I have to disagree with you in regards to your lack of understanding of the fans who have not yet embraced KD.

Well coached teams do not loose by big margins. The fact that UCLA has lost by 25+ points in 10% of the 37 games that he coached (2005 vs. USC L 66-19, 2005 vs. UA L 52-14, 2003 vs. USC L 47-22, 2003 vs. OU L 59-24) contributes to the lack of faith.

I do see progress from KD esp with the way he manages a game. The fake punt vs. Cal last season was a spontaneous and brilliant gameday decision.

Can you give us some insight into how KD develops a gameplan for an opponent?

As a grad('57) and a big fan for 65 years, I believe this team is going to be great. So great that I took them at 30-1 at the local book. Lack of continuity in practice is not meaningful, as the big guy with the whistle is calling the shots.
GO BRUINS! Ken