From the end of the first quarter of the UCLA-Oregon football
game up until the minute I started this column, I’ve been
hearing nonstop complaints from every UCLA fan I’ve seen or
talked to.
I’m normally a pretty tolerant person, but I’ve
heard about all the whining and moaning I can take.
The play-calling is atrocious. The refs cost us the game.
Dorrell should be fired. The defense suddenly forgot how to tackle.
Osaar Rasshan should start at quarterback. This team isn’t
even worth watching anymore.
FLASH SLIDESHOW
See more photos from UCLA Football’s match with the Oregon
Ducks.
OK. We’ve got that all out of the way? It’s my turn
to say someth”“ no Jimmy, I don’t think punting on first
down is the best way for UCLA to produce on offense. Can I please
talk?
Everybody, for the love of God, calm down!
It was wrong for everybody to assume the Bruin football team was
a great team because of its performance against two teams that sit
at the bottom of the Pac-10. And it’s wrong for everybody to
assume this team is a horrible team because of the way it played
against Oregon.
The truth is, the Bruins are a slightly above average team that
did exactly what any neutral party would’ve expected it to do
against Oregon on the road ““ lose by about 10 points.
Here’s the problem. At UCLA, slightly above average just
doesn’t cut it. People here expect greatness.
And rightfully so. As big as this school is, as great a location
as we have, and as huge a reputation as our athletic department
has, UCLA football should be great year in and year out.
Patience isn’t a virtue we should have to have. Being
simply run-of-the-mill is just cause for mass panic. And mass panic
being deemed just usually means that changes need to be made.
In a world where people judge everything in absolutes and
generalities, jumping to conclusions becomes a hobby.
An obviously dumb example of how this relates to the UCLA
football program is when people start calling for the heads of Pat
Cowan and Ben Olson after they perform poorly.
Honestly, what do people expect? These guys are both learning on
the job. They aren’t going to be great right away,
particularly not with an offensive line that struggles to protect
the quarterback. There isn’t one other sophomore or freshman
quarterback in the nation under which this offense would
consistently thrive right now.
A more convincing argument under the same line of reasoning is
this: Karl Dorrell has had four years to turn a mediocre program
into the great program that it should be. The program is still
mediocre. Therefore, Dorrell needs to go.
I have heard so many people, many of whom are much more
intelligent than I am, subscribe to this argument. It’s a
bunch of baloney.
Does anybody ever take the time to look at the situation
anymore? Is it Dorrell’s fault that he lost virtually all of
his offensive talent from a year ago in a season where virtually
all the tough Pac-10 match-ups are road games?
Last season, Dorrell’s third, was an excellent one for the
Bruins. Ten wins, no matter how they are achieved, signal a great
season ““ especially for a team that hadn’t tasted true
success since the Cade McNown era.
This season, the defense has improved dramatically, the offense
has shown occasional signs of life, and the team has been
competitive. 4-2 is certainly not an ideal situation ““
particularly not with the schedule that the Bruins now face the
rest of the way. But if you look honestly at the hand the Bruin
program was dealt this year, could you really have expected
anything more?
I’m not saying that people at UCLA shouldn’t always
expect the best. And I’m not saying that fans shouldn’t
be critical.
I’m just saying, let’s be fair.
If the Bruins aren’t a competitive team for the rest of
this year, by all means, start calling for changes.
If the team isn’t absolutely stellar next year, with the
offense and defense retaining everybody and a favorable schedule,
then, by all means, start an uprising.
But for now, just relax. There’s nothing to be too upset
about.
E-mail Azar at bazar@media.ucla.edu.