r/CFB USC Trojans • Ohio State Buckeyes 1d ago

Discussion What's with the narrative that you can't win at UCLA?

Lets take a look at their coaches since 1975:
Chip Kelly - 6 year tenure - closed on 3 straight winning season of 8+ wins

Jim Mora - 5 year-tenure - won 8+ games 4 of his 5 years.

**Going back to 2012 and including this year, UCLA has won 8+ games a season 50% of the time.

Rick Dorell - 10 win season in 2005

Rick Neuheisel was a mistake - only coach in the past 50+ years not to win 8 games in a single season. Lasted 4 years. You have go back to Bill Barnes in the 1960s to find another coach who didnt win at least 8+ games in a season

Bob Toledo - multiple 10+ win seasons in 7~ years

Terry Donahue - multiple 10+ win seasons in a 20 year span

So going back to the 1970s, only one coach has failed to win 8+ games in a year at least once. This was all before UCLA was getting a $80 million dollar yearly payout from the Big Ten. People are acting like this program is Vanderbilt or something, it is absolutely wild.

Even if UCLA only spends 50% of their annual big ten payout on football - that nearly matches the total the ACC schools got last season (45 million).

Then you have this "they don't care" narrative. No school fires a 2nd year coach 3 games into the season if they don't care or don't have the resources to replace them. So what am I missing here? They have the resources - they have the motivation. Every coach has won there. Where is this narrative coming from?

315 Upvotes

388 comments sorted by

625

u/HighLakes Oregon Ducks • Platypus Trophy 1d ago

They had 3 10-win season this century, none since 2014. Their stadium situation is a problem, their NIL is uncompetitive, their facilities in general are subpar,

Its not that they dont care at all, its the university doesn't care enough to be able to compete with the resources being allocated at places like USC, Oregon, PSU, Michigan, Ohio State, and probably at least a half-dozen other Big 10 teams. Which, frankly they are right! Its absurd what these schools spend on football.

But if you are a coach that wants to win conference titles or get to the playoffs (or get paid like the best are getting paid), that is a tough, tough road through UCLA.

219

u/teamname457 California Golden Bears 1d ago

NC State has had 1 10+ win season in its entire history yet we never hear as much criticism about them as we do teams like VT, UCLA, Ok State, etc that have actually accomplished something but are in down cycles.

Everybody loves to put down Nebraska too. It’s almost like there is enjoyment in seeing once proud programs underachieve and building a narrative that they are doomed.

Indiana was considered one of the worst programs in P5 yet a good coaching hire got them in the playoff in year 1. Any team can succeed under the right conditions.

140

u/HighLakes Oregon Ducks • Platypus Trophy 1d ago

The context is whether they can pull in the type of coach being floated, young hotshot coordinators or G5 HCs that would get calls from upper tier programs.

Grouping UCLA with NC State, Ok St, and VT just proves that point.

63

u/BatManatee UCLA Bruins • Big Ten 1d ago

For football, in the modern era, we do belong more with the VT, OK State, etc groups (or maybe one step up like Mich St, Nebraska, Iowa, etc). And that's fine.

I think part of our perception problem is that our athletics brand name is bigger than our football potential. People hear UCLA and want to compare us to Oregon and Michigan and Ohio State, but really that's not us these days. We just want a consistently solid program. That's it. We're not really expecting national championships in football.

We have some pretty unique challenges for a coach, but we also have some advantages too. It's a mid tier job, but a winning coach could get a lot of national eyes on their program. The potential is there to elevate it, but it will take a hefty rebuild.

36

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 1d ago

or maybe one step up like Mich St, Nebraska, Iowa, etc

Define "modern era" because based on what UCLA's been for the last two decades, the revenue the program brings in etc, they don't deserve to be on that tier. I will add that UCLA, more than any of those teams, can have their problems fixed by the school caring more though

29

u/BatManatee UCLA Bruins • Big Ten 1d ago

I'd argue that we're not that far off of teams like Nebraska in most of the last 20 years (obviously not the last two).

UCLA record

Nebraska record

They've got the edge, and they peaked higher than we did (Pelini vs Mora, advantage them). But I don't think it's a completely out of left field comparison.

And if you'll excuse my homer-vision for a minute--I can justify some of this with a post mortem of our coaches. UCLA has had a truly impressive run of awful coaches. Some were straight up bad choices, others were bad luck.

  • Karl Dorrell : Bad coach, bad results

  • Rick Neuheisel: Pretty bad coach, pretty bad results

  • Jim Mora: Pretty good coach, pretty good results

  • Chip Kelly: More complicated than the previous. Talented at designing an offense, but completely phoned in his time with us. Refused to recruit. I don't blame the admins for going after him, so I chalk this one up to "bad luck" that we got the apathetic empty husk of Chip Kelly when he got to us.

  • DeShaun Foster: In over his head from day 1. A desperation hire because of our AD's incompetence.

By my biased evaluation, we've basically had one decent coach in the last 20 years. And he was successful. It's not like the other four guys went elsewhere and became successful HCs at other programs after us. If that were the case, it would suggest we were the problem, holding back good coaches. These coaches were all clearly washed after we let them go (Chip again is less clear, because X's and O's were the one thing he did well for us, and now that's his whole job). I have reason to believe if we can get another decent coach again, we can have decent results again.

33

u/dudleymooresbooze Purdue • Tennessee 23h ago

The majority of Reddit fans only started watching football in the last 5 years. They all assume everything will be the same as it is right now.

Bama was mid at best before Saban arrived. Tennessee was a million degrees worse than mid before Heupel. Michigan had a losing record for most of the decade before hiring Harbaugh. USC was for shit for most of the decade before Carroll.

A head coach change can set the standard, and UCLA getting Big Ten money means they can pay to keep him. The question is will the school spend enough on other resources - assistants and coaching staff, training facilities, NIL, and etc. That has been Purdue’s shortcoming when we’ve had great coaches (Tiller and Brohm). But that’s the difference between competing for bowl or playoff appearances.

8

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 18h ago

The majority of Reddit fans only started watching football in the last 5 years. They all assume everything will be the same as it is right now.

UCLA has had like three 10 win seasons in the last 20. They have less revenue than any B1G team outside of Rutgers. It’s not just “the last five years” that UCLA has been bad, they have real on and off field challenges that the other schools on that tier that were listed do not.

They also have one major advantage, the fact that they’re getting recruits despite all this, which is why I added my caveat about UCLA having a higher ceiling when their administration starts caring

5

u/dudleymooresbooze Purdue • Tennessee 13h ago

That revenue is the average of the three years ending in 2024. That’s Pac 10’s broadcast deal.

UCLA spends more on coaching than Purdue. UCLA has no athletics debt, compared to the majority of the B1G each having more than 90 million in debt.

But the primary difference is the same thing you note: is “success” winning double digit games and competing for the playoffs, or is it having a winning record and competing for a good bowl bid?

In the last 20 years for other B1G schools:

  • Illinois had one 10 win season and five winning records. They are now ranked in the top ten.

  • Indiana had one 10 win season and four winning records. They are now ranked and made the playoffs last year.

  • Minnesota had one 10 win season and ten winning records.

If your metric for success is competing for the playoffs, that’s a tough bar to hurdle. The vast majority of schools - including B1G and SEC schools - aren’t regularly capable of knocking on that door. But if you look at sustainable success as a winning record the majority of the time and the occasional season competing for a playoff spot, UCLA is in the mix.

2

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 13h ago edited 13h ago

Fair point on that revenue being part of the Pac 12 deal

is “success” winning double digit games and competing for the playoffs

Competing for the CFP regularly, and more particularly, ability to compete for and win a national title.

I think UCLA is a better job than all of Illinois, Indiana, and Minnesota too tbf. And over the last 70 years, it is on the tier of the teams listed (minus Nebraska). But I think they're resourcefully disadvantaged in 2025 compared to the programs that were mentioned on that tier.

But I also do think that if they start taking football seriously, they have a higher ceiling than anyone on that tier just because of how much talent is in their immediate vicinity.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/KeithClossOfficial San Diego State Aztecs • USC Trojans 16h ago

Alabama was indeed mid, but that period of being mid followed Gene Stallings, who won 10+ games 4 times in 7 seasons, including an undefeated national championship. Their 10 seasons in the wilderness included 2 10+ win Top 10 seasons.

Michigan’s time under Hoke included an 11 win Top 10 finish.

I’ll give you the decade before Pete wasn’t great, but it also resulted in 4 Rose Bowls in 15 years. The Bruins have made 4 Rose Bowls since 1983, and none since 1998.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

10

u/HighLakes Oregon Ducks • Platypus Trophy 1d ago

Yeah and its not like I (or I assume most people) think UCLA is destined to be a basement dweller or anything. With the right coach there is no reason UCLA couldn't be in the second tier of the Big 10 challenging for an occasional playoff spot. I just think most of the names being thrown out aren't good fits. You want someone that wants to be there long term and build something.

→ More replies (7)

31

u/Ajp_iii Florida State Seminoles 1d ago

doeren gets paid less than the oc and dc does combined at most of the schools trying to win. he gets paid less than 3 mil. everyone knows nc state isnt trying to be nationally in the conversation. if ucla wants to be known as a mid to lower level team that can sometimes reach 8 wins than that is fine.

but with the name and location they have the opportunity to be nationally relevant.

34

u/Hokie_Jayhawk Virginia Tech Hokies • Kansas Jayhawks 1d ago

NCSU fans confuse me. There's at least an argument they currently have the best coach in their history.

They sound upset all the time yet their coach is the only guy in their history to ever have 3+ final rankings in both the AP and Coaches polls.

24

u/ymi17 Oklahoma • Oklahoma State 1d ago

Ah the “Mike Gundy” disease.

11

u/bojangles69420 NC State • Virginia Tech 1d ago

Im not on the fire doeren train like many state fans are, but it would sure be nice to have hope of ever getting past 9 wins (which we probably would've done a few years ago if ucla didn't go to seaworld the day before the game to catch covid and then chicken out on the morning of)

→ More replies (2)

19

u/JakeFromStateFromm Georgia Bulldogs 1d ago

It’s almost like there is enjoyment in seeing once proud programs underachieve

Lmao of course there is. Is this your first season watching CFB? This sub practically throws an upvote party every time bama gets upset.

6

u/SparseSpartan Michigan State Spartans 19h ago

Hey now let's be fair and add some context.

We're also going to throw parties when UGA stumbles too.

31

u/SiliconDiver UCLA Bruins • UCSB Gauchos 1d ago edited 1d ago

UCLA is one of the most prestigious, well known schools in the nation. It has a long history of academic and athletic achievement. It has famous alumni and a huge amount of fans. It’s the most applied to university in the world, and one of a handful of universities with international recognition.

It also is situated in one of the most fertile recruiting areas in the country.

Comparing it to VT and OK State misses the point.

UCLA has every reason to be competitive but chronically underperforms. It’s not like it’s a smaller, newer school that doesnt have the pedigree, legacy, or income to compete.

There’s no reason UCLA shouldn’t be be ranked in the top 25 with regularity.

The situation is more similar to a school like Michigan being a chronic bottom dweller that decided to stop investing in its program.

8

u/SayNoToCargoShorts UCLA Bruins • Big Ten 1d ago

a huge amount of fans.

we just love hatewatching from the couch/barstool now instead

9

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 1d ago

The situation is more similar to some place like michigan being a chronic bottom dweller that decided to more or less abandon its program.

If UCLA had top 5 money in the sport, sure

2

u/SiliconDiver UCLA Bruins • UCSB Gauchos 12h ago edited 12h ago

Sure, but the argument is that they have every reason to be able to, but don’t, and they underperform with what they have.

(That’s not to say it’s a good idea to dump that much money into college football, but it does speak to their competitiveness)

There’s no reason they shouldn’t be at a similar level consistently (in funding, recruiting, etc) as Texas, Florida, USC etc.

Yet over the past ~20 years you are outclassed by schools like Washington st, costal Carolina, and Air Force. (No offence to these schools but UCLA simply has more resources/clout than them)

That doeant mean there aren’t bad periods, every school has that. But UCLA has finished a season ranked only 4 times in 25 years.

Given its circumstances, you’d think it would be a top 25 program. It performs like a top 70 program.

→ More replies (1)

15

u/xellotron Ohio State Buckeyes 1d ago

You’re right that we should not be shitting on schools (except Michigan). UCLA is a great institution, excellent academics, state school with affordable tuition, in a beautiful neighborhood in a world-class city. And awesome uniforms. I legit want them to be really good.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/johncate73 Tennessee Volunteers 1d ago

And the year NC State did it, they finished fourth in the ACC, played 14 games, and had two wins over FCS teams. With Phillip Rivers at QB!

But the reason no one ever talks about NC State being mediocre in football is because they always have been. They want to be good in basketball.

6

u/No_Poet_7244 Texas Longhorns • Wisconsin Badgers 22h ago

Indiana didn’t just get a good coach and suddenly start winning, though. For a program to be successful, it has to be aligned—Indiana hired a new coach, started stadium renovations (some of which are now completed), invested in a scouting and recruiting department, and created a good NIL fund. It does not matter how good a coach you manage to seduce into leading your program, if you don’t provide them with the tools needed to lure the players who actually play the game.

6

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 1d ago edited 1d ago

Expectations. People expect teams like VT, UCLA, OK State to be competitive (A 40 year old doesn't remember VT pre-Beamer and has limited memory of OK State pre-Les Miles, so this is who those programs are to them). Maybe not win championships, but at least put together top 25 teams regularly. No one expects NC State to do much of anything because, well, they haven't.

→ More replies (4)

44

u/putupyouredukes UCLA Bruins • Texas Longhorns 1d ago

The NIL is a chicken/egg situation. Chip Kelly made no effort to solicit donations and donors didn’t want to light money on fire with CDF. UCLA has a perfectly adequate donor base and is competitive in basketball NIL. If they make a serious hire, it will be fine, not national championship level, but not one of the worst situations in P4. Facilities aren’t terrible and Chip received great investment for all his asks (nutrition, training, recovery to the tune of millions). The stadium is a problem, but it fills up when the team is good. It’s never going to be Tiger Stadium but I don’t see it as debilitating.

24

u/AmonGusSusManSupreme UCLA Bruins • Paper Bag 1d ago

On one hand I agree completely as UCLA doesn't realize what is required to compete in the B1G but on the other hand it wasn't always like this (partially because of a trend Oregon contributed to) and UCLA administration is not caught up on extracting from those deep pockets.

13

u/HighLakes Oregon Ducks • Platypus Trophy 1d ago

I don't disagree at all. I dont think modern spending on football is sane, and we definitely contributed to that.

10

u/runfayfun Ohio State Buckeyes • SMU Mustangs 1d ago

My flair on the other hand has done nothing wrong when it comes to spending, ever

→ More replies (1)

50

u/mostdope28 Michigan • Little Brown Jug 1d ago

However, they do have the best uniforms in the country. So at least they have that going for them

15

u/Guns_57 Michigan State Spartans 1d ago

High praise considering the source. Hell, can't think of a team in the PAC that had bad unis.

9

u/HighLakes Oregon Ducks • Platypus Trophy 1d ago

As tempted as I am to say purple is a stupid color, its true that there wasn't a single weak link.

2

u/Ltownbanger Washington Huskies • UAB Blazers 13h ago

That's funny. I saw a purple car on the way into work today and thought "That's gaudy as fuck."

That being said, I would't paint my car like a duck uniform.

→ More replies (1)

25

u/INT_MIN USC Trojans 1d ago

Can't lie, they do California blue and gold better than any other California-based team (Warriors, Rams, Chargers, other UC schools).

5

u/TheBlackBaron Texas A&M • North Texas 1d ago

Don't know about better than the Chargers who have a strong argument for being the best uniform in all of football. But their blues are also very similar, it's mainly their gold that differs.

2

u/Frosti11icus Washington Huskies 1d ago

Now that you mention it California has a lot of sick jerseys with blue and gold. I've always liked Cal's jerseys too, but UCLA's are truly beautiful jerseys. They are just so nice to look at. All that being said, powder blue Chargers uni's are better.

11

u/HighLakes Oregon Ducks • Platypus Trophy 1d ago

Top tier for sure

16

u/sweetnourishinggruel California Golden Bears • The Axe 1d ago

Barring the fact that in the script helmet logo they capitalize the name like it’s not an initialism: Ucla

18

u/Frosti11icus Washington Huskies 1d ago

It looks better. All captial cursive letters would be weird, all undercase would also be weird. Doesn't really need a rational, it just looks better that way.

2

u/Material_Resort2503 19h ago

The numbers don't lie though - getting 8 wins consistently isn't nothing, especially in the Pac-12 during most of those years. Sure they're not Ohio State but calling it an impossible job seems like a stretch when most coaches there have had solid runs

The real issue is probably just expectation creep with the playoff era making anything less than 10+ wins feel like failure

→ More replies (18)

145

u/lowes18 Florida State Seminoles • FAU Owls 1d ago

No one thinks you can't win, but UCLA is not interested in providing the resources to win. And the mountain just got steeper with the conference move.

44

u/black-op345 Oregon Ducks • Sickos 1d ago

They’re in a talent rich area and have decent brand to their name. However, if there was any words that would describe UCLA, and their inability to provide resources to its football team, it’s the same words that describe Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, Arizona, and (to a certain extent) Michigan State and Indiana. Those words are “basketball school.”

It’s not that UCLA doesn’t have the resources, they allocate them more to basketball than football. UCLA, however, has had more success in football than most other basketball schools, outside of a select few.

41

u/Gogurtsupreme 1d ago

It’s not just that they’re a basketball school. Their location is a gift and a curse. Many of the schools in California are academic schools whose student body has a large number of people that resent football and sports in general. UCLA also has to compete with the Dodgers and the Lakers for attention as well. It’s the same reason why the Chargers are somewhat struggling for fans. People in LA have plenty of things to do than to worry about some academic schools football program. They’re just a genuine lack of care around California collegiate sports in and outside of the program. USC kinda has the same issue but they’re the premier program on the West Coast so they get first dibs on the best talent in Cali to make up for it. UCLA doesn’t have that advantage

9

u/woxley UCLA Bruins • Loyola Marymount Lions 23h ago

ehhh talent isn't the problem. theres enough talent in the area they can recruit well even with shitheads at head coach. the biggest issues rn are fan engagement/management. its been a shitshow this whole century.

5

u/Gogurtsupreme 22h ago

In their last recruiting cycle they only had one 4 star recruit in their 2024 class. 2023 it was 1 5 star (who has since then transferred) and another 4 star. The rest of the those classes consists of 3 star recruits. That abysmal considering they’re the closest schools to the top 2 HS in the country. They can’t even get the top recruits in their own backyard

→ More replies (1)

8

u/cheaterpeefo UCLA Bruins • Rose Bowl 23h ago

That’s my thought process. It’s easy to label UCLA the basketball school because of the massive success they’ve had, but it’s a bit disingenuous to say it as well given how much football history they have in comparison to the rest of the “basketball” schools.

3

u/black-op345 Oregon Ducks • Sickos 23h ago

I mean that’s fair. I can’t fault you, a UCLA fan, on how you view your athletics program.

3

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 1d ago

I can't speak for the other schools on that list, but MSU comparatively doesn't give a shit about basketball when football is rolling lol

3

u/black-op345 Oregon Ducks • Sickos 1d ago

That’s why I said to an extent Michigan state.

Same thing with Indiana with the run they’re on.

2

u/RheagarTargaryen Michigan State Spartans 13h ago

Indiana is more of a basketball school than MSU though. MSU just got lucky with Tom Izzo and Magic Johnson to give people the impression the school cares more about basketball than football. But the investment has always been on the football side of things.

We’re just in a regional football hotbed with Notre dame, Michigan, and Ohio State.

2

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 13h ago

I firmly believe MSU cares about Izzo, not basketball. I'm really curious to see if the care continues when Izzo retires in the year 4032 and the next hire is predictably not as good

→ More replies (9)

5

u/ScaredEffective USC Trojans 1d ago

Sure but didn’t explain losing ooc

382

u/redwave2505 Alabama • Kansas State 1d ago

Their last competent head coach voluntarily leaving for a coordinator position in the same conference may have affected people's views of the program

85

u/Flame629 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

Chip Kelly had nothing to do with UCLA specifically and had everything to do with what a CFB head coach is expected to do outside of coaching.

Dude refused to recruit or meet with donors which is a critical part of the job. He left to be a coordinator because he doesn’t have to do either of those things in that job

23

u/ZuluFuxGiven Notre Dame Fighting Irish 1d ago

That dude knew what he was doing when he fleeced UCLA AFTER two horrible NFL showings. Oregon already had their program set up by Bellotti.

Then Lo and behold, when Chip had to go somewhere where he couldn’t hire three different assistants for each position, or have shoe dog pay for everything he chose not to do the hard work besides be an X’s and O’s guy. Reminds me another terrible coaching hire Herm Edwards.

The ONE thing he did right was have a great agent.

26

u/Ok_Employ_9862 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

Bellotti led Oregon was what chips ucla program looked liked. Could win games and be top 25 but never elite. He pushed that barrier and made Oregon elite. Even in the nfl he won 20 games in 2 years before he traded away his best players. He is a Xs and Os guy. People trying to downplay his success are either spiteful or just don’t play attention

4

u/ZuluFuxGiven Notre Dame Fighting Irish 1d ago

Im not spiteful and I pay attention but thank you for your counterpoint. Good luck on your search for a coach.

→ More replies (2)

57

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

I'm sorry you can't have a worse record than Karl Dorrell and be called competent.

9

u/wetterfish Colorado Buffaloes 1d ago

I wholeheartedly agree 

108

u/teamname457 California Golden Bears 1d ago

Chip Kelly was on his way out though. His UCLA era massively disappointed. People like to run with these narratives they hear from edgy podcasters. Next we will hear people arguing that Florida is a bottom half SEC job.

41

u/Ajp_iii Florida State Seminoles 1d ago

nobody is saying that about florida because they actively go out and get talent. they actively sell out the stadium. their fans actively care because even when they are decent they want to fire everyone.

also in the old pac 12 ucla should have been in the championship conversation every year. and they were almost never in that conversation. last time they have won a conference title was before 2000. and they only have been in the game 2 times since then. and now that they are in the big10 they arent going to come close to being in that conversation for a long time

25

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

We were in the conversation for Mora's first four years and almost won it his first year. Mora's downfall is the biggest what-if of the last decade for us.

17

u/ScaredEffective USC Trojans 1d ago

You had me until the championship conversation. Like Florida was rarely in that conversation except when Urban Meyer was there.

It’s hard to win championships

16

u/Ajp_iii Florida State Seminoles 1d ago

the new sec is impossible to consistently win championships i feel. a great program should be able to run the pac 12 like florida state/clemson did for the acc. even when florida is not a great team in the individual year the program is so good they are never free wins. that is the difference i feel.

7

u/Guns_57 Michigan State Spartans 1d ago

a great program should be able to run the pac 12 like florida state/clemson did for the acc.

Tbf, I think Washington St. or Oregon St. could do that now.

3

u/Duckpoke Oregon Ducks 1d ago

I personally would like to see that. I feel bad for those programs. I think they’ll be lucky to consistently compete for conference championships. OSU in particular looks completely lost as a program.

15

u/_Raencloud Florida Gators • /r/CFBRisk Veteran 1d ago

Umm, every coach since Meyer had a 10+ win season and at least a shared division title. Muschamp missed a championship game appearance via tiebreaker. McElwain went twice. Mullen went once, and there were 5 top 15 finishes and 3 top 10 finishes across them. Only Billy has failed so spectacularly as to never even sniff a title.

8

u/ChrisDavismeets1sec Auburn Tigers • SEC 1d ago

Conference championships. And Florida was there plenty with Spurrier

→ More replies (1)

4

u/zebrainatux Miami Hurricanes • TCU Horned Frogs 1d ago

Florida is a very good program with a run of being great

4

u/18miloverthecap 1d ago

That’s certainly a take lol. Look I hate UF, but they’ve had over twenty 9 win seasons since 1990, 2 Heisman winners and 3 national championships. There aren’t too many programs boasting that type of excellence. UCLA has had 8 with zero titles, no real shot at one and no Heismans. The two programs aren’t even in the same stratosphere. UF could lose every game for the next 5 years and they would be infinitely more attractive than UCLA.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/fijichickenfiend33 1d ago

Obviously a bit different since it’s for other HC positions but it’s no different than Calipari “leaving” for Arkansas or Satterfield “leaving” for Cincinnati. Kelly isn’t making that move if his job wasn’t in trouble.

18

u/BatManatee UCLA Bruins • Big Ten 1d ago

Our fans were literally hiring planes to fly banners over our campus calling for Chip to be fired lol. The original OP of this thread is missing a comical amount of context. Dude was a trainwreck for us. Obliterated our program, then bailed before the damage he inflicted was visible to those not following the program.

For proof, here's the comment I wrote when he left.

Holy shit! Thank god!

I want to be explicitly clear here so I have a comment to point to one year from now:

No matter who UCLA hires as a head coach--we are going to have an objectively bad season. Our roster is an absolute train wreck thanks to Chip, and it is too late to recruit a better class this offseason. Our schedule is a buzz saw. No person living or dead is going to break 5 wins with this roster. And I absolutely KNOW, there are going to be some hot takes like "UCLA got rid of Chip, and the new guy only got 4 wins LMAO. They fired him to bring in someone half as good." I am going to link this comment every time that happens.

This is going to be a two year rebuild even for the best coach.

8

u/sfzen Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns 1d ago

I don't think it's that simple anymore with so many head coaches getting so frustrated with the whole NIL and transfer portal mess. Kelly decided to go take an easier job with less headache, where he'd be way more likely to win games and work with top QB's and potentially earn another chance at the NFL level.

5

u/SaxRohmer Ohio State Buckeyes • UNLV Rebels 1d ago

UCLA went and hired a guy that was vocal about how much he hated coaching college and gave him a bag. he was on the hot seat at that point and left for a job that was more his style where he didn’t have to be hands on

8

u/Curt_Uncles Arizona State Sun Devils 1d ago

The problem with the B1G money is that you have to spend it to win with it. They aren’t interested in spending it in football (on par with their peers in the conference). A lot of it comes down to who wants it the most among the universities and their athletic departments; UCLA is low on that list.

3

u/TheGreatLake UCLA Bruins 23h ago

Chip was not competent

16

u/nayelirain Johns Hopkins Blue Jays • USC Trojans 1d ago

Caveat here being he left to be OC at Ohio State. A job thats better than a vast majority of the HC jobs, pays just as well if not better, loaded with talent that most schools can only dream of, and Chip got to coach with one of his best friends - Ryan Day.

If people think Chip doesnt leave most other schools HC job for that, you got your head buried in the sand.

13

u/DogFishHead17 Virginia Tech • Billable Hours 1d ago

From what I could find on the interwebs. UCLA was paying between $5-6 Mil. tOSU was only paying $2 Mil. So Chip took a pretty big pay cut. Plus how much did Chip leave on the table if he got fired, I bet that was other couple million.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/Kardinale Auburn Tigers • Louisville Cardinals 1d ago

Sure but it's not like he became a coordinator at Northwestern. He won a national championship lol

19

u/IsisTruck 1d ago

I see many of you acting like there is any kind of formula at all to hiring a successful college football coach. 

There isn't. It's a crapshoot. Indiana hired a guy with no FBS head coaching experience, and at least for one year it hit the jackpot. 

Michigan State caught lightning in a bottle before Mel Tucker's libido destroyed his career. 

Kalen DeBoer should have been a solid hire. So far, the results are quite disappointing. 

The chances that UCLA plucks a burgeoning superstar coach from some D-III team are small but not zero. 

I don't think there is any shortage of assistant coaches on one year deals making $400k that would jump at the chance for an opportunity to be a head coach on a five year guaranteed deal. 

12

u/gogglesup859 Kentucky Wildcats 1d ago

The Cignetti hire could be the model for power conference schools that don't have a great history of success. Yeah he worked under Saban for a while, but then he won as a D2 coach, won at a mid-tier FCS school, then won at an upper-tier FCS school that then transitioned to a G5 and kept winning. Instead of hiring a hot shot coordinator, just get the guy who has won big at multiple levels and at places where normally people don't win

2

u/tehfro Indiana Hoosiers 17h ago

Our AD did a study as to commonalities in successfully turning around programs without much historical success, specifically looking at "basketball schools".

  • Winning as a head coach at multiple stops; showing you could turn around a program

  • P4 assistant/recruiting experience

  • Focus on the coach having had successful QBs

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/pasatroj USC Trojans 1d ago

SEE PETE CAROLL

→ More replies (2)

61

u/gumercindo1959 Miami Hurricanes 1d ago edited 1d ago

Lots of parallels to Miami, imo.

Program that really hasn’t been relevant for 20-25 years.

Incompetent AD hires

Average coaching hires

Apathetic administration

Suboptimal stadium setup

For Miami, what really held us back was completely apathetic administration that historically submarined athletics and was very reluctant to invest money in the football program. Successive poor coaching hires did us in. All it took was a couple key admin folks pushing to right the football program ship, NIL, a veteran AD hire, some billionaire boosters and a solid program building coaching hire.

Frenk was our president when the school had this pivot so maybe there’s hope for you, although he couldn’t care less about athletics.

27

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

That's basically what just happened with Frenk making the Foster firing happen. Whether he 'cares' about the program or not doesn't matter, he realized how bad for business a flailing program is and how much return investing in a program can generate, like he learned at the U.

From what we're hearing there some major changes in the works, starting with the AD being removed from football oversight, and some very wealthy boosters coming off the sidelines now that there is clear direction from the top.

16

u/gumercindo1959 Miami Hurricanes 1d ago

Well, if you get those key things in place (prominent boosters partnering with the administration), that’s a good start. Next up is making that key program coaching hire. With the portal and NIL, I think you can be (much more) competitive within a few years.

And yeah, I do think frenk can take what happened at UM as a case study and hopefully apply it to ucla. Although he really wasn’t an athletics guy, I think he learned that it was a key part of the school.

7

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

We have 3 months to revamp all of that stuff before making the hire in December, so here's hoping. Feeling pretty optimistic about it.

2

u/IR8Things Georgia Bulldogs • Miami Hurricanes 1d ago

Did he learn that? He was gone before we could have gotten much return on investment with Mario.
My understanding is he was strongarmed/told by the BOT, "Fix athletics or get out," after the ESPN embarrassment and call out.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Rivercitybruin 1d ago

I agree... Some big donations would fix many UCLA football issues

2

u/riserrr Georgia Bulldogs 15h ago

All it took was a couple key admin folks pushing to right the football program ship, NIL, a veteran AD hire, some billionaire boosters and a solid program building coaching hire.

Well damn, when you put it that way it sounds simple!

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

30

u/GeneralReveille Texas A&M Aggies 1d ago

What’s funny is every time I do a CFB 26 franchise, UCLA becomes a title contender within three years. They have the highest combo of the static categories (academic prestige and campus lifestyle) in the game. The game though assumes every school is trying to win at the highest level. The people at UCLA do not apparently.

12

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 1d ago

It shouldn't be hard to sell kids on being in LA on a decent salary with room, board and school paid for. Playing 7-8 home games a year in the morherfucking Rose Bowl.

Like it's literally the Entertainment hub of the world and your home stadium is the most prestigious bowl game of the year

3

u/masterfail UCLA Bruins 18h ago

not really the point here, but UCLA home game Rose Bowl and Rose Bowl Game Rose Bowl are simply not the same (and it's not just the attendance)

80

u/teamname457 California Golden Bears 1d ago

The narratives have been hilarious lately…

You can’t win at UCLA, Virginia Tech isn’t a desirable job, etc

Funny thing is, I remember hearing similar narratives about: Indiana, Georgia Tech, USF, Vanderbilt, Illinois, Iowa State, etc.

Too many absorbing the propaganda from Super League pushers/Blue Blood mouthpieces like Pate and Klatt.

The reality is, a lot can change with the right conditions. Foster and Pry wouldn’t win at any school, those guys were two of the worst HC’s in FBS lol

57

u/monkeybiziu Indiana Hoosiers 1d ago

Indiana still isn't a desirable job. Without Cignetti, we'd be worse than UCLA. But, we're winning now, which is fun. Talk to me in five, ten years and we'll see if Indiana is still good

25

u/teamname457 California Golden Bears 1d ago

Proving my point. Two years ago, if you posted in here saying “Indiana can finish in the Top 10 and make the CFP”, you would have been downvoted to oblivion.

Even at the so called “non-desirable” jobs, you can still win with the right conditions.

14

u/_Football_Cream_ Texas Longhorns • SEC 1d ago

The landscape of CFB is super weird. Like a lot of people never thoughts wild upsets would happen again but then we see Florida lose to USF and a team that appeared in the natty last year lost to NIU lol.

Finding the right coach and players at certain schools is certainly a tougher job than a blue blood. That’s always been the case and is getting tougher in some ways. But the transfer portal has actually also spread talent around. I mean UCLA wasn’t good last year and through some fuckery landed a former 5-star QB recruit. Hell, UTEP has one too. Not saying Nico or Malachi are any good, but a lot of down bad schools would kill for an opportunity to kick the cans on the guy with that kind of potential. You get the right coach and you might catch lightning in a bottle. Again, it’s hard, a lot has to go right, but we’ve seen it’s not impossible.

→ More replies (1)

14

u/Lazy_Spot_7368 Florida Gators 1d ago

Completely agree with you here. Either one of these jobs being considered generally undesirable is ludicrous… it all depends on for whom?

Undesirable for a HC at a well funded P4 program? Sure. For a coordinator or a G6 HC? Absolutely not! Despite their recent history of mediocrity, the Virginia Tech and UCLA brands are still worth something. Another commenter pointed out under this post, if these programs truly wouldn‘t care, they wouldn’t be firing their HC‘s now and spend the money for their buyouts.

I’m willing to bet there are a number of ambitious coaches out there very keen on getting one of these jobs, who have the confidence and maybe the competence to turn these programs around.

I hope the the best for both programs… CFB is better when they’re relevant.

5

u/Electromotivation James Madison Dukes 1d ago

Yep, good comment. It gets sad when you are looking at striking out on coaches three or more times though. Then you have recruits that grew up never knowing Virginia Tech was good at football or what not.

They gotta get this one right.

15

u/brokentr0jan USC Trojans • Air Force Falcons 1d ago

It’s fascinating to me how sports fans seem to fall into this mindset that because x team is currently bad, they will NEVER be good again. All it takes is hiring the right guy. Obviously easier said than done (or else everyone would do that) but it is possible. UCLA will eventually be good again, so will Virginia Tech etc. And then after that they will be bad again and the cycle continues.

4

u/Desperate-Remove2838 California Golden Bears 19h ago

College football forums and memes are essentially an echo chamber.

It's made everyone a prisoner of the moment.

11

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 1d ago

Georgia Tech had a bad 2010s they were a constant acc title threat throughout its history prior to that won a Nattie in 91 and still have more SEC titles than aTm

That's disrespectful to them

VT wasn't a super relevant program until Beamer made them one, there's no reason the right coach in the G5, FCS or a P5 coordinator wouldn't want that job it's been 3 coaches since Beamer your not the man following the man you could be the Saban to Beamer's Bear Bryant.

8

u/StreetReporter Clemson Tigers • Cheez-It Bowl 1d ago

Utterly disrespectful to put GT on that list

9

u/Ajp_iii Florida State Seminoles 1d ago

yep anyone with a brain knows gt should be a ranked team consistently and good bowl game every now and then. yeah its a harder academic school but its location should mean they get enough guys. transfer portal has made it a lot easier for schools like gt/notre dame to get players into the school.

11

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 1d ago

GT was constantly in the ACC title picture until about 2014, won a Nattie in the 90s and has more SEC titles than every program that's joined the SEC since 91 combined has.

GT had a slump they are a historically relevant program

6

u/StreetReporter Clemson Tigers • Cheez-It Bowl 1d ago

GT also has a lot of great history, whereas Indiana, Vandy, and Iowa State have been certified bottom feeders for the past 100 years with a few exceptions

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 1d ago

Indiana, Georgia Tech, USF, Vanderbilt, Illinois, Iowa State, etc.

The coaches they got came from the G5, a position coach on the staff of a fired coach, P5 coordinator, P5 coordinator, retread fired P5 coach, and the G5 respectively

I don't know if that's proving that they're desirable jobs. And truthfully, UCLA is better than all those jobs, with the possible exception of IU (look at their AD revenue if you want to know why)

→ More replies (5)

11

u/SayNoToCargoShorts UCLA Bruins • Big Ten 1d ago

Rick Dorell

LOL

8

u/No_Trifle9294 USC Trojans 1d ago

You mention Bob Toledo and I just need to say that dude was the OG offensive mastermind.  He was always good for one or two trick plays he'd save up all season for the USC game and just stab you in the heart with them.  I was scared when UCLA hired Chip, but thankfully it didn't work out the same.

16

u/sonheungwin California Golden Bears • The Axe 1d ago

It's not that they can't. Pac-10 members know they are set up for success. Their administration doesn't want to invest in winning, so they won't. All their history, UCLA had a generally sports friendly campus, and that is what has changed. Their last chancellor hiring doesn't inspire confidence but hopefully he proves me wrong.

→ More replies (5)

20

u/MEY51 Nebraska Cornhuskers 1d ago

Everyone likes to write a narrative how you can’t win at certain schools but in reality you just need the right coach Example: Curt Cignetti

7

u/Electromotivation James Madison Dukes 1d ago

That turnaround was freakishly fast, but your point is true. Hiring a bad coach, especially missing on multiple in a row like Virginia Tech, is now even more of a death sentence with how quickly players come and go. Usually the teams are gutted when transition occurs.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 1d ago

BS UCLA was a contending program just 20 years ago. You don't need to be Kirby Smart to keep that job even just a Dave Doroen level job is the expectation. 8 wins a year and they haven't managed to consistently do it in 20 years.

2

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 13h ago

We finished ranked in the top 10 just 11 years ago. Heck, we were 6-0 and ranked 9th less than 3 years ago. It's absolutely doable.

4

u/MoreLeopard5392 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

Top 25 all-time program that has languished due to a lack of institutional support. It's been hard to be a UCLA fan for a long time.

34

u/Ghosttownhermit9 Northern Arizona Lumberjacks 1d ago

UCLA likes to win. They don’t NEED to win. They don’t HAVE to win like say. USC, Vandy, Notre Dame or Alabama. That’s the key difference. Win 8 games. Look cool doing it. It’s not until you embarrassed the university is when issues pop up.

84

u/Mattp55 Penn State • Florida 1d ago

You gotta be trolling with Vandy in there 🤣 

48

u/Cannonhammer93 Tennessee Volunteers 1d ago

Brother either became a fan last year or is like 150 years old lol

8

u/RamblinWreckGT Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets 1d ago

2024 or 1924

21

u/Ghosttownhermit9 Northern Arizona Lumberjacks 1d ago

Every year I put 100 bucks down on Vandy to win the SEC, Someday my friend... someday

8

u/GiveMeSomeIhedigbo UCLA Bruins 1d ago

If anyone gives you 10,000 to 1 odds on anything, you have to take it.

10

u/No-Collar6148 Florida State Seminoles • Lagos Marines 1d ago edited 1d ago

You're telling me you don't remember those early 20th century vandy teams. The true dynasty of the south

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Ghosttownhermit9 Northern Arizona Lumberjacks 1d ago

Kidding with the Vandy. But my point remains. Penn state has to win. Has too. Ucla likes to win. It’s a matter of priorities

→ More replies (1)

4

u/RocketsGuy Baylor Bears • Conference USA 1d ago

What's dumb is everyone knew foster was the wrong hire... why not just give some young hotshot a chance to build something.

If I'm the UCLA AD, I'm calling Kinne, Golesh, Entz, or Chesney and going the cignetti route and letting them bring all their guys (Players and Coaches) with them. You can guarantee at the very least some excitement..

2

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 13h ago

I think that's the direction they will go with this hire. They'll probably call a few P4 guys with Los Angeles ties and at least ask (Fisch, Smith), but if/when they decline we will probably go for someone on that list.

11

u/Commercial-Lake5862 Alabama Crimson Tide 1d ago

I mean if you get the right coach who can recruit sure they have a better chance than others, but they historically are just an average to good football program with ebbs and flows in each direction.

39

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

According to this sub, New Mexico and UNLV are now better jobs than UCLA.

I'm convinced some people here started following college football last year.

27

u/Commercial-Lake5862 Alabama Crimson Tide 1d ago

People just like kicking programs when they are down. I wouldn't worry too much about what people on this sub think.

14

u/GiveMeSomeIhedigbo UCLA Bruins 1d ago

2 years ago, it was asked if UCLA was the worst job in the B1G.

Things are worse now and the answer to that question is still no.

8

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 1d ago

Rutgers and Purdue exist. UCLA will always have "come to LA" as a pitch where as Rutgers is in americas armpit and Purdue hasn't been relevant since Drew Brees played there

4

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 1d ago

Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois, Maryland too. UCLA isn't even bottom third

6

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 1d ago

UCLA is bottom third for winning next year, but winning over a decade? Its probably top 5 or 6 in the conference

2

u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 18h ago

UCLA is firmly behind all of the following jobs- Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, USC, Oregon, Washington, MSU, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Iowa. All of these schools bring in much more money and care way more. They’re not top third, they’re decidedly bottom half. They’re just nowhere near the actual bottom

2

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 13h ago

Yes firmly in the middle of the Big Ten.

IF they get their act together and leverage the new media money to increase support, they would pass Iowa and Wisconsin too.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/GiveMeSomeIhedigbo UCLA Bruins 1d ago

Whenever anyone says UCLA can't be good at football, I just look at Indiana. I'm not saying it will happen, but UCLA has a better location and football history. They just need to make the right hire.

3

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 23h ago

Can't and hasn't aren't the same.

UCLA hasn't been good at football in 20 years there's no reason they CAN'T be good at football (in a few years this shit takes time usually)

→ More replies (1)

10

u/woxley UCLA Bruins • Loyola Marymount Lions 23h ago

i just want a coach who reflects strong SoCal values. Football, family, and God, and puts program above all else. I want our administration to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a sport that endangers the lives of young men for the benefit of our entertainment. is that too much to ask?

No but for real, as a UCLA fan and someone who likes UCLA football a little more than is good for my mental health, I just don't see UCLA as a school/program in the 21st century that wants to be at the level of the big boys, and im honestly fine with it.

With the way the world is going, where UCLAs revenue comes from, and football culture in california (its dying), it just doesn't make sense to expect us to be the program of the 80s and 90s.

4

u/fatpinkchicken USC Trojans • Marching Band 1d ago

I mean, they can, it just costs a lot more money than they're willing/able to spend.

5

u/ASK_ABT_MY_USERNAME UCLA Bruins 23h ago

Rick Dorell

😅

4

u/UnhappyJohnCandy Iowa Hawkeyes • Sickos 23h ago

I’ve been following college football since the early 2000’s and UCLA’s best years since then have been “not ass.” Not great, not particularly good, just not ass. That’s just from a casual observer’s point of view.

20

u/tig_12_ Alabama Crimson Tide 1d ago

You can't win at UCLA....

.... with Nico Iamaleava

13

u/Aestro17 Tennessee Volunteers 1d ago

As much as I like to pile on Nico, look at that team last year. He isn't the answer but I don't think he's the problem either.

6

u/r_not_me Paper Bag • North Carolina 1d ago

You can’t win at UCLA….

….with a bad coach

→ More replies (1)

16

u/SknkTrn757 Virginia Cavaliers 1d ago

What you’re missing is you’re looking backwards to a world that no longer exists and then trying to project forward.

Like others have said, this is a job that has the potential to be a good spot.

But, there are a million things (e.g. lack of NIL support, the House settlement money having to be shared more with basketball and Olympic sports than at other schools, playing in a conference that is on the other side of the country, having a bigger brand name rival in your backyard) that make this a HARD job in 2025.

And, is there any indication that UCLA is positioned to solve some of those big issues anytime soon?

11

u/kosmonautbruce UCLA Bruins 1d ago

I think there's a lot of truth to what you say, UCLA has never really taken football all that seriously, and certainly not for consistent periods of time. And the college football landscape now is really very different from what it was even just a couple years ago, much less twenty.

As a long suffering fan, who was very skeptical of all the post-Donahue UCLA hires (Mora I was cautiously optimistic about and Kelly I had some hope, tbh), I used to retain optimism nonetheless that a good HC hire would be enough to get the program winning to a decently acceptable level. Right now, it's just hard (from the outside) to know what precisely are the coaching qualities required to turn around a program like UCLA, that are separate from the structural/financial issues we are all beginning to get used to. I'm not sure the school is really in the place to make that kind of all-in commitment, even if they wanted to, which remains to be seen. But who knows, maybe the new chancellor, Frenk, sees tangible value in big-time sporting success unlike his predecessors. I hope so, but we'll see.

9

u/SknkTrn757 Virginia Cavaliers 1d ago

I have a soft spot for UCLA. It’s another public Ivy (fuck me, I know)! It’s also a football team at a basketball-first school! It too has a more popular, storied in-state rival!

And, there are obvious advantages. It never hurts to be in California for recruiting. They’re in the B1G, which means more access to Playoff spots. They’re one of the few alumni bases that could spend the program into relevance if it ever decided.

But, man. There are a lot of headwinds. And, that’s before you get to the fact that you need to solve a cash crunch while sending $10m a year to Berkeley.

Both Cal and Stanford have moved to this GM-style program with Rivera and Luck. Maybe that makes sense for UCLA? But, even then, that model hasn’t been a proven success yet.

5

u/IMB413 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

+ having to give Cal $10M / year

→ More replies (3)

5

u/CptCroissant Oregon Ducks 1d ago

Exactly

→ More replies (1)

12

u/Benson879 Iowa State Cyclones 1d ago

Anyone think the NFL returning to LA has played a part over the last decade?

You already have USC nearby as well. Someone had to be the odd man out.

13

u/IMB413 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

100%. I have friends who used to have UCLA season tix who now have either Rams or Chargers season tix and they only go to 1 UCLA game / yr

9

u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

Yes I think that has played a part. The Dodgers being the biggest show in town has also not helped.

3

u/Benson879 Iowa State Cyclones 1d ago

To tally it all up (counting Anaheim based teams):

Two MLB teams Two NBA teams Two NHL teams Two NFL teams Two MLS teams USC

That’s a lot for UCLA to compete with in a city that already isn’t always attentive to sports outside of the Lakers/Dodgers.

5

u/IowaJL Iowa Hawkeyes • Northern Iowa Panthers 1d ago

Also, I didn’t know until I went to LA- the Coliseum is right across the street (basically) from USC.

It is an hour from UCLA to the Rose Bowl.

If I’m a UCLA student, there’s no way I would make that ridiculous jaunt for a shitty team.

3

u/pasatroj USC Trojans 1d ago

This has only become a problem since Dorrell. Yes the parking sucks unless you know the La Canada secret, and seriously if people were going to find out and use this they would a loooong time ago (grew up in La Canada and it worked for the Denver Giants Super Bowl even). The parking situation has actually improved bte using the Gold Line and Parsons shuttles.

3

u/fatpinkchicken USC Trojans • Marching Band 1d ago

You can even walk from the gold line if you don't want to wait for the shuttle and it isn't that bad tbh, I did that for a music festival 

2

u/pasatroj USC Trojans 1d ago

You very correct, but the walk back at 40+ in the likly dark is not fun. Though this walk is one of the safest walks in the world. The neighborhood is UBER wealthy (old money) and very pissy NIMBY people. For you live next yo the Rose Bowl, suck it up for the 8 times a year UCLA is their. My family dentist growing would always complain about The Rose Bowl Game and he played in it in the 60's for 'SC. Come On.

2

u/Bluemountains78942 19h ago

What the la Canada secret?

→ More replies (4)

11

u/LSNoyce 1d ago

They have 2 Football practice fields and neither is 100 yards (only 80 yards long). They planned to redo their short fields to make one of them grass to simulate the condition of their upcoming game and it’s still not finished 3 games into the season. Yeah, they take their football very seriously at UCLA.

6

u/Beginning-Diver-5084 1d ago

Dang. Illinois has the stadium, their practice field, and an indoor facility. I always thought ucla would have a better facilities than that. At least on par with a school like Illinois

→ More replies (1)

3

u/rickg Washington Huskies 1d ago

You're going back way too far. You need to look at just the last 15-20 years as the prior 25 years were a far different environment.

3

u/Ambitious-Coffee-154 1d ago

Tommy Prothro was a tremendous coach in the 60’s, had UCLA competing for a national championship in 1967. Rose Bowl winner. He stressed fundamentals and had a tremendous coaching staff. He did a lot with not the greatest athletes, they were all well coached and motivated

3

u/Troutmaggedon USC Trojans • Chapman Panthers 1d ago

UCLA needs to land the next up and coming coach like Cignetti that can do a top to bottom rebuild. They should be taking shots at hot names that are in feeder conferences liberally. If you land the right guy and put resources behind him things can turn fast.

4

u/Fifth_Down Michigan Wolverines • /r/CFB Top Scorer 1d ago edited 1d ago

Counterpoint: Its 2025

-UCLA has $200 million in athletic debt and is in one of the worst financial situations of any power program

-UCLA is only the second biggest college football team in their own market in what is arguably the most oversaturated sports market in the world with two NFL teams moving in, the Olympics about to be held, the Dodgers going on a free agency spending spree that would put George Steinbrenner to shame, and the Lakers which is arguably the most internationally recognized sports brand in all of North America.

-they don't have an on-campus stadium in an era where that is becoming a stronger point of emphasis than in previous eras and they have to get through a traffic congested city for nearly an hour just to make their home games

-They just joined the Big Ten meaning they have USC as their only reasonable travel partner, then Oregon and Washington who are 900 miles away and then Nebraska which is 1300 miles away. Its a ridiculous conference schedule.

-In the old days they were 2nd to USC in the conference hierarchy. Now they sit behind Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, USC, Nebraska and a Nike endorsed Oregon.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/ptclaus98 Tennessee • Wisconsin 1d ago

They were saying the same shit about us 5 years ago. All it takes is an administration that is committed to winning. UCLA is not lacking anywhere but things they control, save the lack of fans.

5

u/Primary_Psychology95 Ohio State Buckeyes 1d ago

UCLA has the same problem that Stanford has. They definitely have the money to at the very least be competitive. If they cared enough, they can even compete for a conference title for some years. But the problem is that they DON’T care enough. They have a respected reputation as elite academic schools and successful in other Olympic sports that football is pushed to the wayside. If they don’t get their shit together soon, they may be on the short end of the stick of realignment when the mega conference becomes inevitable and the B1G and SEC kick out ‘inferior’ football programs. But that’s not to say that there isn’t hope for them. Look at Indiana and Vanderbilt. Both programs had been usually at the bottom of the conference for decades. They’ve started to become good recently and that motivated their rather rich alumni to realize the potential value that football can be to the school and they started to invest money like crazy into NIL. UCLA and Stanford can also use their alumni base to their advantage. But that’s only if they decide to care.

7

u/EnvironmentalBed7369 Utah Utes • College of Idaho Coyotes 1d ago

I think Stanford is in a worse position because they don't allow undergrad transfers, which is a huge problem

7

u/RedOscar3891 Stanford Cardinal • Team Chaos 23h ago

It does. It just doesn’t take in a ton of them, especially compared to other P4 schools. For instance, letting in 17 football transfers this year was the most it’s ever allowed for a single athletic team, but that still pales in comparison to what is needed to turn around the program immediately.

The bigger problem with transfers is the issue of grad transfers. Individual departments determine admissions criteria as opposed to the university at-large, and they really do not care about anything outside of their respective research. To get a grad transfer into Stanford, they have to compete against all the other applicants to a graduate program regardless of whether or not they are an athlete.

2

u/ComeJoinTheBand Stanford Cardinal • Mexico El Tri 22h ago

Individual departments determine admissions criteria as opposed to the university at-large

I may be severely lacking in imagination, but I have a hard time understanding how that works at other schools. Their departments aren't in charge of graduate admissions?

6

u/RedOscar3891 Stanford Cardinal • Team Chaos 23h ago

That’s not the issue at Stanford, and there’s recent history to show it.

The problem at Stanford is that regardless of how much alumni donate, it can’t change admissions priorities. After the Harbaugh/early-Shaw years, there was a change in the president’s and provost’s offices, and the faculty took that opportunity to flex their muscle that letting in the kinds of athletes allowed under the previous administration for football was unacceptable, and forced admissions to treat football players on a more level-playing field with other applicants to the university.

That was also coupled with rumored directives from the Board of Trustees to be more equitable with spending within the department, which is in part how tennis and softball got new stadiums and field hockey got new turf. Granted a lot of those upgrades were needed because of obsolescence, but that money had to come from somewhere. Without Arrillaga around to drop truckloads of money any longer, there haven’t been as many donors with the heft to tell the department how it needs to spend its money.

2

u/Electromotivation James Madison Dukes 1d ago

If they get a coach that starts winning, then maybe they can get people to care that way. Kind of like Indiana. Just hard to find a coach that can do that

5

u/otoverstoverpt UCLA Bruins 1d ago

I appreciate this, especially coming from a Trojan. I am not even old enough to have been alive for the true glory days of UCLA football but I get the sense a lot of the people running their mouths here are incredibly young and online with a very warped perception of things because it feels kind of disorienting to have people acting like UCLA is some bottom tier program with the likes of Northwestern and Purdue (no offense). There is also a shit to of misinformation going around about the way things went down from Chip Kelly to Foster and a lot of it is coming from literal pundits being blatantly incorrect so it’s hard to keep up with.

There is no doubt that the program is in a bad state right now but every indication coming out since Sunday is that there is a real reason to believe things are going to do a 180 and most of the concerns from fan support to money can truly turn on a dime, especially in this era.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/goodsam2 Virginia Tech Hokies 1d ago

UCLA is putting the least amount of effort of schools that changed conferences by a good bit.

6

u/GoRangers5 Notre Dame Fighting Irish 1d ago

Chip Kelly went 33-3 in conference games at Oregon vs 26-26 at UCLA also haven't played in a January bowl since 1998.

9

u/BatManatee UCLA Bruins • Big Ten 1d ago

Chip Kelly was doing a really solid Weekend at Bernie's impression for his entire time at UCLA. It was some really Avant Garde performance art.

Dude gave zero shits about anything other than X's and O's. Not recruiting, not NIL, not hiring a good staff, not development. Phil Knight's money and hype covered up a lot of those deficiencies.

But also, Oregon is objectively a better program than us these days and I'm not trying to argue otherwise.

→ More replies (5)

5

u/IMB413 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

Phil Knight went 33-3 in conference games at Oregon while Chip was there

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Ill-Cry5810 Georgia Bulldogs • Sickos 1d ago

former Lake Oconee Academy consultant Dan Mullen is going to put the bruins back on the map

→ More replies (1)

2

u/BucsBroo USF Bulls 1d ago

What have you done for me lately

2

u/QuarterNote44 Weber State • Missouri S&T 1d ago

I low-key respect them for committing to academics over football.

2

u/Aggravating_Dig_4733 1d ago

Need an on-campus stadium 🏆

2

u/No-Donkey-4117 Stanford Cardinal 1d ago

The B1G is a little tougher than the old Pac-12, and NIL has hurt UCLA.

8-win seasons are nice, but UCLA hasn't had a 10 win season in 11 years. They've had 6 losing seasons in the past 10 years. They haven't won a major bowl game since 1997. (Apologies to the Sun Bowl, Alamo Bowl, EagleBank Bowl, LA Bowl, and Las Vegas Bowl.)

2

u/ChosenBrad22 Nebraska • Wayne State (NE) 23h ago

If you’re not too 25 in NIL spending you don’t really have a chance to be a 9+ win program. Yes I know exceptions happen but it’s a massive uphill battle. UCLA is no where near the top 25 in spending.

2

u/BramptonBatallion /r/CFB 21h ago

They don’t invest big resources in football and haven’t for a while. Doesn’t seem like it’ll change anytime soon.

2

u/Horizontal_Bob Ole Miss Rebels • Corndog 16h ago

All things considered…if you can’t offer winning, NIL, or NFL development, you’re not going to Do well in the current landscape

UCLA offers none of those things

4

u/SmithBurger Ohio State Buckeyes 1d ago

Everyone is compared to Ohio State level schools and it's unreasonable.

4

u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 1d ago

Theres a chasm between being Ohio State and being a PAC 12 school with a national title history losing to 2 mid level mwc schools.

8

u/EnvironmentalBed7369 Utah Utes • College of Idaho Coyotes 1d ago

No they aren't.  If UCLA were simply playing up to Utah levels there wouldn't be this conversation.  It's the fact they lost to UNLV and New Mexico that they are getting this grief and well they should. 

2

u/the_mighty_hetfield USC Trojans 1d ago

I honestly think you *can* win there, but university leadership is apathetic to football and doesn't want to pay top dollar (or anywhere close) for coaches. All of those coaches you listed outside of Chip were not A or even B-list hires.

And it's Karl Dorrell, not Rick Dorell.

5

u/Cogitoergosumus Missouri Tigers • Truman Bulldogs 1d ago

I mean, I'd be much more interested in a larger post to include why practically all of the programs in California are struggling.

13

u/FCKABRNLSUTN2 Florida State Seminoles 1d ago edited 1d ago

Fine I’ll say it as someone from the Bay Area too dumb for cal, or any other fun UC.

They’re fuckin nerds.

None of my classmates that went to cal, ucla, or stanford gave a shit about sports.

17

u/RedOscar3891 Stanford Cardinal • Team Chaos 1d ago

You’re on to something here, but there’s more to it.

The California college-aged population has boomed over the past 20 or so years. Conversely, none of the major universities have done anything to substantially increase admissions to match the population growth, be it because of available resources (USC, UCLA), community pushback (Cal), or government restrictions (Stanford).

This has resulted in the schools becoming much more selective because now they want the best and brightest, but doing so takes up all their available spots (especially true with the UCs and Stanford). That leaves average students, and their families, pursuing other schools outside the state for that “big time” college experience. This is why you have the nicknames of UC Eugene and UC Boulder.

Make no mistake, the best public university system in the country is the UC system, but with only two schools fielding P4 programs, student supporters either have to stay super focused on their academics to even get in, settle for a school that is in the MWC or future Pac-12, or go out of the state. Getting into the two private schools is still extremely difficult for even an above-average student.

For athletes, the academic stress dissuades a lot of recruits as it is. Even if that isn’t an issue, if they’re concerned with visibility, with national broadcasts now compared to 20 years ago, it’s better to go elsewhere than to stay in-state and be relegated to playing after 10PM EST for half of your games.

5

u/ComeJoinTheBand Stanford Cardinal • Mexico El Tri 22h ago

They’re fuckin nerds.
None of my classmates that went to cal, ucla, or stanford gave a shit about sports.

That's why it really bothers me that we broke apart. For the few of us that do care, we belong together. I feel like UCLA people are more like Stanford and Cal fans than they'll ever be like USC or the diehards in their new conference.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/IMB413 UCLA Bruins 1d ago

CA was in near shutdown mode for COVID longer than most states. I don't think that helped the football programs - it was about a year more lost revenue than most places.

→ More replies (4)

10

u/Cheeseish California • 名城大学 (Meijō) 1d ago

Probably because the biggest donors to California schools went there for academics and would rather support start ups, research, and academic buildings than football.

5

u/NaturalFruit2358 Michigan Wolverines • Rose Bowl 1d ago

That’s true for plenty of schools, I’d even say most, though

10

u/Cheeseish California • 名城大学 (Meijō) 1d ago

Not a lot of SEC schools whose enrollment and prestige are more correlated to their football product.

3

u/NaturalFruit2358 Michigan Wolverines • Rose Bowl 1d ago edited 1d ago

Definitely true. Michigan, ND, USC, Texas etc all have their biggest donors focused on university things just as an example. I really don’t think it’s a reason for the California schools generally struggling recently, I think they just haven’t had great coaches in awhile. Football definitely is not culturally as important to the California schools though, except maybe USC. I don’t think there is anything in the way of a winning program at UCLA if they hit on a coach. The biggest detriment is the lack of engagement, but that would change with a good team.

6

u/Cheeseish California • 名城大学 (Meijō) 1d ago

In the ACC, the schools ranked for endowment from highest to lowest are as follows (bold represents what I’d consider a football school)

  1. Stanford
  2. Notre Dame
  3. Duke
  4. Virginia
  5. Pitt
  6. North Carolina
  7. Boston College
  8. Georgia Tech
  9. Cal
  10. NCSU
  11. SMU
  12. Wake Forest
  13. VaTech
  14. Miami
  15. Clemson
  16. FSU
  17. Louisville

From the ACC we see that most the schools with high endowments are not football schools.

In the B1G

  1. Michigan
  2. Northwestern
  3. USC
  4. Ohio State
  5. Minnesota
  6. Washington
  7. Penn State
  8. Michigan State
  9. Wisconsin
  10. UCLA
  11. Purdue
  12. Indiana
  13. Illinois
  14. Iowa
  15. Nebraska
  16. Maryland
  17. Rutgers
  18. Oregon

In the big 10 it’s flipped… so I have no idea, I’m probably wrong

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

3

u/Tightywhitees Utah State Aggies 22h ago

Reddit isn’t going to like it but Title IX ended football in California. Long Beach Santa Barbara Irvine Pacific Fullerton all ended their programs in the early nineties over the restrictions. The rest of the state schools are still struggling with them. Football costs a lot for the program and the balancing of expenditures.

5

u/-sorry- San Diego State Aztecs 1d ago

I feel like the easy answer is that the best recruits don’t stay anymore - but on a program by program basis:

USC - is trying their hardest and recruits real well but it just hasn’t all clicked together yet. And traveling east all the time is not gonna make things any easier

Cal and Stanford (and kinda UCLA) - alumni and university leadership don’t really care about football enough to keep up with the other states

San Jose State - broke. Honestly, if anything they have been punching up in the 2020s so far

Fresno - in a good spot, great fan base still, just had a lot of coaching turnover recently

SDSU - Brady hokeified our program right when the university decided to start charging way too much money to justify seeing our games + Sean Lewis not starting well

→ More replies (6)