ucla new coach is...

[BuddyLee]

I think you guys are missing the point.  UCLA football is a has been and not going to be good again.  Yeah I know they played in the PAC 12 championship, but that was a joke becuase it was the PAC 12 split into 2 divisions.  Remember USC blew them out 50-0 the week before the PAC 12 Championship. 

[Denver Viking]

I think you guys are missing the point.  UCLA football is a has been and not going to be good again.  Yeah I know they played in the PAC 12 championship, but that was a joke becuase it was the PAC 12 split into 2 divisions.  Remember USC blew them out 50-0 the week before the PAC 12 Championship. 

And USC was in a hole before Carroll got there. UCLA should be good with all the talent in SoCal, the weather, etc. The right coach that can recruit and get alumni to give money to upgrade the facilities will make them relevent again. I don't know if Mora is the guy to do that, but in my opinion UCLA is a sleeping giant.

[bigfan]

And USC was in a hole before Carroll got there. UCLA should be good with all the talent in SoCal, the weather, etc. The right coach that can recruit and get alumni to give money to upgrade the facilities will make them relevent again. I don't know if Mora is the guy to do that, but in my opinion UCLA is a sleeping giant.

I agree...absolutely no reason not to have a super program.

[BuddyLee]

C'mon guys I forget UCLA even has a football team anymore.

[bigfan]

C'mon guys I forget UCLA even has a football team anymore.

Too much revenue to be generated these days not to...

[CWClassof2007]

I think you guys are missing the point.  UCLA football is a has been and not going to be good again.  Yeah I know they played in the PAC 12 championship, but that was a joke becuase it was the PAC 12 split into 2 divisions.  Remember USC blew them out 50-0 the week before the PAC 12 Championship. 

I don't think you can ever say that a school that has a history like UCLA's, with the athletic program like UCLA's & that's located in an area like UCLA is a "has been". They're going through a rough stretch. I'm not saying that they'll be winning any national title's or Rose Bowls in the next couple of years. But if you're another coach in the PAC 12 you can't look past UCLA. Even if you are USC or Oregon. Those two schools will be at the top consistently for a while.

[OriginalCVFan]

Schools like UCLA and CAL will always have problems, BECAUSE THEY HAVE HIGH ACADEMIC STANDARDS, EXTERMELY HIGH, then you couple that with the fact that they are PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES.  Its a double whammy

Private schools, such as USC, STANFORD, etc, DONT HAVE TO FOLLOW admissions guidelines that Cal and UCLA have.  Private schools, can have an incredibly HIGH academic standard for the general population, but they can admit as many ATHLETES as they want, that just have to meet NCAA MINIMUMS(about an 1100 on the SAT, and a GPA somewhere above a 2.8)    That is why USC and Stanford have done so well lately, they have an admissions office that works very closely with the football teams, to figure out a way to get the ATHLETES into the schools.

UCLA and Cal, well their Admissions office is LEGALLY BOUND to follow the admissions policies of the UNIVERSITY, since the University is funded by STATE FUNDS.  They do make MINOR exceptions, however i can guarantee you that 95% of the Alabama and LSU football teams would not have been able to get into UCLA or CAL even with assistance.   However, at Stanford and USC, those athletes CAN get in.

Notre Dame is another school that has its problems.  THey have CONTINUALLY REFUSED to lower their academic standards, even though they are a private institution(which means they can if they want too) and their football has suffered for 20 years.  Just last 2 years, notre dame has decided to try it the USC way, and bend the rules of the school.  We will see how it works.  Same with Northwestern.  UCLA and Cal would dominate in football MUCH MORE, if they were able to admit kids with exceptions similar to stanford, usc, and other PRIVATE schools that arent bound to the public school rules. 

[taysdad]

Pathetic is the way your team has played the for 10 years.  The tripping incident did not affect the outcome of the game and was a ridiculous brain fart of an isolated incident. 

Both are sad, but one was an isolated, meaningless incident!!!

i agree. but i stand by em through the highs and lows.

[Denver Viking]

Schools like UCLA and CAL will always have problems, BECAUSE THEY HAVE HIGH ACADEMIC STANDARDS, EXTERMELY HIGH, then you couple that with the fact that they are PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES.  Its a double whammy

Private schools, such as USC, STANFORD, etc, DONT HAVE TO FOLLOW admissions guidelines that Cal and UCLA have.  Private schools, can have an incredibly HIGH academic standard for the general population, but they can admit as many ATHLETES as they want, that just have to meet NCAA MINIMUMS(about an 1100 on the SAT, and a GPA somewhere above a 2.8)    That is why USC and Stanford have done so well lately, they have an admissions office that works very closely with the football teams, to figure out a way to get the ATHLETES into the schools.

UCLA and Cal, well their Admissions office is LEGALLY BOUND to follow the admissions policies of the UNIVERSITY, since the University is funded by STATE FUNDS.  They do make MINOR exceptions, however i can guarantee you that 95% of the Alabama and LSU football teams would not have been able to get into UCLA or CAL even with assistance.   However, at Stanford and USC, those athletes CAN get in.

Notre Dame is another school that has its problems.  THey have CONTINUALLY REFUSED to lower their academic standards, even though they are a private institution(which means they can if they want too) and their football has suffered for 20 years.  Just last 2 years, notre dame has decided to try it the USC way, and bend the rules of the school.  We will see how it works.  Same with Northwestern.  UCLA and Cal would dominate in football MUCH MORE, if they were able to admit kids with exceptions similar to stanford, usc, and other PRIVATE schools that arent bound to the public school rules. 

Michigan and Texas have pretty good academics and good football programs. With the volume and talent in SoCal there is no reason they can't get enough good athletes to excel in football. I also don't buy that it is easier for players to get into Stanford than Cal or UCLA. Sure, they can let in whoever they want but if they drop admissions standards too much the kids that get in won't make it academically. They don't have the easy classes at Stanford that are available at most public schools to help improve the GPA. I also don't see Stanford decreasing their admissions requirements much as most college rankings hold admissions standards in high regard. Stanford is more interested in those rankings than the AP/BCS polls.

[BuddyLee]

No one wants to play for a school whose team colors are baby blue and yellow. 

[bigfan]

Schools like UCLA and CAL will always have problems, BECAUSE THEY HAVE HIGH ACADEMIC STANDARDS, EXTERMELY HIGH, then you couple that with the fact that they are PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES.  Its a double whammy

Private schools, such as USC, STANFORD, etc, DONT HAVE TO FOLLOW admissions guidelines that Cal and UCLA have.  Private schools, can have an incredibly HIGH academic standard for the general population, but they can admit as many ATHLETES as they want, that just have to meet NCAA MINIMUMS(about an 1100 on the SAT, and a GPA somewhere above a 2.8)    That is why USC and Stanford have done so well lately, they have an admissions office that works very closely with the football teams, to figure out a way to get the ATHLETES into the schools.

UCLA and Cal, well their Admissions office is LEGALLY BOUND to follow the admissions policies of the UNIVERSITY, since the University is funded by STATE FUNDS.  They do make MINOR exceptions, however i can guarantee you that 95% of the Alabama and LSU football teams would not have been able to get into UCLA or CAL even with assistance.   However, at Stanford and USC, those athletes CAN get in.

Notre Dame is another school that has its problems.  THey have CONTINUALLY REFUSED to lower their academic standards, even though they are a private institution(which means they can if they want too) and their football has suffered for 20 years.  Just last 2 years, notre dame has decided to try it the USC way, and bend the rules of the school.  We will see how it works.  Same with Northwestern.  UCLA and Cal would dominate in football MUCH MORE, if they were able to admit kids with exceptions similar to stanford, usc, and other PRIVATE schools that arent bound to the public school rules. 

In recent years it appears they have gotten several players on the lower end of academics however keeping them in and on track is the difficult part.

[OriginalCVFan]

i agree. but i stand by em through the highs and lows.

Now there is a fan i can drink many beers with?    :u: 

[OriginalCVFan]

Michigan and Texas have pretty good academics and good football programs. With the volume and talent in SoCal there is no reason they can't get enough good athletes to excel in football. I also don't buy that it is easier for players to get into Stanford than Cal or UCLA. Sure, they can let in whoever they want but if they drop admissions standards too much the kids that get in won't make it academically. They don't have the easy classes at Stanford that are available at most public schools to help improve the GPA. I also don't see Stanford decreasing their admissions requirements much as most college rankings hold admissions standards in high regard. Stanford is more interested in those rankings than the AP/BCS polls.

You prove my point again.  Michigan has FANTASTIC academics, but  is PRIVATE.  They dont have to bow down to the PUBLIC SECTORS guidelines on the use of PUBLIC money in the state of california.  Texas, is NOT considered anywhere near the caliber of university that cal and ucla(both are listed as number 1 and number 2 in us news rankings of PUBLIC universities) 

If you are truly interested, I can send you the guidelines for IVY LEAGUE SCHOOLS, and the DETAILED regulations they follow for admissions, i can send you the CAL/UCLA "P" classifications that they use for determinging feasiility for admittance.  Stanford, USC, all have their OWN PRIVATE way of dealing with academics enrollments that, although they are much more strict than most AVERAGE DI universities, they are MUCH MORE FLEXIBLE and Lenient and able to be changed, than at Cal and UCLA. 

Stanford never used to make the exceptions for football, however when Harbaugh took over, he created an atmosphere with the admins to allow more flexibility for a few years, which they REAPED the benefits of, however now that Harbaugh is gone, the admins are pulling back their support of these practices, and I will bet you right now that Stanford will be back to MIDDLE OF THE PACK within 3 years due to this.   USC has always done this, and they do it WELL.  Cal and UCLA CANNOT do this, even if they wanted too because they are held accountable to the schools PUBLIC admissions policies to a much tighter degree.  Like i said, if you wold ever want to talk about this topic privately, let me know i can share much more info.

[Denver Viking]

You prove my point again.  Michigan has FANTASTIC academics, but  is PRIVATE.  They dont have to bow down to the PUBLIC SECTORS guidelines on the use of PUBLIC money in the state of california.  Texas, is NOT considered anywhere near the caliber of university that cal and ucla(both are listed as number 1 and number 2 in us news rankings of PUBLIC universities) 

If you are truly interested, I can send you the guidelines for IVY LEAGUE SCHOOLS, and the DETAILED regulations they follow for admissions, i can send you the CAL/UCLA "P" classifications that they use for determinging feasiility for admittance.  Stanford, USC, all have their OWN PRIVATE way of dealing with academics enrollments that, although they are much more strict than most AVERAGE DI universities, they are MUCH MORE FLEXIBLE and Lenient and able to be changed, than at Cal and UCLA. 

Stanford never used to make the exceptions for football, however when Harbaugh took over, he created an atmosphere with the admins to allow more flexibility for a few years, which they REAPED the benefits of, however now that Harbaugh is gone, the admins are pulling back their support of these practices, and I will bet you right now that Stanford will be back to MIDDLE OF THE PACK within 3 years due to this.   USC has always done this, and they do it WELL.  Cal and UCLA CANNOT do this, even if they wanted too because they are held accountable to the schools PUBLIC admissions policies to a much tighter degree.  Like i said, if you wold ever want to talk about this topic privately, let me know i can share much more info.

Um...Michigan is public

See the message from their president's first line in the link from their website:

http://www.umich.edu/pres/welcome/index.php

[Coach W]

How Mora not only relates to younger players but how well he can recruit will tell how successfull he will be at UCLA . He has always been a pro Coach as we all know, the NFL is a lot different from college football. As a coach and a defensive minded guy, I love the hire. He has a history of running the 4-3 under front defense with a tampa 2 scheme behind it; however, rumors are that UCLA will be running a 3-4 scheme. One thing Mora is known for is being a conservative , defensive minded coach who prefers a bend but don't break approach rather than the high risk reward style defense, you don't see a high statistical amount of blitzing out of his defenses, they rather are more situational and prefers zone coverage to man. I would be suprised if he runs anything other than a pro-style offensive scheme with a heavy emphasis on the running game. I LIKE THE HIRE AND I BELIEVE HE WILL BE OUT TO SHOW HE CAN RECRUIT AND WILL THEREFORE BE SUCCESFULL IN HIS TENURE AT UCLA......GIVE THE GUY 2 TO 3 SEASONS AND THEY WILL COMPETE FOR PAC 12 TITLE.......BEAUTIFUL MOVE HIRING A DEFENSIVE MINDED -CONSERVATIVE STYLE COACH
   

[jeraf]

Schools like UCLA and CAL will always have problems, BECAUSE THEY HAVE HIGH ACADEMIC STANDARDS, EXTERMELY HIGH, then you couple that with the fact that they are PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES.  Its a double whammy

Private schools, such as USC, STANFORD, etc, DONT HAVE TO FOLLOW admissions guidelines that Cal and UCLA have.  Private schools, can have an incredibly HIGH academic standard for the general population, but they can admit as many ATHLETES as they want, that just have to meet NCAA MINIMUMS(about an 1100 on the SAT, and a GPA somewhere above a 2.8)    That is why USC and Stanford have done so well lately, they have an admissions office that works very closely with the football teams, to figure out a way to get the ATHLETES into the schools.

UCLA and Cal, well their Admissions office is LEGALLY BOUND to follow the admissions policies of the UNIVERSITY, since the University is funded by STATE FUNDS.  They do make MINOR exceptions, however i can guarantee you that 95% of the Alabama and LSU football teams would not have been able to get into UCLA or CAL even with assistance.   However, at Stanford and USC, those athletes CAN get in.

Notre Dame is another school that has its problems.  THey have CONTINUALLY REFUSED to lower their academic standards, even though they are a private institution(which means they can if they want too) and their football has suffered for 20 years.  Just last 2 years, notre dame has decided to try it the USC way, and bend the rules of the school.  We will see how it works.  Same with Northwestern.  UCLA and Cal would dominate in football MUCH MORE, if they were able to admit kids with exceptions similar to stanford, usc, and other PRIVATE schools that arent bound to the public school rules. 

OCVF, this article on Stanford also supports your post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/09/stanford-athletes-had-acc_n_833655.html

[izne1home]

I'm sure that is the rule, but there are exceptions.  I've known guys that went to UC's on football scholarships that were marginal.  And by marginal I mean slow learners.  And by slow learners I mean dumb. 

[OriginalCVFan]

I'm sure that is the rule, but there are exceptions.  I've known guys that went to UC's on football scholarships that were marginal.  And by marginal I mean slow learners.  And by slow learners I mean dumb. 

There are exceptions everywhere and in every situation.  Cmon IZNE, you are a lawyer, you guys make your entire livlihood off of this very true point. ;)

The point is, Cal and UCLA are bound by rules of public universities in their admissions.  If they give TOO MUCH preferential treatment(not preferential treatment but TOO MUCH) then they can open themselves up for lawsuits, which they have faced time and time again.  In fact, the only programs AT UCLA and Cal that DO get the preferential treatment are Football and Basketball.  I can tell you that  over the last 3 years, UCLA and CAL have pulled offers and walked away from recruiting 4 and 5 star athetes due to the CONCERN over getting them in and keeping them elligible(and believe me, at ANY college, even the average ones, you have to be a complete GOOFBALL NOT to be able to maintain eligibility) 

HERE is the quote from the Stanford that I love!!!!!!!

Stanford "accommodates athletes in the manner that they accommodate students with disabilities," said Donald Barr, who teaches a course titled "Social Class, Race, Ethnicity, Health," which was highlighted by resource center advisers.

[Sixtynine]

The Football team will never get enough money to be consistently competitive. Simple as that.

[Sixtynine]