I am surprised a certain individual, an ardent Kelly apologist, has not been commenting, not even a word. But I am darn sure he is covertly pleased we got what we deserve. Even if worse is yet to come with six weeks remaining, to me, this is a painful learning season for Foster and his team. Time will tell if he is the right fit for UCLA. But our AD is to the one to blame for everything. He is unqualified, unskilled for prime time. Too bad UCLA has to endure a sequel to Dan Guerrero.
Ole Chipster Alfraud had a horrible first season at UCLA. In fact, he was a horrible coach and person. Yet invariably no one called for his firing as most were in awe of CA and gave him the proverbial pass.
Foster was indeed put in a terrible position due to Jarmond Jelly (aka Donut 2.0) and his inexcusable handling of CA. Jelly lacks integrity and is totally unqualified to be AD.
With that said, Foster will be much better next year, if he continues to be great on the HS recruiting trail. Because Foster loves UCLA so much and is a dedicated and intelligent person, he will learn from his mistakes, seek wisdom from others and develop into a good if not great coach down the road.
I am not sure any coach could produce a great record this season given the dumpster fire left by CA and the weakness of Jelly.
I initially had much higher hopes for this season, but realized we were left with not much and Foster had to scramble to fill the holes. I say give Foster time as he deserves our support, imho.
Speaking of recruiting, given the number for 2025 to date, it looks like a good effort is being made, but check out the ESPN 300. Of course, the cross-town brats have their fair share, but Oregon is scary. Two for the Bruins including a QB at LB Poly.
Oregon is such a strange school. Remember when they were the proverbial basement dwellers with Oregon State? Knight's cash lifted them to the moon.
Have you have ever been on their campus, it's so obvious that athletics are King with beyond State of the Art facilities while their campus remains as ugly as their uniforms and as lacking as their college town of Eugene. It's just a weird weird place.
Almost went to play there in 68. Eugene was a funky little town and the athletic facilities were agricultural! Two beautiful days of sun in May. Went to a pizza place with my Mom and was told by some students that it usually rains from October to June. Rain? Uh, I grew up on the beach in So Cal. Imagine a lot has changed since then, especially the facilities!
It is always raining. Eugene is not a clean town now - it's kinda a cesspool. My son spent his first year of HS at Marist Catholic HS in Eugene - which is an excellent school but we moved back to my home State of Utah when Oregon as a whole was rapidly deteriorating. I know many diehard Ducks and they don't care about academics, only Football and Basketball as a somewhat distant cousin.
They will continue to recruit well as they have so much money and Football is cult-like with their uniform and brand. UCLA will likely never reach that level of success unless we have a complete cultural overhaul and Frenk is not the guy to do it.
I do not understand why we continue to have bad ADs and Chancellors - the committees making these decisions really must love to see us tank in Football and only care about their glam galas and posh fundraisers for 'health' care.
I don't know what you have against our chancellor. Frank actually hasn't taken over yet (until Jan 2025). But also I don't know if the chancellor should or does care about our football team. The chancellor has more to worry about than UCLA athletics. That is the AD's job.
The chancellor absolutely influences culture and athletics. Remember Chuck Young... he loved UCLA and was a huge advocate of our athletics program. Let's just say that I know Frenk's type and he is not what I had hoped for in terms of leadership at UCLA. You disagree and that's fine.
Of course a chancellor has everything on his plate to deal with. Ask the chancellor of Michigan, Notre Dame, LSU, Clemson, etc The list goes on. But their football team performs well perennially. Is there any reason why >
I disagree, a chancellor is responsible of ALL aspects of the University, Academics, Athletics, growth and yes contraction as well, if necessary. The issue with Colleges and Universities these days are that they don't get the fanfare for top academics or a "great research University" or a university known for its master's and PhD programs. Most of the publicity a College or University gets these days is via their Athletics. In addition, this is where these schools can also score huge amounts of money, even exceeding some of their generous endowments. But the Athletics of a school is a double-edged sword. The better you do, the better your athletic performances, the better press you get, the more money pours in. However, the worst you are in Athletics, the more the University suffers, the less recognition, the less cash comes in. Not good and this is what UCLA is currently experiencing. So, if a Chancellor ignore Athletics, they are simply ignoring the welfare of the University they are in charge of.
LOL !!!! Weird place you say ??? I agree 100%. When you have the chance, go check out Madison, Wisconsin. Town & Country magazine ranks it perennially among the top five most livable places in US.
One year, Francis Ford Coppola was a guest speaker at a graduate seminar at the School of Communication Arts. He shook all of our hands and to a person, he said he would come back and come back again. Just staying overnight to give a speech was not enough, quote unquote.
I never believed then and I still don't that he was faking it to please us kids.
Foster has been bad!
I am surprised a certain individual, an ardent Kelly apologist, has not been commenting, not even a word. But I am darn sure he is covertly pleased we got what we deserve. Even if worse is yet to come with six weeks remaining, to me, this is a painful learning season for Foster and his team. Time will tell if he is the right fit for UCLA. But our AD is to the one to blame for everything. He is unqualified, unskilled for prime time. Too bad UCLA has to endure a sequel to Dan Guerrero.
Ole Chipster Alfraud had a horrible first season at UCLA. In fact, he was a horrible coach and person. Yet invariably no one called for his firing as most were in awe of CA and gave him the proverbial pass.
Foster was indeed put in a terrible position due to Jarmond Jelly (aka Donut 2.0) and his inexcusable handling of CA. Jelly lacks integrity and is totally unqualified to be AD.
With that said, Foster will be much better next year, if he continues to be great on the HS recruiting trail. Because Foster loves UCLA so much and is a dedicated and intelligent person, he will learn from his mistakes, seek wisdom from others and develop into a good if not great coach down the road.
I am not sure any coach could produce a great record this season given the dumpster fire left by CA and the weakness of Jelly.
I initially had much higher hopes for this season, but realized we were left with not much and Foster had to scramble to fill the holes. I say give Foster time as he deserves our support, imho.
Need to add, that I think EB needs to go.
Speaking of recruiting, given the number for 2025 to date, it looks like a good effort is being made, but check out the ESPN 300. Of course, the cross-town brats have their fair share, but Oregon is scary. Two for the Bruins including a QB at LB Poly.
Oregon is such a strange school. Remember when they were the proverbial basement dwellers with Oregon State? Knight's cash lifted them to the moon.
Have you have ever been on their campus, it's so obvious that athletics are King with beyond State of the Art facilities while their campus remains as ugly as their uniforms and as lacking as their college town of Eugene. It's just a weird weird place.
Almost went to play there in 68. Eugene was a funky little town and the athletic facilities were agricultural! Two beautiful days of sun in May. Went to a pizza place with my Mom and was told by some students that it usually rains from October to June. Rain? Uh, I grew up on the beach in So Cal. Imagine a lot has changed since then, especially the facilities!
It is always raining. Eugene is not a clean town now - it's kinda a cesspool. My son spent his first year of HS at Marist Catholic HS in Eugene - which is an excellent school but we moved back to my home State of Utah when Oregon as a whole was rapidly deteriorating. I know many diehard Ducks and they don't care about academics, only Football and Basketball as a somewhat distant cousin.
They will continue to recruit well as they have so much money and Football is cult-like with their uniform and brand. UCLA will likely never reach that level of success unless we have a complete cultural overhaul and Frenk is not the guy to do it.
I do not understand why we continue to have bad ADs and Chancellors - the committees making these decisions really must love to see us tank in Football and only care about their glam galas and posh fundraisers for 'health' care.
I don't know what you have against our chancellor. Frank actually hasn't taken over yet (until Jan 2025). But also I don't know if the chancellor should or does care about our football team. The chancellor has more to worry about than UCLA athletics. That is the AD's job.
The chancellor absolutely influences culture and athletics. Remember Chuck Young... he loved UCLA and was a huge advocate of our athletics program. Let's just say that I know Frenk's type and he is not what I had hoped for in terms of leadership at UCLA. You disagree and that's fine.
I agree with you. Read with response above.
Of course a chancellor has everything on his plate to deal with. Ask the chancellor of Michigan, Notre Dame, LSU, Clemson, etc The list goes on. But their football team performs well perennially. Is there any reason why >
I disagree, a chancellor is responsible of ALL aspects of the University, Academics, Athletics, growth and yes contraction as well, if necessary. The issue with Colleges and Universities these days are that they don't get the fanfare for top academics or a "great research University" or a university known for its master's and PhD programs. Most of the publicity a College or University gets these days is via their Athletics. In addition, this is where these schools can also score huge amounts of money, even exceeding some of their generous endowments. But the Athletics of a school is a double-edged sword. The better you do, the better your athletic performances, the better press you get, the more money pours in. However, the worst you are in Athletics, the more the University suffers, the less recognition, the less cash comes in. Not good and this is what UCLA is currently experiencing. So, if a Chancellor ignore Athletics, they are simply ignoring the welfare of the University they are in charge of.
LOL !!!! Weird place you say ??? I agree 100%. When you have the chance, go check out Madison, Wisconsin. Town & Country magazine ranks it perennially among the top five most livable places in US.
One year, Francis Ford Coppola was a guest speaker at a graduate seminar at the School of Communication Arts. He shook all of our hands and to a person, he said he would come back and come back again. Just staying overnight to give a speech was not enough, quote unquote.
I never believed then and I still don't that he was faking it to please us kids.
hate to say it, but we were in better shape with Chip Kelly.
You really don't hate to say it.
Chip was bad, but this is like basically not having a coach. And there's no end in sight.
We got him out of his foxhole, LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hope he migrates to his the Columbus habitat to be closer to Chip Kelly.
Oops, forgot to delete " the ".