Short answer to your question: No. There are numerous reasons why Chip should no longer be coaching the Bruins - many have been discussed and I won't repeat them. I will mention just one example that I'm not sure was mentioned in the articles I've read on this site. When asked by reporters after the Colorado game what adjustments wer…
Short answer to your question: No. There are numerous reasons why Chip should no longer be coaching the Bruins - many have been discussed and I won't repeat them. I will mention just one example that I'm not sure was mentioned in the articles I've read on this site. When asked by reporters after the Colorado game what adjustments were made at half time to address the unfolding debacle that was occurring on the field, Chip quickly let everyone know that no adjustments were made. Fantastic (usual) job of leadership there.
Let me ask - does anyone truly believe that Chip could do what Kyle Whittingham has done at Utah in what was perceived to be a down year at the beginning of the season for them?
We have an AD that I'm confident would like to boost his resume by helping to turn the football program. There are no shortage of football coaches looking for a new job (Dan Mullen was just let go in fact). However, if I'm in the AD's shoes, I have to believe that UCLA is not going to be the top of the list of many of those coaches. Not with USC, Florida, and LSU available as a starting point.
Instead, it makes more sense to me to target someone (head coach of a non-Power 5 conference team or a respected coordinator/coach of a Power 5 conference team) to come and infuse some energy into the program while boosting their own resumes. Could there be someone out there in the college ranks like a Brandon Staley or a Sean McVay that wants to make a name for themselves by making UCLA into a power while also proving to themselves that they can indeed lead at the Power 5 conference level? Who might that be? That's what I would like to know.
I believe that extending Chip just leads to continued mediocrity and inconsistency.
Short answer to your question: No. There are numerous reasons why Chip should no longer be coaching the Bruins - many have been discussed and I won't repeat them. I will mention just one example that I'm not sure was mentioned in the articles I've read on this site. When asked by reporters after the Colorado game what adjustments were made at half time to address the unfolding debacle that was occurring on the field, Chip quickly let everyone know that no adjustments were made. Fantastic (usual) job of leadership there.
Let me ask - does anyone truly believe that Chip could do what Kyle Whittingham has done at Utah in what was perceived to be a down year at the beginning of the season for them?
We have an AD that I'm confident would like to boost his resume by helping to turn the football program. There are no shortage of football coaches looking for a new job (Dan Mullen was just let go in fact). However, if I'm in the AD's shoes, I have to believe that UCLA is not going to be the top of the list of many of those coaches. Not with USC, Florida, and LSU available as a starting point.
Instead, it makes more sense to me to target someone (head coach of a non-Power 5 conference team or a respected coordinator/coach of a Power 5 conference team) to come and infuse some energy into the program while boosting their own resumes. Could there be someone out there in the college ranks like a Brandon Staley or a Sean McVay that wants to make a name for themselves by making UCLA into a power while also proving to themselves that they can indeed lead at the Power 5 conference level? Who might that be? That's what I would like to know.
I believe that extending Chip just leads to continued mediocrity and inconsistency.