In Reply to: Re recruiting, I still go w/ my theory that Jarmond/the Admin posted by TheHappyBurgermeister on August 03, 2024 at 17:42:40
I agree with all you points except for the recruiting portion. I think the evidence shows that UCLA’s admission for football players are as lenient as they’ve been in 50 years. UCLA implemented a grad program (which has always been an untouchable at ICLA) specifically to place athletes. UCLA’s is also taking general transfers from programs that historically they would never have alllowed to transfer unless they were 4.0 types; think Hawaii, Wyoming, North Texas etc.
The high school recruiting is almost idienfic to any other program in the country. Name a single kid who couldn’t get into ucla but went somewhere else. The last one we can remember is the kid in Matt Wares class (who couldn’t get into sc either) and wound up at Kansas State. Ironically, the other kid is Addison who went to Oregon and now is at ucla. He had an issue with his standardized test that CA guidelines (not specifically ucla) mandated. UCLA’s issue with recruiting is that Chip torched all our high school relationships for 6 years. We have been absent in the recruiting scene. It’s also pretty evident that Deshaun isn’t exactly a dynamic personality that will be a mega hit in recruiting. I always look at it this way — if your kid was a legit NFL prospect would you send you kid to X college? UCLA would not be near the top of my list. I think the staff is terrible (except EB, who I don’t expect to be here long and Jerry, who needs to move on based on how they screwe him this year).