Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

UCLA and Tennessee: The USC and Florida of the '10s?

CUFan

CUFan

Welcome back
5. UCLA and Tennessee: The USC and Florida of the '10s?

Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas and USC recently resuscitated themselves following a decade or more of mediocrity. Several traditional powers that struggled in the 2000s should do the same this decade. Why not UCLA and Tennessee?
The Bruins have several factors working in their favor entering their third season under Rick Neuheisel. Most notably, their cross-town rival just got hit with heavy NCAA sanctions (10 docked scholarships each of the next three seasons) that, at the very least, will benefit UCLA in head-to-head recruiting. But the Bruins weren't exactly struggling in that arena: Even coming off a 7-6 season, they landed Rivals.com's No. 8 class last spring.
"I think we're right on the cusp of being there," said Neuheisel. "The last three years, we've gotten great recruiting classes. We've done our R&D. Now we need to execute the business plan."
If UCLA, which enters preseason camp with just one projected senior starter, struggles this fall, it could spark grumblings about Neuheisel. But by then the foundation should be in place for either him or a successor to instigate a breakthrough right around the time USC feels the brunt of its sanctions. Remember, the Trojans started the 2000s with 5-7 and 6-6 seasons.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vi...la_usc_pac10.mov.SportsIllustrated/index.html
Tennessee faces a longer climb back to preeminence due to the state of disarray caused by coaching changes each of the past two seasons and the fact that several of Lane Kiffin's top 2009 signees (running back Bryce Brown, defensive back Darren Myles and receiver Nu'keese Richardson) have already washed out. But new coach Derek Dooley -- son of legendary Georgia coach Vince Dooley -- signedanother top 10 class last winter and should get some leeway from normally impatient fans.
Tennessee's big break, however, will come a few years down the road when Florida coach Urban Meyer prematurely retires (again) and Alabama's Nick Saban returns to the NFL (again).


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/08/10/new-era/index.html?eref=sihp


Stewart Mandel and Andy Staples think Slick Rick will lead UCLA to the promise land. What is the constant fascination with this guy?
 
Neuheisel sucks, and Tennessee just hired some guy named Dick Dooley or something like that. Neither of those teams is going anywhere soon.
 
Both schools have some incredible advantages. Tennessee has a fanatical and devoted fan base that will throw money at the program, no questions asked, so long as they think the AD is trying to produce a winner. UCLA is at ground zero for HS football talent. They don't have a lot of competition for recruits, and are in a freakishly huge media market. USC turned these advantages into one of the most dominant football programs of the last 10 years. They lost their coach and are on probation now. Sucks for them. With Slick Rick running the show at UCLA, the very same thing will probably happen there, but sooner.
 
i would consider UCLA significantly below programs like Bama, USC, UT, and OU. they weren't even in the top 3-4 of Pac 10 wins when that list made the rounds during the expansion discussions. Next to Barry Alvarez, I'd consider Terry Donahue to be pretty over-rated and somehow the object of an undeserving media love affair.
 
CUFan said:
Stewart Mandel and Andy Staples think Slick Rick will lead UCLA to the promise land. What is the constant fascination with this guy?
Click to expand...

Actually, if you read what they wrote, they think UCLA is in a position for Neuheisel or someone else to lead UCLA to the promised land because of three solid to good recruiting classes in a row, great location, sanctions for their top rival for recruits and attention.

SI.com said:
The Bruins have several factors working in their favor entering their third season under Rick Neuheisel. Most notably, their cross-town rival just got hit with heavy NCAA sanctions (10 docked scholarships each of the next three seasons) that, at the very least, will benefit UCLA in head-to-head recruiting. But the Bruins weren't exactly struggling in that arena: Even coming off a 7-6 season, they landed Rivals.com's No. 8 class last spring.

If UCLA, which enters preseason camp with just one projected senior starter, struggles this fall, it could spark grumblings about Neuheisel. But by then the foundation should be in place for either him or a successor to instigate a breakthrough right around the time USC feels the brunt of its sanctions. Remember, the Trojans started the 2000s with 5-7 and 6-6 seasons.
Click to expand...

No one can question Slick's ability to recruit. Whether he build a long term dynasty, not clear. But, if he falls on his face, these guys are right, UCLA could find itself in an OU type position. Great roster just waiting for the right coach.
 
UCLA historically isn't much different than CU. Its a Top 25 program but I seriously doubt it ever will trump USC for a long period of time.
 
The sleeping giants right now if you look at all-time winning percentage & prestige: UCLA, Tennessee, Syracuse, Washington, Texas A&M, Miami (FL) and Colorado.
 
+1 on Barry Alvarez being overrated. He is credited more for resurrecting an historically irrelevant program. This is all well and good, but Wisconsin sure as hell was never a national title contender.

Mick Ronson said:
i would consider UCLA significantly below programs like Bama, USC, UT, and OU. they weren't even in the top 3-4 of Pac 10 wins when that list made the rounds during the expansion discussions. Next to Barry Alvarez, I'd consider Terry Donahue to be pretty over-rated and somehow the object of an undeserving media love affair.
Click to expand...
 
Florida State and Michigan just recently went to sleep, but will be back sooner rather than later.

Buffnik said:
The sleeping giants right now if you look at all-time winning percentage & prestige: UCLA, Tennessee, Syracuse, Washington, Texas A&M, Miami (FL) and Colorado.
Click to expand...
 
JimmyBuff said:
UCLA historically isn't much different than CU. Its a Top 25 program but I seriously doubt it ever will trump USC for a long period of time.
Click to expand...

If UCLA had the same admissions standards for their guys as Cal and USC they would stand a big, big chance. Seems like their administration is fine with "only" being a basketball powerhouse year in and year out.
 
UCLA is a better school than USC, is in a MUCH better location and they play home games at the Rose Bowl - I don't see why they can't overtake USC someday as kings of SoCal. Academics? Tradition? I don't get it - talk about a gold mine if they could get the right coach.
 
UCLA won't get it done with Slick at the helm. They will get good (with great talent), but they will never be a tough enough team. He's way too Slick to be a real football coach.
 
SINKRATZ said:
UCLA is a better school than USC, is in a MUCH better location and they play home games at the Rose Bowl - I don't see why they can't overtake USC someday as kings of SoCal. Academics? Tradition? I don't get it - talk about a gold mine if they could get the right coach.
Click to expand...

The Rose Bowl not being located close to campus does hurt them. I know plenty of people that went to UCLA and never went to a football game while they were there. Fan support starts with getting the students/alums into the picture and keeping them there. Even so, it's the ****ing Rose Bowl. That alone makes it worth the trip when we play UCLA in a few years. Easy.

LA is definitely more of a bball town than a football town.
 
UCLA traditionally has done less with more than any program in America. With Rick leading them they're not going anywhere fast...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top