I was reading that Karl Dorrell is more than likely out at UCLA and began to wonder why a program like UCLA can't be a Top 20 team year in and year out. Obviously every program has a down year or two, but it seems to me that the Bruins should be competing for the Pac-10 every year.
I like to think of myself as very knowledgeable of college football and it's history. UCLA has always been in USC's shadow or so it seems. But still, you have the weather, the women an established tradition. Just seems to me that they should be winning 8 or 9 games a year at least.
UCLA is situated in one of the nicest areas in Southern California, just five miles from the Pacific Ocean. The average year-round temperature is 74 degrees with little humidity. UCLA is also located in the nation's No. 2 media market and receives national exposure as well as local coverage from a dozen newspapers, seven television stations and cable networks such as ESPN and Fox Sports Net.
They've played in 28 bowls to date but over the past several years have played in the Las Vegas Bowl, the Emerald City Bowl, the Silicon Valley Bowl and the Sun Bowl. It's been almost 9 years since they have played in the Rose Bowl.
I was very surprised to see that they have only won one National Championship in football and that was in 1954. I truly thought they had won a few more than that.
Their record since 1990 is 125-88 which is an average of 7 wins and 5 losses. In those 18 years they have had 5 losing seasons, 2 even seasons and 11 winning seasons with three of those as 10 win seasons.
I don't know, maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, but it would seem to me that UCLA would be more consistent.
This is in no way a hating post at all. Believe me, as an Alabama fan I know all about expectations and ruined seasons.
Any Bruins fans want to chime in or Pac-10 fans?
I like to think of myself as very knowledgeable of college football and it's history. UCLA has always been in USC's shadow or so it seems. But still, you have the weather, the women an established tradition. Just seems to me that they should be winning 8 or 9 games a year at least.
UCLA is situated in one of the nicest areas in Southern California, just five miles from the Pacific Ocean. The average year-round temperature is 74 degrees with little humidity. UCLA is also located in the nation's No. 2 media market and receives national exposure as well as local coverage from a dozen newspapers, seven television stations and cable networks such as ESPN and Fox Sports Net.
They've played in 28 bowls to date but over the past several years have played in the Las Vegas Bowl, the Emerald City Bowl, the Silicon Valley Bowl and the Sun Bowl. It's been almost 9 years since they have played in the Rose Bowl.
I was very surprised to see that they have only won one National Championship in football and that was in 1954. I truly thought they had won a few more than that.
Their record since 1990 is 125-88 which is an average of 7 wins and 5 losses. In those 18 years they have had 5 losing seasons, 2 even seasons and 11 winning seasons with three of those as 10 win seasons.
I don't know, maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, but it would seem to me that UCLA would be more consistent.
This is in no way a hating post at all. Believe me, as an Alabama fan I know all about expectations and ruined seasons.
Any Bruins fans want to chime in or Pac-10 fans?
Last edited:
