A few things have jumped out at me lately that makes me wonder where Ucla's shortcomings really are when it comes to football. Really talking about the last 10 years or so.
I know the aggrevation prior. I'll give 3 names as an example that have had ties to Ucla football or in the HC search that have struck me.
First, Jim Mora. Personally thought he'd be an excellent fit at Ucla, knowledge of NFL, and connections to overall coaching community. At one point did an incredible job raising money for the Training facility, had gotten fan interest in Ucla at a pretty high level, pretty good overall record (fell short in some big games, but that could have changed over time), seemed to change the recruiting talent levels, and had some really good Coordinators and coaches. Then at some point, things dramatically changed. Looked checked out, lost coaches, didn't seem to replace them with quality guys.
Second name is John Harbaugh. Don't remember if he was being considered before or after Jim Mora, but as far as the average fan opinion I got, people didn't seem to in favor of him as a candidate. I believe he was one of 3 or 4 final names in interviews before he withdrew his name. Now has one Super Bowl title to his name and looking really good this year for a second run. The big question for me, is would he have been successful at Ucla and gotten the support? My gut feeling is probably not.
Last name is Jedd Fisch. Really liked him when he came on as OC. Then due to circumstances, wasn't given the chance as HC which again, my feeling was most didn't want to risk taking a chance. In his third year, finished incredibly strong in the P12 and I saw Arizona is now a preseason number 9 for next year. The question again for me is would he have been successful at Ucla and gotten the overall support? Again my feeling is probably not.
If I'm correct about the last two, it does make me wonder why that is the case with Ucla? And to add to it, why would a previous HC who seemed to be on path to getting to an elite level just dropped like he did? Are there other issues or obstacles that Ucla football as a whole won't be able to overcome.
As far as HC's are concerned, I think football is one of the few sports that the assistant coaches are possibly as important as a HC. So to add regarding Chip Kelly, is it a thing that CFB is passing him by? Would he be more successful somewhere else? Have there been reasons why it's taken him longer periods of time to get coordinators that seem to have big impacts? Does make me wonder how fixable Ucla football is as far as trying to get back up to a much higher level.