In Reply to: Hey, a pretty interesting take on Ucla fb! posted by ClockBlocker on May 27, 2025 at 10:48:19
because UCLA overall has recruited the high school ranks poorly. Except I disagree that it was "probably" before DF. There is no doubt that it was before DF because DF has only signed one class, the one graduating high school this week. He also can't be expected to put us on a 4-year plan with the OL because coaches don't have that kind of time anymore. He's had no choice but to heavily mine the portal.
This writer also does not seem to know that UCLA has a new OC and OL coach, which would seem like a pretty significant fact to mention in such an article. And he doesn't mention how we fell off a cliff in the running game vs. the year before.
Dropping from 2573 yards and 21 TD's to 1039 yards and 4 TD's could speak to a coaching issue as much or more as it does a personnel one.
UCLA is an unknown on offense right now. We have a new QB, new OC, new OL coach, new starting running back, and a lot of new bodies on the OL. And they didn't get a spring together. We appear to have significantly upgraded our talent level at OC (how could we not from EB?), QB, and RB, however. That's about all that we know.
The problem with all these articles is that they are written by people who have very little familiarity with UCLA football. And they often come with a bias, thus the digs about smog, etc.