All FB coaching rumors and speculation

That raises the question of "Why does UCLA ever lose a recruit?"

Actually, why does UCLA ever lose a recruit? I guess I can understand them losing an occasional recruit to Arizona State, Colorado, Pepperdine, or Iowa State but why would they lose a recruit to anybody else?
It's the #2 public school in the country for academics I assume that factors.
 
Wilner, LOL. Read through this guy's stuff on conference realignment, he is clueless.

He started the USC stuff by getting fooled by a fake Thamel Twitter handle, then said, "yeah but still."

This guy is so blinded by PAC homerism that he is miles out of reality. If Campbell were to turn down UW to him it would be that clearly UW decided they wanted the Fresno guy more, and would think of it along the lines of Napier turning down Florida to stay at Louisiana.
I think he’s the same quack that said the best big12 addition to the pac12 was houston. He seems preoccupied with insulting the big12 when given a chance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cyclonick182
I think he’s the same quack that said the best big12 addition to the pac12 was houston. He seems preoccupied with insulting the big12 when given a chance.
Yes - his conference realignment takes were really bad. He thinks the conference has McCartney's CU, James' UW, Carroll's USC, Robinson's UCLA, and Desert Swarm Arizona right now.
 
Yes - his conference realignment takes were really bad. He thinks the conference has McCartney's CU, James' UW, Carroll's USC, Robinson's UCLA, and Desert Swarm Arizona right now.

So kind of like a B1G fan.
 
Although I would like to think you are correct, history says you are not. I have been going to games since 1969. When we are down, people don’t show up.

But, I agree with the rest of your comments.

I'd say now in the 21st century this has changed. You can have the hell that was 1970-2000 (one of worst programs in the country, I still remember cheering my butt off as a kid when we got a tie to end the year instead of losing every game) but after that we've been pretty dang loyal.
 
5? If we give someone leeway for 5 losing seasons, we've thrown away the program and committed ourselves to failure.
I think it sorta depends on what kind of losing seasons they are. If they are all 6-6 and there are a lot of injuries you might want to keep him. If ISU starts winning 3 games a year again, even Matt would feel the heat after 3 years. He also would consider that completely unacceptable. Honestly, I just don't see that happening under Campbell.
 
Okay, you last sentence clarified the difference. I never mentioned worried about money. People making those dollar figures don’t worry about money, they just spend. Their sorry is accumulating. That is the driver
It’s sounds hard to imagine but I’ve seen it. People who make 250-400 or so a year sometimes think they make good money but it’s not what they talk about when making real money. Real money is when you go buy something, anything, that may cost 50k just because it amuses you. People with 50MM to 100 MM worths are at different levels than most of us. That is when generational wealth happens. Dave Ramsey talking about millionaires and that is supposed to be big? It isn’t, it’s nice, but it isn’t big.

We may think it’s hard to spend a million a year but it’s far from difficult if money is not worried about


5 minute rides into space are not cheap.
 
That raises the question of "Why does UCLA ever lose a recruit?"

Actually, why does UCLA ever lose a recruit? I guess I can understand them losing an occasional recruit to Arizona State, Colorado, Pepperdine, or Iowa State but why would they lose a recruit to anybody else?

LA, even the nice parts, just isn’t for everybody. After graduating from ISU I moved to LA and loved it. Spent a good deal of my free time in Westwood and it was glorious (when I was twenty something). I drug my wife to be out to join me a few years later and she didn’t share my enthusiasm. Which means we split the difference and moved to San Diego…..
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron