True. UCLA does not like to pay a lot for that muffler. For all their reputation, they're willing to take in local recruits who want to be there, which are always good if not great, and have never had any ambition to be like USC. Problem is they really want to beat USC. I don't know how to beat them (on an annual basis) without being like them.
It's too bad. I blame the Pac-10's slumber as a major college football player on UCLA and a stumbling Washington program. If those two programs would just meet expectations on an annual basis the Pac-10 would never have any reputation problems.
My take is a lot of UCLA fans are like me, they love UCLA basketball and that's what they want at UCLA is the basketball team to be great. If football is good too that's great, but it's not life or death like basketball is for some.
I see tons of UCLA fans who want Dorrell gone but they all realize money is the problem. It was with basketball too, a huge part of it is as a public school they are under huge pressure to NOT give out massive salaries to coaches. It's a school how do you justify multi million dollar salaries to coach football or basketball is what everyone asks. At USC it's a whole different game because it's a private school.
USC can pay Pete Carroll whatever they want, they can pay Tim Floyd what they want, they can let Tim Floyd hire the parents of prospects to get the kid to commit, it's a private school if he wants to give a parent a job to get the recruit so be it. You can't do that in a public school(frankly I'm still amazed nobody has hit USC with a discrimination suit for those types of hires in basketball).
Plus UCLA's AD isn't particularly good, he got lucky with Howland it was Ben's dream job, Adidas kicked in money to help, everyone knew UCLA was a sleeping giant. A story came out a few months back that said more than 50% of the recruits for football at UCLA, and Cal(and USC) are "special admits" which means they don't meet the average academics standards of the incoming class but were taken for some special reason, in their case athletics. At USC special admits also includes legacy students, same thing at Stanford (see the Lopez twins in basketball one of whom is now ineligible).
SO UCLA football IS "bending" their rules to try and be more competitive they're taking more and more kids that in the past they wouldn't take.
I'm quite happy the basketball team isn't doing that, they still take guys who have lower GPAs and SATs than the overall average but they're not taking guys who barely meet the NCAA minimums the way the football program is.
The reality is with rosters so big in football it's almost impossible to win and NOT lower your academics, that's why Stanford and ND are down IMHO, they simply can't get enough good players who meet their academics criteria. Stanford football took less than 10% as special admits in the same story they have lowered standards but not nearly as much as other schools have.
I'd like to see what Chow could do at UCLA but I don't think they can afford him unless he just so badly wants a HC job he just takes it.