• TrojanRick

    With a poll on this wide-open a discussion, you need a “none of the above” box, which I feel will be the ultimate result.


    I agree with Rick. No matter who they bring in, it will take years, even decades, before UCLA becomes relevant. Sure they may get an upset here and there, but fielding consistently good teams is near impossible for the powder blue baby bears.

  • ucla-of-the-rockies

    You guys are screwed on this site if we get Petersen.
    It’s well-known that Wolf has a huge love-fest for all things Boise State.

  • Son of CharIie Bucket

    Peterson has yet to interview with any member of the Cadre Executive Council, but he is a viable candidate.

    Cable has been to Preffered Plus Night at Cadre HQ several times…until he sucker punched “Count Smackula” one night and he has been banned since then. But i could still see it happening.

    the possibilities are STAGGERING!! we are already Pac 12 South Champeens!! and now we get a coach UPGRADE!!! Never has a Division Champion Fired their coach to UPGRADE!!! oh how the RICH get RICHER!!!! what an inspired out of the box move by the Cadre and Guerrero!!!! I feel so ALIVE!!!!!

  • Matt Leinart’s Moustache

    It’ll be Jones, if any of these. More likely it’ll be the JV coach over at Uni High. He’s the only one likely enough to take the pittance a bankrupt UC system can offer up.

  • TrojanFamily


    We Trojan fans can only hope UCLA hires Petersen. Then Mr. Wolf can beg off the Trojan beat and cover UCLA. Then he can do his best to ask idiotic questions of Petersen at the press conference and be ridiculed in Westwood.

  • The Monopoly Is Over Here

    Tom Cable FTMFW!!!

  • trojanwahine

    Re-hire Bob Toledo. I miss the look on his face when we won.

  • schammer47


    Try DeWayne Walker, Head Coach New Mexico State…his 2011 current record 4-8. Last two games:

    BYU 42 NMS 0

    La Tech 44 NMS 0

    Try Mike Leach, former Texas Tech University Head Coach.

    My pick for next ucla Head Coach: Coach Walker

    I win, SW hands in the clipboard and gets the hell out of Dodge.

  • BoscoH

    Norm Chow. Bank on it.

  • schammer47

    correction: BYU 42 NMS 7

  • Medneggler

    Couple of things on Petersen:

    Petersen’s son has serious medical issues, and his personal Doctor was recently hired on at the UCLA medical Center.

    UCLA is reportedly willing to offer a salary in the 3 million dollar range, and an additional 2-3 million for coordinators.

    I have read that Troy Aikman, Casey Wasserman, and others are flying out to Boise to make the pitch to CP.

    Once Pauley is done, UCLA’s next project is renovating the football facilities.

    Add it all up, and Petersen to UCLA may not be as far fetched as I would have thought last week.

  • .mownyc

    Petersen isn’t going to ucla.

  • How does Scott Wolf keep his job?

    ucla needs to dispel of the notion that they are a football school, and an attractive draw for a top tier coach. Whoever the next ucla head coach will decide whether its the goal of ucla football to displace USC as the perennial college football powerhouse in Southern California, or its intent is to field competitive teams and a program that can coexist with USC. Neuheisel seemed to have the former as a singular focus, which he never achieved and may have led to his downfall.

    When has ucla been relevant? in 2005, ucla was 10-2 under Karl Dorrell, and in 1997 & 1998, ucla was 10-2 under Bob Toledo. Prior to this there was a stretch between 1982-1988, where ucla was a consistently good program. So, we’ve gone back 25-30 years since ucla was relevant. And from the early 1950s to 1980s ucla had maybe 10 years where they were a good team. If you take out the 1980s stretch, ucla has never consistently had a good program, and is therefore not a top-tier program.

    2011 was more than just USC’s re-emergence as a national football power, after a brief and fairly mild 2 year hiatus. 2011 and 2012 were the years that ucla should have created a long-term power shift away from USC. Lane Kiffin clearly won the battle, on both the field and in recruiting, thereby restoring USC as a national football power. Playing its hand with Neuheisel, ucla failed as its college football program is far weaker now than when he assumed head coaching responsibility. ucla’s last recruiting class was unimpressive, and the 2012 class will not likely be much better.

    So, the next ucla head coach takes the job knowing that ucla missed its easiest opportunity to displace USC. And not only is USC the Southern California college football power, it is also arguably the most consistent program west of the Rocky Mountains. So, what head coach would want to assume the role of playing second fiddle to USC, which also happens to be the consistently strongest program in the western US?

    Top tier programs that are currently rebuilding are Texas, Florida and Ohio State. Each of these programs can hire top talent, as proven by tOSU hiring Urban Meyer today. If Mack Brown or Will Muschamp can’t right their respective ships, Texas and Florida can get the right person to restore their programs. There are no shortage of head coaches that want the distinction of restoring a top-tier program, of which there are about a dozen – USC, Texas, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, Georgia, Oklahoma and Nebraska. I would argue that Oregon could enter this group as a counterbalance to USC in the western US. Notre Dame was among this group, but if Brian Kelly fails, I believe they are more likely to become comparable to a service academy or middle of the pack Big 10 program.

    Given that ucla has never been a top-tier football program other than for very brief periods over the past 60 years, what established coach would want to stake his reputation and take the ucla head coaching job knowing that he will be in USC’s shadow? Not only will it be difficult to gain national relevance, but just in Southern California alone, ucla will be drawing recruits passed over by USC.

  • BruinTodd

    S o u r ces close to me say peet carroll to UCLA 20 yrs/$600,000,000

  • Medneggler

    Petersen has proven he knows how to coach. He has beaten BCS teams consistently, and if he had a kicker worth a damn, he would be in the middle of back to back undefeated seasons. He is undefeated versus Chip Kelly, and also has wins versus Oklahoma, Georgia, Va tech, etc. But I am sure all of you knew that.

    Any school can win in the NCAA. TCU is now a winning program for god’s sake. All it takes is the right coach to build a program.

    Petersen is looking for the right situation for his family. With the Doctor’s in the right place, maybe that is UCLA.

  • Medneggler

    Anyone on here think Coach Lane is a better coach than Petersen? And “How does Scott Wolf keep his job?”, these past two years were not the tough one’s for SC. Those will be a few years down the line, when they have brought in a max of 15 kids a year for a few recruiting classes. Those teams will struggle to maintain the dominance that was established by PC in the 00’s, and appears to have resurfaced at the end of this year.

  • BruinTodd


    SOURCES close to me say now 10 yrs/pro boneoh

  • How does Scott Wolf keep his job?

    @Medneggler – At this point in time, I think Kiffin has proven to potentially be a top tier coach. I’m not completely sold that he is, although I have always thought that he is a great offensive coordinator. Thinking about what he did with Jonathan Crompton at Tennessee and now Barkley, its tough to argue that he is not a great offensive coach.

    My skepticism was around his ability as head coach. I shared some of the concerns others had about him earlier this year, but my opinion started to change during the week preceding the Notre Dame game. The guy has a really unique way of communicating with and motivating his players, as well as instilling discipline. Petersen? He’s won and won a lot especially against top-tier programs. He’s a great coach, but it would be interesting to see how he fares in an AQ conference.

    I agree that we are not out of the woods yet because of the scholarship sanctions, but if USC can keep scholarships around the 75 limit, then I think it will not be too bad. I will take 75 Ed Orgeron players over 85 Brennan Carroll players. I have far more confidence in this coaching staff to recruit the right 75 players that can be coached to play top-level football. The margin for error, such as injuries and recruits that don’t pan out (i.e. Dillon Baxter) will be far less now than pre-scholarship reductions.

  • http://www.insidesocal.com Skipper

    They can afford Butch Davis, and he would turn their program around.

  • http://eppsnet.com PE2

    Charlie Weis? Jerry Sandusky?

  • USC owns the Rose Bowl

    Where did the bRuin trolls go? 50-0 was too much to handle?
    the real Charlie Bucket (the new, fake one isn’t nearly as funny, clever, or witty at all)
    UCLA fantasy
    Yoda (is a Trojan)
    *credit to special-ed-jones for sticking around after the ass whooping. Taking it like a man and knows his team is garbage! Where are the rest of you??

  • NJ Trojan

    For 50 years from 1949 through 1998, UCLA went 25-22-3 against USC; UCLA went 218-100-11 in the Pac-12, winning or sharing the conference title 14 out of 50 times; and the Bruins were a perennial top-25 program with USC, Washington, and Arizona State. That should be the standard in Westwood: top-25 rankings, a conference title every four to five years, and a winning record against USC. Oh, and Im sure the Bruins would like to see another national championship, even if they have to split it with the Buckeyes.

    Following Donahues retirement, Bob Toledo appeared to have UCLA on the brink of a second national championship in 1998, but the wheels came off at the end of the season, the Bruins began losing against USC again, and UCLA has been mired in mediocrity ever since.

    Unfortunately for the Bruins, Sanders was struck by a heart attack before the 1958 season and UCLA struggled under his replacement for seven years. In 1965, UCLA hired one of Sanderss former assistants at Vanderbilt and UCLA away from Oregon State, Tommy Prothro. Prothro went 41-18-3 overall, 22-10-2 in the Pac-8, and 3-3 against USC. After Prothro left to coach the Los Angeles Rams in 1971, three consecutive head coaches kept it rolling at UCLA. The first was Pepper Rogers, another coach from the south who led UCLA to a 19-2 overall record and a 12-7-1 Pac-8 record, but he went 0-2-1 against USC. The second was Dick Vermeil, a California man who led UCLA to a 15-5-3 overall record, an 11-3-1 Pac-8 record, and a 1-1 record against USC. The third was Terry Donahue, a former UCLA player and assistant. Donahue coached the Bruins for 20 years, from 1976 through 1995. Donahues Bruins went 144-81-8 overall, 92-61-5 in the Pac-10, and 10-9-1 against USC, including the first six games of an eight game winning streak against the Trojans.

    UCLA joined the forerunner of the Pac-12 for the 1928 season early in William Spauldings career. While the Bruins under Spaulding saw overall success, Spauldings Bruins went 33-34-6 in the PCC. The next two coaches failed to compile winning records in the conference as well. Then in 1949, UCLA hired Red Sanders away from Vanderbilt. Sanders went 66-19-1 overall, 47-11-1 in the PCC, and 6-3 against USC.

    Sanders coached UCLA to their only national championship in 1954. Actually, Ohio State split the 1954 national championship with UCLA. The two teams should have met in the Rose Bowl but a no-repeat clause forced the Bruins to stay home and watch Pac-8 runner-up USC play the Buckeyes instead. Ohio State and UCLA did play two common opponents that year: Cal and USC. Ohio States combined score against those two teams was 41-20, while UCLAs was 61-6.

  • Medneggler

    How does Scott Wolf keep his job and NJ Trojan dropping knowledge! It amazes me a) how many Bruin fans cannot recognize the difference between where the two programs currently are, and b) how many trojan fans dont understand UCLA’s history. I think this sums up why UCLA fans feel they should be able to compete with SC and the rest of the Pac 12 on a yearly basis: “For 50 years from 1949 through 1998, UCLA went 25-22-3 against USC; UCLA went 218-100-11 in the Pac-12, winning or sharing the conference title 14 out of 50 times;”

  • BoscoH

    Yeah, but there is now a whole generation of UCLA grads and fans who expect to be USC’ annual bitch.Having spent my adult life with equal time under both realities, I like this new one a lot better.

  • Trojan Conquest

    BoscoH….I’ve lived long enough to remember the 60s and 70s being USC decades, and the 80s being close at 4-5-1. Obviously the 90s belonged to UCLA, but they didn’t make any statement on the National level during this decade. They only played in 2 Rose Bowls, both losses.
    It would be great if both schools could be national powers and the rivalry game meaning something.

  • NOBS

    NJ, nice post. 100% in agreement, as long as SC is in Top 10!