10-26-2016, 11:07 AM
Mora is a fascinating case. On the one hand, his record is substantially better than the coaches who have preceded him:
He is certainly much better than Neuheisel, Dorrell, or Toledo; you have to go back to Terry Donahue to get a coach with a similar overall record, and Donahue was given two decades at UCLA. Mora can recruit about as well as anyone, and over his tenure, I think only USC can match UCLA in recruiting within the Pac-12. So, Mora can recruit well and can win games... BUT, it sure seems that when you go through the roster, you might have expected UCLA to have performed better given the players they have on the team. Now, to be sure, our opinion of him might be colored by the fact that he has never beaten Stanford, but still this is a program that always seems to underachieve just enough that you are left wondering if there is a bit of a failure to translate talent into championships.
BC
| 19741975 | Dick Vermeil | 1553 |
| 19761995 | Terry Donahue | 151748 |
| 19962002 | Bob Toledo | 4932 |
| 20032007 | Karl Dorrell | 3527 |
| 20082011 | Rick Neuheisel | 2129 |
| 2012present | Jim L. Mora | 4018 |
He is certainly much better than Neuheisel, Dorrell, or Toledo; you have to go back to Terry Donahue to get a coach with a similar overall record, and Donahue was given two decades at UCLA. Mora can recruit about as well as anyone, and over his tenure, I think only USC can match UCLA in recruiting within the Pac-12. So, Mora can recruit well and can win games... BUT, it sure seems that when you go through the roster, you might have expected UCLA to have performed better given the players they have on the team. Now, to be sure, our opinion of him might be colored by the fact that he has never beaten Stanford, but still this is a program that always seems to underachieve just enough that you are left wondering if there is a bit of a failure to translate talent into championships.
BC
