[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/plaschke-uc...00255.html

Newspaper articles like this one don't necessarily mean much, but it does seem like UCLA is at best stuck in mediocrity. Kelly has about an 8.6 million buyout, which doesn't look like much in today's football world. However, UCLA athletics has a large structural deficit (or so they say) and spending that much to get rid of a coach would have issues. Kelly has had 6 years or so, and things aren't improving. If anything, they are getting worse.

Of course, replacing Kelly would both cost money and not necessarily produce much better results. UCLA has replaced several coaches that had better records than Kelly, but none of them put UCLA in the "top tier", which is where they believe they should be. I can see a scenario where Kelly defeats USC and is given another year. If he loses to USC, it is much harder to see how UCLA chooses to retain him, given his results and trajectory.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/plaschke-uc...00255.html

Newspaper articles like this one don't necessarily mean much, but it does seem like UCLA is at best stuck in mediocrity. Kelly has about an 8.6 million buyout, which doesn't look like much in today's football world. However, UCLA athletics has a large structural deficit (or so they say) and spending that much to get rid of a coach would have issues. Kelly has had 6 years or so, and things aren't improving. If anything, they are getting worse.

Of course, replacing Kelly would both cost money and not necessarily produce much better results. UCLA has replaced several coaches that had better records than Kelly, but none of them put UCLA in the "top tier", which is where they believe they should be. I can see a scenario where Kelly defeats USC and is given another year. If he loses to USC, it is much harder to see how UCLA chooses to retain him, given his results and trajectory.

[Giants]

1699898991[/url]']
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/plaschke-uc...00255.html

Newspaper articles like this one don't necessarily mean much, but it does seem like UCLA is at best stuck in mediocrity. Kelly has about an 8.6 million buyout, which doesn't look like much in today's football world. However, UCLA athletics has a large structural deficit (or so they say) and spending that much to get rid of a coach would have issues. Kelly has had 6 years or so, and things aren't improving. If anything, they are getting worse.

Of course, replacing Kelly would both cost money and not necessarily produce much better results. UCLA has replaced several coaches that had better records than Kelly, but none of them put UCLA in the "top tier", which is where they believe they should be. I can see a scenario where Kelly defeats USC and is given another year. If he loses to USC, it is much harder to see how UCLA chooses to retain him, given his results and trajectory.

In this era of bloated salaries and buyouts, it is the donors who call the shots (see Texas A&M, etc.).  The Bruin donor community will fund the buyout if they decide it is time for Kelly to go.

[Giants]

1699898991[/url]']
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/plaschke-uc...00255.html

Newspaper articles like this one don't necessarily mean much, but it does seem like UCLA is at best stuck in mediocrity. Kelly has about an 8.6 million buyout, which doesn't look like much in today's football world. However, UCLA athletics has a large structural deficit (or so they say) and spending that much to get rid of a coach would have issues. Kelly has had 6 years or so, and things aren't improving. If anything, they are getting worse.

Of course, replacing Kelly would both cost money and not necessarily produce much better results. UCLA has replaced several coaches that had better records than Kelly, but none of them put UCLA in the "top tier", which is where they believe they should be. I can see a scenario where Kelly defeats USC and is given another year. If he loses to USC, it is much harder to see how UCLA chooses to retain him, given his results and trajectory.

In this era of bloated salaries and buyouts, it is the donors who call the shots (see Texas A&M, etc.).  The Bruin donor community will fund the buyout if they decide it is time for Kelly to go.

[Goose]

1699898991[/url]']
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/plaschke-uc...00255.html

Newspaper articles like this one don't necessarily mean much, but it does seem like UCLA is at best stuck in mediocrity. Kelly has about an 8.6 million buyout, which doesn't look like much in today's football world. However, UCLA athletics has a large structural deficit (or so they say) and spending that much to get rid of a coach would have issues. Kelly has had 6 years or so, and things aren't improving. If anything, they are getting worse.

Of course, replacing Kelly would both cost money and not necessarily produce much better results. UCLA has replaced several coaches that had better records than Kelly, but none of them put UCLA in the "top tier", which is where they believe they should be. I can see a scenario where Kelly defeats USC and is given another year. If he loses to USC, it is much harder to see how UCLA chooses to retain him, given his results and trajectory.

In this era of bloated salaries and buyouts, it is the donors who call the shots (see Texas A&M, etc.).  The Bruin donor community will fund the buyout if they decide it is time for Kelly to go.

True, but at UCLA things haven't turned out to be that simple. The "new" coach and assistants will cost more than Kelly et al, but the boosters will pay that too. However, it will be the "unexpected costs" of many million dollars that won't get covered that will be the problem. UCLA went through this when they brought Kelly in. No reason to expect anything different this time around. The increasing deficit in the department is the issue the AD will have to explain. It will be interesting to see what affect the supposed B1G "windfall" will have at UCLA. Apparently, even this isn't going to solve the problem, and that is without really knowing what the cost increases in other sports will actually be.

[Goose]

1699898991[/url]']
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/plaschke-uc...00255.html

Newspaper articles like this one don't necessarily mean much, but it does seem like UCLA is at best stuck in mediocrity. Kelly has about an 8.6 million buyout, which doesn't look like much in today's football world. However, UCLA athletics has a large structural deficit (or so they say) and spending that much to get rid of a coach would have issues. Kelly has had 6 years or so, and things aren't improving. If anything, they are getting worse.

Of course, replacing Kelly would both cost money and not necessarily produce much better results. UCLA has replaced several coaches that had better records than Kelly, but none of them put UCLA in the "top tier", which is where they believe they should be. I can see a scenario where Kelly defeats USC and is given another year. If he loses to USC, it is much harder to see how UCLA chooses to retain him, given his results and trajectory.

In this era of bloated salaries and buyouts, it is the donors who call the shots (see Texas A&M, etc.).  The Bruin donor community will fund the buyout if they decide it is time for Kelly to go.

True, but at UCLA things haven't turned out to be that simple. The "new" coach and assistants will cost more than Kelly et al, but the boosters will pay that too. However, it will be the "unexpected costs" of many million dollars that won't get covered that will be the problem. UCLA went through this when they brought Kelly in. No reason to expect anything different this time around. The increasing deficit in the department is the issue the AD will have to explain. It will be interesting to see what affect the supposed B1G "windfall" will have at UCLA. Apparently, even this isn't going to solve the problem, and that is without really knowing what the cost increases in other sports will actually be.

[Goose]

https://sports.yahoo.com/reports-ohio-st...26286.html

Well, it does look like he is in fact going. Strange in some ways, but I can see it.
REVISED: IMO this is a slightly more on-point article.
https://www.si.com/college/ucla/football...ion-ak1987

[Goose]

https://sports.yahoo.com/reports-ohio-st...26286.html

Well, it does look like he is in fact going. Strange in some ways, but I can see it.
REVISED: IMO this is a slightly more on-point article.
https://www.si.com/college/ucla/football...ion-ak1987

[Giants]

https://sports.yahoo.com/reports-ohio-st...26286.html

Well, it does look like he is in fact going. Strange in some ways, but I can see it.

I can, too.  Evidently, he wasn’t happy working at UCLA.  When the opportunity to work with a lifelong friend at a premier school, he jumped.  Over the years, Kellyologists have constantly reminded us that he marches to a different drummer.  This move is confirmation that he doesn’t follow the standard script.  

So, once again the coaching carrousel is spinning.

[Giants]

https://sports.yahoo.com/reports-ohio-st...26286.html

Well, it does look like he is in fact going. Strange in some ways, but I can see it.

I can, too.  Evidently, he wasn’t happy working at UCLA.  When the opportunity to work with a lifelong friend at a premier school, he jumped.  Over the years, Kellyologists have constantly reminded us that he marches to a different drummer.  This move is confirmation that he doesn’t follow the standard script.  

So, once again the coaching carrousel is spinning.

[CowboyIndian]

Just heard on the radio that Bill O'Brien will be new head coach at BC.

[CowboyIndian]

Just heard on the radio that Bill O'Brien will be new head coach at BC.

[GK3]

Just heard on the radio that Bill O'Brien will be new head coach at BC.

Maybe UCLA will hire Shaw :)

[GK3]

Just heard on the radio that Bill O'Brien will be new head coach at BC.

Maybe UCLA will hire Shaw :)

[82lsju]

In a message to UCLA alumni and fans, Bruins athletic director Martin Jarmond thanked Kelly for his time at the school, wished him well and said a national search for a replacement had already commenced.

“We understand the importance of the timing of this search,” Jarmond wrote, before referencing the school’s most famous coach, “and will heed the advice of Coach [John] Wooden, to be quick but not to hurry.”

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/stor...aving-ucla

[82lsju]

In a message to UCLA alumni and fans, Bruins athletic director Martin Jarmond thanked Kelly for his time at the school, wished him well and said a national search for a replacement had already commenced.

“We understand the importance of the timing of this search,” Jarmond wrote, before referencing the school’s most famous coach, “and will heed the advice of Coach [John] Wooden, to be quick but not to hurry.”

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/stor...aving-ucla

[Maple Leaf]

Just heard on the radio that Bill O'Brien will be new head coach at BC.

Maybe UCLA will hire Shaw :)

or Pete Carroll or Prime Time Sanders

[Maple Leaf]

Just heard on the radio that Bill O'Brien will be new head coach at BC.

Maybe UCLA will hire Shaw :)

or Pete Carroll or Prime Time Sanders

[needle]

How many times has a major conference head coach resigned to become a coordinator at a different school?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

[needle]

How many times has a major conference head coach resigned to become a coordinator at a different school?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

[Goose]

How many times has a major conference head coach resigned to become a coordinator at a different school?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

Me neither. I can only guess at the "reasons". It was IMHO very probable that if UCLA wasn't much better in 2024 than in 2023 Kelly was gone anyway. He would have left with much more cash, but he would have "left". Resigning is always better than being fired. It may be he believes a gig at tOSU that leads to a national championship will resurrect his image and give him a better shot at a good next landing spot, like Sarkisian and Kiffin did. I guess it is also possible he wants to decompress a little before re-entering the NFL. Supposedly he was interested in doing that this "cycle" but nobody wanted him.

[Goose]

How many times has a major conference head coach resigned to become a coordinator at a different school?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

Me neither. I can only guess at the "reasons". It was IMHO very probable that if UCLA wasn't much better in 2024 than in 2023 Kelly was gone anyway. He would have left with much more cash, but he would have "left". Resigning is always better than being fired. It may be he believes a gig at tOSU that leads to a national championship will resurrect his image and give him a better shot at a good next landing spot, like Sarkisian and Kiffin did. I guess it is also possible he wants to decompress a little before re-entering the NFL. Supposedly he was interested in doing that this "cycle" but nobody wanted him.

[cardcrimson]

How many times has a major conference head coach resigned to become a coordinator at a different school?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

Major conference?!? Isn't UCLA still part of the Pac-whatever. At least for three more months?

[cardcrimson]

How many times has a major conference head coach resigned to become a coordinator at a different school?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

Major conference?!? Isn't UCLA still part of the Pac-whatever. At least for three more months?

[chrisk]

I don't think he was happy with UCLA moving to the Big Ten. If he was going to go to the Big Ten, he can switch to a winner, rather than being stuck at also ran with dubious prospects.

[chrisk]

I don't think he was happy with UCLA moving to the Big Ten. If he was going to go to the Big Ten, he can switch to a winner, rather than being stuck at also ran with dubious prospects.

[Leftcoast]

Since USC/UCLA football left the PAC I’ve wanted to curse them with losing every Big-10 game 50-0 except when they tie each other (0-0).  Losing your head coach to be a coordinator at another Big 10 school ups the ante a little bit.  But I like it!

[Leftcoast]

Since USC/UCLA football left the PAC I’ve wanted to curse them with losing every Big-10 game 50-0 except when they tie each other (0-0).  Losing your head coach to be a coordinator at another Big 10 school ups the ante a little bit.  But I like it!

[Mick]

Since USC/UCLA football left the PAC I’ve wanted to curse them with losing every Big-10 game 50-0 except when they tie each other (0-0).  Losing your head coach to be a coordinator at another Big 10 school ups the ante a little bit.  But I like it!

I actually think that Stanford and Cal will succeed and thrive in the ACC, and that USC/UCLA will falter. The Big 10's a tougher conference, travel will stink, they'll face recruiting difficulties, the coaches are better and both USC and UCLA are part of an Evil Empire that is destined to fall. Stanford and Cal will both recruit better, have stronger coaches, and weaker competition, and one of the two is the Good Guys.

[Mick]

Since USC/UCLA football left the PAC I’ve wanted to curse them with losing every Big-10 game 50-0 except when they tie each other (0-0).  Losing your head coach to be a coordinator at another Big 10 school ups the ante a little bit.  But I like it!

I actually think that Stanford and Cal will succeed and thrive in the ACC, and that USC/UCLA will falter. The Big 10's a tougher conference, travel will stink, they'll face recruiting difficulties, the coaches are better and both USC and UCLA are part of an Evil Empire that is destined to fall. Stanford and Cal will both recruit better, have stronger coaches, and weaker competition, and one of the two is the Good Guys.