pure speculation at this point but interesting: LINK
That Michigan job is cursed. UCLA and Michigan have about the same upside, but Michigan has waaay more downside.
That Michigan job is cursed. UCLA and Michigan have about the same upside, but Michigan has waaay more downside. Sorry, but this is silly. UCLA has won a single national championship in football and that was in 1954. Michigan has won several, the last in 1997. Michigan, fairly recently, was also the winningest program in college football history. When they're winning, they pack their 100k+ stadium every Saturday. Michigan has a higher upside than UCLA, there should be no doubt about that. The downside is also lower at UCLA. They have a program with much lower expectations than Michigan. When you get down to brass tacks, UCLA is a basketball school first. Michigan is a football school first. Michigan is going through a rough patch, but with Harbaugh there now, my money is on them giving Meyer and tOSU all they can handle and then some in the not too distant future. The PAC has nowhere near the power of Harbaugh at Michigan and Meyer at tOSU right now and there doesn't seem to be a program built in a way to step up to that yet. All you can say about Mora at UCLA is he's less likely to be fired from that job than he would be at Michigan. Michigan is not afraid to cycle through coaches until they hit a winner, which is exactly what it looks like they've done. UCLA on the other hand has no problem giving marginally winning to slightly losing coaches a pass. Not a knock on Mora, just an observation of UCLA's current football expectations. I actually think Mora will keep UCLA competitive in the current PAC, and that's all it will take for contract extensions there.