In Reply to: Re: I'm sorry, I just don't see.... posted by confused442 on July 06, 2024 at 11:41:01
There are unmistakable consensus CFB destinations, and you know who they are. This is just being argumentative. They garner the best talent every year because they are stable and have unshakable institutional, cultural and financial support.
They aren't defined by their beautiful facilities. The NIL era means money is the decisive factor. They're defined by their unshakable institutional and cultural support and their inexhaustible financial resources.
Ucla lacks all three. Ucla is not a destination in CFB.
Yes, the current TV deal provides the mainstream of Ucla revenues, but more is needed to move to the upper tier. With consistent success we might expect more permanent donor support and growing support for NIL. We might expect higher marginal revenues from the venue and marginally higher revenue from better bowl appearances. There must be a bedrock.
More important is the unshakable institutional and cultural support which are predicates for all of the consequent improvements. Ucla football lacks institutional and cultural support.
You are excusing the gutless, incompetent government bureaucracy at Morgan Center for sliding along and getting by. That sucks. You and I differ here.
"Most applied to" is a completely fake distinction. It's meaningless, not something to be proud of. It says nothing of academic or educational quality. It says nothing of institutional excellence. It says nothing at all. It's a transparent marketing gimmick, but it does give low information fans something to mindlessly brag about.