It’s clear after the first two games of the 2024 season that the UCLA Bruins have a problem. But contrary to popular belief, it’s not just a DeShaun Foster problem, or an Eric Bieniemy problem, or even a Martin Jarmond problem. It’s something more existential, more causal, more holistic.
How important is football to the ethos of being a UCLA Bruin? And the only person with the power and influence to answer that question is the university’s chancellor.
Case in point, for 29 years, UCLA was led by Chancellor Charles Young, a visionary leader who understood the impact sports, particularly football, had on the university’s enrollment, spirit, and giving.
The late great Chancellor Young’s final year leading the UCLA Bruins was 1997. The last time the Bruins won the conference, went to the Rose Bowl, and threatened for the national title in football? 1998.
Don’t think for a second that’s a coincidence. Young’s successor was Chancellor Albert Carnesale, a decorated academic who wanted to transform UCLA into “the Harvard of the West.”
Carnesale was much less concerned about the role athletics played in a university’s purpose and proceeded to disassemble many of the athletic mechanisms, policies, and philosophies of his predecessor. Carnesale was more focused on policymaking, technology, and curriculum than the extracurricular nature of football.
From 1999 to 2006, the UCLA Bruins never finished better than third in the then PAC-10 and had a 1-7 record against crosstown rival USC.
After an interim Chancellor bridged one academic year, the Bruins ushered in the Chancellor Gene Block era from 2008 until this past summer. Block is widely regarded as a sensible leader, caring man, and thoughtful pragmatist who was very much inclined to be status quo in athletics. Translation – in the 16 football seasons with Chancellor Block, the Bruins epitomized more mediocrity from the Carnesale years having only three top-25 finishes and two 10-win seasons.
Leadership matters…a lot. The only way for the past 26 years of football ambivalence to change is if the Bruins are armed with a leader who understands, prioritizes, and actualizes football as a fundamental ingredient to the university’s fabric.
How Will UCLA Bruins New Chancellor Think About Football?
Enter Chancellor Julio Frenk, slated to begin his tenure in Westwood on January 1st, 2025. Frenk is a world-renowned medical authority who spent the previous nine years as president at the University of Miami.
Also Read: More On Chancellor Julio Frenk
Frenk will turn 72 prior to his first day on campus and thus is looking at about a five-year term leading the country’s number one public institution.
At Miami, he oversaw the hiring of three different coaches: Mark Richt, Manny Diaz, and Mario Cristobal with modest success – only one 10-win season in his nine years at the U.
How will Frenk think about football relative to his priorities? A five-year run leading a university is a relatively short period of time. Will Frenk use that accelerated timeline as a means of going daringly bold with football decision-making having absorbed the remnants of Miami’s decorated history? Or will he see his relatively short duration as an indicator of not rocking the boat and only focusing on his noble areas of expertise, namely, aggressive fundraising for the UCLA Health ecosystem and ensuring UCLA becomes a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI)?
That decision will have far greater implications for UCLA football than any offensive scheme Bieniemy calls, any recruit Foster snags, or any NIL deal Jarmond closes. The amount of time, money, and energy it takes to be a college football power today leaves no room for ambiguity.
Thus, for football fans, the only question to ask Chancellor Frenk on New Year’s Day is “What does success on the gridiron look like?”
We’re all waiting for the real UCLA football program to please stand up.