Dan Guerrero took over as UCLA Athletic Director in 2002. How have the Bruins done in that time period?
In the 9 completed years of Dan Guerrero's reign of error, (not including the 1-2 record through the first three games of 2011), UCLA football is 55-55, a .500 winning percentage. UCLA Football has not won a conference championship during this period. During this period, UCLA has not played in any BCS-level bowls and bowl results are Las Vegas Bowl (W), Silicon Valley Bowl (L), Las Vegas Bowl (L), Sun Bowl (W), Emerald Bowl (L), Las Vegas Bowl (L), Eagle Bank Bowl (W).
The much-maligned Peter Dalis was the AD for 19 years, from 1983 to 2002. UCLA won 1 NCAA Mens's Basketball championship. The football team was 170-97-4 (.634) and won or shared conference championships in 1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1993, 1997 and 1998, and played in numerous bowls, including 5 Rose Bowls and the Fiesta Bowl.
J.D. Morgan was the AD from 1963-1979. UCLA won 10 NCAA Men's Basketball championships during that period and the football team was 103-69-9 (.632). During this time, the team won or shared conference championships in 1965, 1975 and played in 2 Rose Bowls and the Fiesta Bowl.
For comparison, UCLA Football's all-time record is 542-379-37 (.588). Dan Guerrero's winning percentage is clearly significantly below the UCLA historical baseline. With no football conference championships, no BCS-level bowl appearances and declining attendance, it seems clear that Dan Guerrero has significantly mismanaged the UCLA football program.
We have detailed repeatedly that football is the lifeblood of any large athletic department. Continuing decline in the football program is simply not an option. Dan Guerrero has already fired two football coaches. He has hired two football coaches. It seems obvious that he cannot be allowed to hire another football coach because if history is any indication, he simply cannot do a competent job of hiring football coaches.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.