that if we get a "name" coach like a Spurrier, we won't lose many, if any, recruits.

and not a mere conference title at 8-4.  I absolutely disagree that 8-4 should save KD's ass, given all the favorable factors enumerated time and time again previously.

There is nothing elite about our current status, and that was the DG promise.

He knows the game, has rebuilt 3 programs, and is a proven winner.  He already has had a bad taste of the NFL and could be the perfect counterpart for PC.  Personable, exciting, upbeat, and if UCLA's admin is really concerned.... I'll buy the guy a nice suit and electronic organizer for birthdays, just so they think he's all that....

but...

1. He makes $1.75 million per year at South Carolina
   
2. He's been openly critical of the administration's admission criteria for athletes

Both of those seem to forestall against a job in Westwood

I really don't see the admin paying the money it would take to sign spurrier. Remember, a number of big-time schools are going to be looking for a new HC and they're going to shell out the bucks to get the coach they want. That's only going to drive up the price to compete with those schools. And, given UCLA's history, I'm doubtful we do that.

Radio guys talking.  There may some merit to it, though.  I'll be making noise about it; calling radio shows, chanting his name at the Rose Bowl on Saturday and anything else I can think of.

Take the fund from the billboard that is no longer needed and build on it to pay for Spurrier's membership to one of the exclusive golf clubs in L.A.

UCLA, I believe knows that they are going to have to pay this time.  We can't live in the past about the school's tendencies.  It is a new era.

One major thing to think about is something Colin Cowherd talks about regularly.  If Peterson or Spurrier are offered the job at UCLA for $2 million/year, and they get offers from Texas A&M or Nebraska for $2 or $2.5/year then UCLA needs to offer other things.

Colin's argument goes like this:  $2 million in L.A. and your middle class, $2 million in Nebraska or b.f.Texas and your, well, a millionaire.  I have to agree; I make good money but I'm broke living in Orange County.

But, there are other ways around it.  I'm sure UCLA has the resources to get a membership for the 'ole coach at a prestigious golf club.  He loves his golf.  And, Yes, it is different if he wants to golf versus KD.

and another thing, I hope more people in the nation think Steve Spurrier is past his prime.  It'll drive down the price a little; if say the people in Lincoln or wherever T a&m is at think they want a young, innovative coach.

The simple fact is that it is being talked about on the radio.  That could very well mean absolutely nothing.  But, that talk could get louder and louder and maybe reach South Carolina.

I think Spurrier would be a great hire, but how long would he coach here.  He would absolutely turn the program around, and we'd be on the winning track with 2 years.  If it does coem to pass, hopefully he would lay a sturdy enough foundation to pass on to the follow on coach.  Because, let;s face it, he's getting a little bit up there in the AARP benefits.  He might want to coach for a long time, or he might decide that 3-4 more years is enough.
It's an interesting quandry, get a proven coach for a short term (Spurrier), or a young up and coming guy (Petersen) for perhaps the long term.

 Change is Bruin

Two names keep coming up should a coaching change occur at UCLA: Boise State's Chris Petersen and BYU's Bronco Mendenhall.

And I wouldn't be shocked if Texas Tech's Mike Leach becomes a player for the UCLA job if he opts to leave Lubbock on his own accord. But if Mendenhall left BYU for UCLA, would Leach be interested in going to BYU, his alma mater?

This was on the Sporting News website.  Doesn't mention Spurrier at all but another popular pick is on it.
http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=300844

Nester, Sorry don't know how to do the block quotes.

he had to win all 3 remaining games to save his ass.

Face to face meeting w/Guerrero?

Memo/letter?

Voice mail?   OR...  (drum roll)

Text message?

But seriously -- if rumour is true -- how was he told?

If given a choice between the two, I would take Peterson over Spurrier only because the upside is a shot at long term sustained success as opposed to short term success, then wondering who the next coach would be and how would that person handle the job.

Who thinks Spurrier would coach more than 3 or 4 years then decide to retire??

Both men are proven successes and both would be that "big name" hire we are looking for. I would prefer being in the hunt for NC's for many years instead of just a few.

If we are to rebuild the program from the smoldering ashes that it is now, that's the way I see it.

I wonder just how interested he would be in leaving BSU. He currently makes as much as Dorrell with a much lower cost of living. When BSU offered him more money, he told them to give it to his assistant coaches (kind of like Beamer did at Va-Tech a couple of years ago). He just build a big house outside of the school too. At BSU he is a big fish in a little pond, however he is fighting for BCS bowls every year too (he is this year even with a loss). Clearly BSU is a much lower pressure job. Of course none of that means a hill of beans if he is interested in leaving, but it does beg the question.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/sioncampus/11/07/campus.clicks1107/index.html