I'd much rather have Pruitt. Not to say that I know whether Pruitt will be successful or not, but he has a blueprint that has worked successfully in the past (strong recruiting, great player development).
The problem with Chip Kelly is that his success at Oregon basically came down to a few magical factors:
(a) inheriting a great situation from Mike Bellotti, including a strong staff that he could lean on,
(b) out-scheming opponents with an innovative offense that defenses weren't prepared for,
(c) recruiting underrated talent with speed, but still getting a reasonable enough share of talent so they were ranked in the 20s in the recruiting rankings,
(d) having Nike's big money to help lure in recruits
He doesn't have any of those elements at UCLA. He does, however, have a much better recruiting footprint in his backyard, but Kelly has always been a terrible recruiter, so this advantage is being completely squandered. And now, every team in the country is prepared for his "innovative offense", because they've recruited and developed players for years to stop those types of offenses (whereas, they were caught completely off-guard in the early 10s).
Kelly doesn't get the advantage of inheriting Bellotti's staff this time around, which quite honestly, was comparable to the staff Fulmer inherited from Johnny Majors. Bellotti was excellent at building up that program over the long-run.
Chip Kelly's record at Oregon was phenomenal, but I've said this 2 years ago when everyone wanted to hire him: he's the most overrated coach in college football. I was praying that Florida would get him, because we'd be 4-0 against a Chip Kelly coached Florida team. He's basically RichRod, except with a much worse personality and deep hatred for recruiting. Not a recipe for long-term success.
If we're being honest, Chip Kelly is a great high school coach who hit the jackpot by being in the right place at the right time, but who otherwise, is still probably better cut out to be a high school coach.