GMP said:

---

Goobear said:

---

burritos said:

---

GMP said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

chazzed said:

---

burritos said:

---

I know we live in an era of hateration. My I suggest a brief reprieve to enjoy:

and

---

There were a lot of offensive weapons in those two games but defense was almost an afterthought. Thanks for posting the highlights from our games against Texas.

---

Seems impressive until you realize Texas went 5-7 each of those years.

---

I take it you were not in Austin for that win. It was glorious.

Texas fans believe the early season losses to Cal demoralized the team and the fans.

---

I was. It was not. It was glorious until the 4th quarter when we completely collapsed on defense, turtle shelled on offense, and won on a fluke missed extra point. That's glorious? It sucked.

---

I enjoyed both games. I apologize for being an azzhole. I wish I were a better person to recognize the truth and that it sucked. I hope all the Cal players on both teams have the wisdom to recognize that nothing of meaning was achieved in those two victories.

---

My son was on both teams and played the home game. He would tell you that Cal botching the kick against Stanfurd last year and losing the game and reaction it invoked should cause the exact opposite reaction about Cal winning in Texas.. Oh I forgot fans are not rational....

---

I think I'm quite rational. Obviously a win is better than a loss. But I was looking at the bigger picture. A few times Sonny made me think he'd finally turned the corner and figured out his defense. Then, within the same game, it would be clear he had not. This was one of those games. He also took his foot off the gas in that game. So, it was very frustrating to know that nah, it would never change.

Your son enjoyed it as he absolutely should have. He's a player and he worked hard and he deserved to celebrate and he deserves to look on it fondly. As a fan, I'm looking at it from a very different perspective. That doesn't make me irrational.

---

You may think you're rational. But trying to convince yourself, at any time, that Dykes has turned a corner on defense is not evidence of rationality :p

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Sonny is even selling his own performance short. This is a good analysis IMO:

https://writeforcalifornia.com/p/the-pac-12-doesnt-need-saving

Quote:

---

In 2009, the Pac-10 saw just two schools finish in the top 25 and the entire conference went a mediocre 23-14 in non-conference play and 2-5 in bowl games. 2007 and 2008 were a bit better but not remarkably successful, and the Pac-10 failed to get more than the one guaranteed team (their conference champion) into a BCS bowl. There was nothing particularly good about the Pac-10's performance from 2007-2009. Meanwhile, in 2013, the Pac-12 finished with six ranked teams and went 6-3 in bowl games. Seven teams finished ranked in 2014, and Oregon went to the national title game. Five teams finished ranked in 2016. By any reasonable metric, the Pac-12 when Sonny Dykes coached at Cal was better than the Pac-10 when Dykes coached at Arizona.

---

There actually isn't much evidence that the conference was better when Dykes first coached at Arizona than it was when he coached at Cal. If anything, it was worse. His comments are nonsense.

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

Lol. Yes, '71 as I've said in the past I believe you do have some insights into existing in a "perpetual state of misery" (Field rushes are dangerous! Stanford is awesome! Supporting the team by attending games is for losers!, etc).

The point, as should be obvious but I'll say anyway, is to find joy where you can. Appreciate the wins as they come. And of course agitate for the team to do better and to be better where that agitation would help. But no, I didn't walk out of Austin with my head hanging low because we almost found a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I left proud that our team went into the lion's den and defeated arguably one of the most storied, and definitely one of the most well funded, teams in all of college football. To be angry and sad after that game is just to always be angry and sad. Not what I choose.

But if you think I'm "psyched" about a 4-8 season or "satisfied" with that because it means we won four games then you haven't been paying attention. I won't be satisfied until I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal curb stomp Ohio State 100-0. And even then a part of me will be looking for that National Championship game and Cal hoisting the Crystal football, with a Heisman thrown in for good measure. I want all of it. But I'll take the joy I can find along the way.

Remember the good ole days when we were happy w 1 win as long as that 1 was against Furd?

hanky1 said:

---

Remember the good ole days when we were happy w 1 win as long as that 1 was against Furd?

---

Big Game was the only game that mattered.

Sebastabear said:

---

Lol. Yes, '71 as I've said in the past I believe you do have some insights into existing in a "perpetual state of misery" (Field rushes are dangerous! Stanford is awesome! Supporting the team by attending games is for losers!, etc).

Yes, field rushes are dangerous. The fines should be sufficient to eliminate this practice. I would suggest a minimum of $1,000,000 per incident.

Yes, Stanford is an awesome school. However, Cal is awesomer.

No, I never said or intimidated that supporting the team by attending games is for losers. I have said that it is not necessary to attend games to be considered an individual who supports the program.

The point, as should be obvious but I'll say anyway, is to find joy where you can. Appreciate the wins as they come. And of course agitate for the team to do better and to be better where that agitation would help. But no, I didn't walk out of Austin with my head hanging low because we almost found a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I left proud that our team went into the lion's den and defeated arguably one of the most storied, and definitely one of the most well funded, teams in all of college football. To be angry and sad after that game is just to always be angry and sad. Not what I choose.

After a Cal win, the only time I left a stadium with a miserable attitude was the So. Miss. game in Hattiesburg because I knew that Cal wasn't going to the Rose Bowl.

But if you think I'm "psyched" about a 4-8 season or "satisfied" with that because it means we won four games then you haven't been paying attention. I won't be satisfied until I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal curb stomp Ohio State 100-0. And even then a part of me will be looking for that National Championship game and Cal hoisting the Crystal football, with a Heisman thrown in for good measure. I want all of it. But I'll take the joy I can find along the way.

Just for the record, they don't hand out a crystal football after the CFP title game anymore. The current prize is a weird looking trophy.

---

Fyght4Cal said:

---

GMP said:

---

Goobear said:

---

burritos said:

---

GMP said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

chazzed said:

---

burritos said:

---

I know we live in an era of hateration. My I suggest a brief reprieve to enjoy:

and

---

There were a lot of offensive weapons in those two games but defense was almost an afterthought. Thanks for posting the highlights from our games against Texas.

---

Seems impressive until you realize Texas went 5-7 each of those years.

---

I take it you were not in Austin for that win. It was glorious.

Texas fans believe the early season losses to Cal demoralized the team and the fans.

---

I was. It was not. It was glorious until the 4th quarter when we completely collapsed on defense, turtle shelled on offense, and won on a fluke missed extra point. That's glorious? It sucked.

---

I enjoyed both games. I apologize for being an azzhole. I wish I were a better person to recognize the truth and that it sucked. I hope all the Cal players on both teams have the wisdom to recognize that nothing of meaning was achieved in those two victories.

---

My son was on both teams and played the home game. He would tell you that Cal botching the kick against Stanfurd last year and losing the game and reaction it invoked should cause the exact opposite reaction about Cal winning in Texas.. Oh I forgot fans are not rational....

---

I think I'm quite rational. Obviously a win is better than a loss. But I was looking at the bigger picture. A few times Sonny made me think he'd finally turned the corner and figured out his defense. Then, within the same game, it would be clear he had not. This was one of those games. He also took his foot off the gas in that game. So, it was very frustrating to know that nah, it would never change.

Your son enjoyed it as he absolutely should have. He's a player and he worked hard and he deserved to celebrate and he deserves to look on it fondly. As a fan, I'm looking at it from a very different perspective. That doesn't make me irrational.

---

You may think you're rational. But trying to convince yourself, at any time, that Dykes has turned a corner on defense is not evidence of rationality :p

---

Lol, fair.

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

Demanding excellence begins with asking the leadership of the department hard questions regarding the direction of the program. Too often, leadership gets by via happy talk sessions about how wonderful Cal is doing.
Putting them on the spot regarding what they are doing on a daily basis to put winning programs on the field should be a regular occurrence. For example, the hiring of the men's hoops coach was a debacle; however, since the demand for excellence is lacking, the AD probably thinks he made a great choice and is doing a wonderful job. Cal's overall athletic record has been abysmal for years. Why? No one gives a damn. No one is holding those responsible to account.

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

Demanding excellence begins with asking the leadership of the department hard questions regarding the direction of the program. Too often, leadership gets by via happy talk sessions about how wonderful Cal is doing.
Putting them on the spot regarding what they are doing on a daily basis to put winning programs on the field should be a regular occurrence. For example, the hiring of the men's hoops coach was a debacle; however, since the demand for excellence is lacking, the AD probably thinks he made a great choice and is doing a wonderful job. Cal's overall athletic record has been abysmal for years. Why? No one gives a damn. No one is holding those responsible to account.

---

I think Jim Knowlton's head just exploded. I will just say "happy talk" isn't exactly the theme du jour (du week or du year for that matter). If you don't think pressure is being brought you are wrong.

And for the record, the only thing awesome about Stanford is they are awesomely smug.

AunBear89 said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Beyond the silly Dykes quote, the cited article is worth a read. It is a rather detailed analysis of the situation by a local writer with a national platform (Stewart Mandel, a Northwestern grad and editor-in-chief of The Athletic's college football coverage, lives in Sunnyvale).

---

Sagarin's Conference Rankings Top 10

2015
1. SEC West
2. Big-12
3. PAC-12 South
4. Pack-12 North
5. Big 10 East
6. ACC Coastal
7. SEC East
8. Big 10 West
9. ACC Atlantic
10. I-A Indrpendents

2020
1. SEC West (no change)
2. Big-12 (no change)
3. PAC-12 South (no change)
4. PAC-12 North (no change)
5. SEC East (up 2 spots)
6. Big-10 West (up 2 spots)
7. Big-10 East (down 2 spots)
8. ACC Coastal (down 2 spots)
9. ACC Atlantic (no change)
10. MAC West (up 4 spots)

There has been no change in the PAC-12's relative strength over the last 5 years. The PAC-12 as a whole is still better than the SEC East and the Big 10.

The conference that declined is the ACC. The conference that improved is the MAC West but only at the expense of the Independents, the AAC and the MWC.

The MAC West improvement is a story. The PAC-12 decline is fake news.

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

Demanding excellence begins with asking the leadership of the department hard questions regarding the direction of the program. Too often, leadership gets by via happy talk sessions about how wonderful Cal is doing.
Putting them on the spot regarding what they are doing on a daily basis to put winning programs on the field should be a regular occurrence. For example, the hiring of the men's hoops coach was a debacle; however, since the demand for excellence is lacking, the AD probably thinks he made a great choice and is doing a wonderful job. Cal's overall athletic record has been abysmal for years. Why? No one gives a damn. No one is holding those responsible to account.

---

I think Jim Knowlton's head just exploded. I will just say "happy talk" isn't exactly the theme du jour (du week or du year for that matter). If you don't think pressure is being brought you are wrong.

And for the record, the only thing awesome about Stanford is they are awesomely smug.

---

The proof is in the pudding. Cal's on-field/court is horrible. The AD needs to take full responsibility for the mess by issuing a statement that expresses his disappointment along with a specific action plan for turning things around. Nebulous comments about pressure being applied by the donor community is all well and good but it does not directly translate into wins. It just makes the donors fell better about themselves. In other words, anything short of an ass-kicking by those who have the authority to do so is not enough.....


P.S. I appreciate you taking the time to post a response to my comments.

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

I actually quite enjoyed our 60-59 win over Wazzu when Wazzu Coog'd at a closer than extra point range chip shot FGA. It was such a crazy game of offense that basically the last team with the ball was going to win (theoretically). There was no doubt if we got the ball back we would have scored, so it didn't matter to me. This was on the heels I think the following week or the week after that stupid loss at Tucson on the Hail Mary. In between we had the overtime game v. CU. Sonny Ball was pretty nuts.

KoreAmBear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

I actually quite enjoyed our 60-59 win over Wazzu when Wazzu Coog'd at a closer than extra point range chip shot FGA. It was such a crazy game of offense that basically the last team with the ball was going to win (theoretically). There was no doubt if we got the ball back we would have scored, so it didn't matter to me. This was on the heels I think the following week or the week after that stupid loss at Tucson on the Hail Mary. In between we had the overtime game v. CU. Sonny Ball was pretty nuts.

---

Yes Sonny Ball was pretty nuts. But usually Sonny could not beat a strong team. If Cal failed to score on a few possessions against a strong team, i knew that the game was lost because I knew the other team would score on their possessions barring a lucky break for Cal (an unforced fumble, lucky INT, several penalties, missed FG, botched pass).

I realized that Sonny had to go when I realized that Cal's defense was premised upon our opponent stopping itself. The good teams rarely stopped themselves. So we would regularly lose to the good teams. And often lose BIG to those teams.

Sebastabear said:

---

Lol. Yes, '71 as I've said in the past I believe you do have some insights into existing in a "perpetual state of misery" (Field rushes are dangerous! Stanford is awesome! Supporting the team by attending games is for losers!, etc).

The point, as should be obvious but I'll say anyway, is to find joy where you can. Appreciate the wins as they come. And of course agitate for the team to do better and to be better where that agitation would help. But no, I didn't walk out of Austin with my head hanging low because we almost found a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I left proud that our team went into the lion's den and defeated arguably one of the most storied, and definitely one of the most well funded, teams in all of college football. To be angry and sad after that game is just to always be angry and sad. Not what I choose.

But if you think I'm "psyched" about a 4-8 season or "satisfied" with that because it means we won four games then you haven't been paying attention. I won't be satisfied until I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal curb stomp Ohio State 100-0. And even then a part of me will be looking for that National Championship game and Cal hoisting the Crystal football, with a Heisman thrown in for good measure. I want all of it. But I'll take the joy I can find along the way.

---

I certainly hope you are exaggerating for effect. I will be VERY satisfied if I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal eek out a win over Ohio St. by one point via a missed extra point or a missed chip shot FG. Will I get additional satisfaction from winning the playoffs and having a National Championship? Sure, but I don't need that to be satisfied.

However, any who can't find the joy where they can should have jumped off this ship a long time ago.

I wasn't in Austin for that Texas game, but in the second half, I was in the stands of my son's high school football game (high school football on a Saturday? What next, college football on a Friday?). I was watching on my phone, and there happened to be a Cal walk-on who was not on the traveling squad near me in the stands to see his high school team play, and my cries of pleasure and agony let him know I was watching the game. My joy in the Cal victory was enhanced by getting to see his joy and share in the joy with him. I guarantee, neither one of us thought for one second, "What a bummer, we won because of a missed PAT."

There are the rare Cal victories in which I don't find joy, but those are always exhibition type games where Cal should win easily. The football team barely beating a mediocre to poor FCS team or the basketball team eeking out a home win over a team that is not in the D-1 top 250 gives me concern more than joy. I missed the 2013 Portland St. game to have emergency surgery. Maybe it was the effects of the anesthesia, but in watching the game on DVR, I told my wife, "we're playing like we'll go winless in FBS game this year." Of course, maybe it was the effects of the anesthesia that kept me from saying, "We could lose the Big Game by 50 points this year."

But give Cal a "real" opponent (ANY P-5 team is certainly a "real" opponent), there is always joy in a Cal victory, and anyone who can't appreciate it should find a different hobby than following college athletics.

Cal8285 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Lol. Yes, '71 as I've said in the past I believe you do have some insights into existing in a "perpetual state of misery" (Field rushes are dangerous! Stanford is awesome! Supporting the team by attending games is for losers!, etc).

The point, as should be obvious but I'll say anyway, is to find joy where you can. Appreciate the wins as they come. And of course agitate for the team to do better and to be better where that agitation would help. But no, I didn't walk out of Austin with my head hanging low because we almost found a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I left proud that our team went into the lion's den and defeated arguably one of the most storied, and definitely one of the most well funded, teams in all of college football. To be angry and sad after that game is just to always be angry and sad. Not what I choose.

But if you think I'm "psyched" about a 4-8 season or "satisfied" with that because it means we won four games then you haven't been paying attention. I won't be satisfied until I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal curb stomp Ohio State 100-0. And even then a part of me will be looking for that National Championship game and Cal hoisting the Crystal football, with a Heisman thrown in for good measure. I want all of it. But I'll take the joy I can find along the way.

---

I certainly hope you are exaggerating for effect. I will be VERY satisfied if I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal eek out a win over Ohio St. by one point via a missed extra point or a missed chip shot FG. Will I get additional satisfaction from winning the playoffs and having a National Championship? Sure, but I don't need that to be satisfied.

However, any who can't find the joy where they can should have jumped off this ship a long time ago.

I wasn't in Austin for that Texas game, but in the second half, I was in the stands of my son's high school football game (high school football on a Saturday? What next, college football on a Friday?). I was watching on my phone, and there happened to be a Cal walk-on who was not on the traveling squad near me in the stands to see his high school team play, and my cries of pleasure and agony let him know I was watching the game. My joy in the Cal victory was enhanced by getting to see his joy and share in the joy with him. I guarantee, neither one of us thought for one second, "What a bummer, we won because of a missed PAT."

There are the rare Cal victories in which I don't find joy, but those are always exhibition type games where Cal should win easily. The football team barely beating a mediocre to poor FCS team or the basketball team eeking out a home win over a team that is not in the D-1 top 250 gives me concern more than joy. I missed the 2013 Portland St. game to have emergency surgery. Maybe it was the effects of the anesthesia, but in watching the game on DVR, I told my wife, "we're playing like we'll go winless in FBS game this year." Of course, maybe it was the effects of the anesthesia that kept me from saying, "We could lose the Big Game by 50 points this year."

But give Cal a "real" opponent (ANY P-5 team is certainly a "real" opponent), there is always joy in a Cal victory, and anyone who can't appreciate it should find a different hobby than following college athletics.

---

I understand what both you and Sabastabear are saying and cannot disagree.

First of all I love and live Cal football. Every win is special regardless how we got the win. After a win I am on a high until the next loss ( which I am certain is coming sooner rather than later).

I have told my 3 kids that a Cal win is like a fine wine. Don't always expect one, but enjoy it when you get it.
A lot like Life = lots of mediocre and bad moments broken up by some really great moments.

But that said, I am a realist. I knew that Sonny had to go. He gave us some great moments but not enough of them because he focused only on the Offense and failed/refused to take any serious steps to improve the Defense. You cannot say you that about JW he has taken serious step to improve the Offense (both recruiting and coaching)
BTW some posters have ragged on JW because his results took a step back in 2020. But IMO such criticism is unwarranted in view of the haphazard effects that COVID had on the teams and games.
In my mind 2021 will be a much better indicator on JW and his skills as HC.

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

Demanding excellence begins with asking the leadership of the department hard questions regarding the direction of the program. Too often, leadership gets by via happy talk sessions about how wonderful Cal is doing.
Putting them on the spot regarding what they are doing on a daily basis to put winning programs on the field should be a regular occurrence. For example, the hiring of the men's hoops coach was a debacle; however, since the demand for excellence is lacking, the AD probably thinks he made a great choice and is doing a wonderful job. Cal's overall athletic record has been abysmal for years. Why? No one gives a damn. No one is holding those responsible to account.

---

I think Jim Knowlton's head just exploded. I will just say "happy talk" isn't exactly the theme du jour (du week or du year for that matter). If you don't think pressure is being brought you are wrong.

And for the record, the only thing awesome about Stanford is they are awesomely smug.

---

The proof is in the pudding. Cal's on-field/court is horrible. The AD needs to take full responsibility for the mess by issuing a statement that expresses his disappointment along with a specific action plan for turning things around. Nebulous comments about pressure being applied by the donor community is all well and good but it does not directly translate into wins. It just makes the donors fell better about themselves. In other words, anything short of an ass-kicking by those who have the authority to do so is not enough.....


P.S. I appreciate you taking the time to post a response to my comments.

---

I certainly understand how to long time observers of the program there's a sense that nothing ever changes and it's all the same old Cal. But a careful (or maybe even not so careful) reading of some recent headlines would indicate that some changes are afoot and it is a result of the aforementioned pressure. And no, I can't be more specific than that. But rest assured, no one (especially the donors) enjoys complaining and no one (especially the donors) is happy with the status quo. If there's patience it's because people like the trend and can see what needs to change and how to improve things. But that patience will end if we were to, for example, lose Wilcox because we aren't giving him the resources he needs. People are trying to ensure that doesn't happen.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

Cal8285 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Lol. Yes, '71 as I've said in the past I believe you do have some insights into existing in a "perpetual state of misery" (Field rushes are dangerous! Stanford is awesome! Supporting the team by attending games is for losers!, etc).

The point, as should be obvious but I'll say anyway, is to find joy where you can. Appreciate the wins as they come. And of course agitate for the team to do better and to be better where that agitation would help. But no, I didn't walk out of Austin with my head hanging low because we almost found a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I left proud that our team went into the lion's den and defeated arguably one of the most storied, and definitely one of the most well funded, teams in all of college football. To be angry and sad after that game is just to always be angry and sad. Not what I choose.

But if you think I'm "psyched" about a 4-8 season or "satisfied" with that because it means we won four games then you haven't been paying attention. I won't be satisfied until I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal curb stomp Ohio State 100-0. And even then a part of me will be looking for that National Championship game and Cal hoisting the Crystal football, with a Heisman thrown in for good measure. I want all of it. But I'll take the joy I can find along the way.

---

I certainly hope you are exaggerating for effect. I will be VERY satisfied if I spend New Year's Day in Pasadena watching Cal eek out a win over Ohio St. by one point via a missed extra point or a missed chip shot FG. Will I get additional satisfaction from winning the playoffs and having a National Championship? Sure, but I don't need that to be satisfied.

However, any who can't find the joy where they can should have jumped off this ship a long time ago.

I wasn't in Austin for that Texas game, but in the second half, I was in the stands of my son's high school football game (high school football on a Saturday? What next, college football on a Friday?). I was watching on my phone, and there happened to be a Cal walk-on who was not on the traveling squad near me in the stands to see his high school team play, and my cries of pleasure and agony let him know I was watching the game. My joy in the Cal victory was enhanced by getting to see his joy and share in the joy with him. I guarantee, neither one of us thought for one second, "What a bummer, we won because of a missed PAT."

There are the rare Cal victories in which I don't find joy, but those are always exhibition type games where Cal should win easily. The football team barely beating a mediocre to poor FCS team or the basketball team eeking out a home win over a team that is not in the D-1 top 250 gives me concern more than joy. I missed the 2013 Portland St. game to have emergency surgery. Maybe it was the effects of the anesthesia, but in watching the game on DVR, I told my wife, "we're playing like we'll go winless in FBS game this year." Of course, maybe it was the effects of the anesthesia that kept me from saying, "We could lose the Big Game by 50 points this year."

But give Cal a "real" opponent (ANY P-5 team is certainly a "real" opponent), there is always joy in a Cal victory, and anyone who can't appreciate it should find a different hobby than following college athletics.

---

I understand what both you and Sabastabear are saying and cannot disagree.

First of all I love and live Cal football. Every win is special regardless how we got the win. After a win I am on a high until the next loss ( which I am certain is coming sooner rather than later).

I have told my 3 kids that a Cal win is like a fine wine. Don't always expect one, but enjoy it when you get it.
A lot like Life = lots of mediocre and bad moments broken up by some really great moments.

But that said, I am a realist. I knew that Sonny had to go. He gave us some great moments but not enough of them because he focused only on the Offense and failed/refused to take any serious steps to improve the Defense. You cannot say you that about JW he has taken serious step to improve the Offense (both recruiting and coaching)
BTW some posters have ragged on JW because his results took a step back in 2020. But IMO such criticism is unwarranted in view of the haphazard effects that COVID had on the teams and games.
In my mind 2021 will be a much better indicator on JW and his skills as HC.

---

Cal is like buying bargain wine, enjoy the good bottles when you luck out on one, try to find a way to enjoy the many not so good ones, but don't go around saying it is great wine when it isn't.

I spent much of the Holmoe years on Tightwad enjoying the view of the Bay. I found joy in watching a Joe Igber run, making something out of nothing.

Beating USC, Stanford, UW, Oregon, Texas, Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Norte Dame etc is always great. Regulation or overtime. Good team or mediocre. It is great when they think they are going to win and are disappointed . 90,000 disappointed fans.

Saying Wilcox did more to fix the offense than Dykes did to fix the defense is just not true. Buh was fired after year one. Baldwin was retained for three years. Dykes brought in good defensive players by years 2, 3 and 4 that have been the majority of Wilcox's best defenses. Under Wilicox the top three salaries have been Wilcox, DeRuyter, Sirmon ....all defensive.

However that is finally changing. While Dykes did do more sooner to "try" to improve the defense no one believed he could. The problem was coaching on the defensive side, not talent as Wilcox showed.

This year's recruiting class in year 5 of Wilcox is the first sign of true improvement on offense. Next year's class looks good too. The move to Musgrave in year 4 shows signs of making a difference even if we didn't see it on the field last year due to the shortened time to install his offense and the lack of depth on the OL.

So back to the wine analogy, Dykes was a mediocre wine, that had no depth, was fun at times for what was but was never going to get better than it was. Wilcox has been a mediocre wine that we hope is actually a great wine that just needed to age. We can hope and we will find out. This Fall and next are critical.

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

Demanding excellence begins with asking the leadership of the department hard questions regarding the direction of the program. Too often, leadership gets by via happy talk sessions about how wonderful Cal is doing.
Putting them on the spot regarding what they are doing on a daily basis to put winning programs on the field should be a regular occurrence. For example, the hiring of the men's hoops coach was a debacle; however, since the demand for excellence is lacking, the AD probably thinks he made a great choice and is doing a wonderful job. Cal's overall athletic record has been abysmal for years. Why? No one gives a damn. No one is holding those responsible to account.

---

I think Jim Knowlton's head just exploded. I will just say "happy talk" isn't exactly the theme du jour (du week or du year for that matter). If you don't think pressure is being brought you are wrong.

And for the record, the only thing awesome about Stanford is they are awesomely smug.

---

The proof is in the pudding. Cal's on-field/court is horrible. The AD needs to take full responsibility for the mess by issuing a statement that expresses his disappointment along with a specific action plan for turning things around. Nebulous comments about pressure being applied by the donor community is all well and good but it does not directly translate into wins. It just makes the donors fell better about themselves. In other words, anything short of an ass-kicking by those who have the authority to do so is not enough.....


P.S. I appreciate you taking the time to post a response to my comments.

---

I certainly understand how to long time observers of the program there's a sense that nothing ever changes and it's all the same old Cal. But a careful (or maybe even not so careful) reading of some recent headlines would indicate that some changes are afoot and it is a result of the aforementioned pressure. And no, I can't be more specific than that. But rest assured, no one (especially the donors) enjoys complaining and no one (especially the donors) is happy with the status quo. If there's patience it's because people like the trend and can see what needs to change and how to improve things. But that patience will end if we were to, for example, lose Wilcox because we aren't giving him the resources he needs. People are trying to ensure that doesn't happen.

---

The problem as I see it is the football trend arrow is not pointing upward. It is pointing in the same direction as it has over the last couple of years (neither up nor down). Patience is ok when the arrow is decidedly pointing upward (see 2002, a year in which it was obvious to everyone that great things were on the horizon). Otherwise, patience can easily be confused with disinterest.

Anyway, if the donor community is turning the screws on the AD, I would say "that is a good thing". Thanks again for chiming in.....

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

How to demand excellence?

Here's a primer:

If you're not donating, then donate.

If you are donating, donate more.

If you're already donating a lot, then speak up.

When people say that Oregon's fans demand excellence what they really mean is that Phil Knight demands excellence.

Most of these decisions - whether it is facilities or the salaries of coaches - have a financial component to them.

If the academic side of Cal saw a benefit to spending money on athletics in terms of finances a lot of them would strike a different tune, but most of them see Cal going into the red spending money on athletic futility that could be used to enhance academic excellence. In plain terms, they don't see Cal getting a good ROI on its investment in athletic programs.

dimitrig said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

How to demand excellence? Here's a primer:

If you're not donating, then donate.

If you are donating, donate more.

If you're already donating a lot, then speak up.

When people say that Oregon's fans demand excellence what they really mean is that Phil Knight demands excellence.

Most of these decisions - whether it is facilities or the salaries of coaches - have a financial component to them.

If the academic side of Cal saw a benefit to athletics in terms of finances a lot of them would strike a different tune, but most of them see Cal going into the red spending money on athletic futility that could be used to enhance academic excellence. In plain terms, Cal they don't see Cal getting a good ROI on its investment in athletic programs.

---

That sounds too hard (not to mention expensive). I was hoping somebody might tell me I could stamp my foot every morning and exclaim, "I demand excellence!!!" (Note the three exclamation marks, because I mean business... hell, I might even be willing to go ALL CAPS!)

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

Demanding excellence begins with asking the leadership of the department hard questions regarding the direction of the program. Too often, leadership gets by via happy talk sessions about how wonderful Cal is doing.
Putting them on the spot regarding what they are doing on a daily basis to put winning programs on the field should be a regular occurrence. For example, the hiring of the men's hoops coach was a debacle; however, since the demand for excellence is lacking, the AD probably thinks he made a great choice and is doing a wonderful job. Cal's overall athletic record has been abysmal for years. Why? No one gives a damn. No one is holding those responsible to account.

---

I think Jim Knowlton's head just exploded. I will just say "happy talk" isn't exactly the theme du jour (du week or du year for that matter). If you don't think pressure is being brought you are wrong.

And for the record, the only thing awesome about Stanford is they are awesomely smug.

---

The proof is in the pudding. Cal's on-field/court is horrible. The AD needs to take full responsibility for the mess by issuing a statement that expresses his disappointment along with a specific action plan for turning things around. Nebulous comments about pressure being applied by the donor community is all well and good but it does not directly translate into wins. It just makes the donors fell better about themselves. In other words, anything short of an ass-kicking by those who have the authority to do so is not enough.....


P.S. I appreciate you taking the time to post a response to my comments.

---

I certainly understand how to long time observers of the program there's a sense that nothing ever changes and it's all the same old Cal. But a careful (or maybe even not so careful) reading of some recent headlines would indicate that some changes are afoot and it is a result of the aforementioned pressure. And no, I can't be more specific than that. But rest assured, no one (especially the donors) enjoys complaining and no one (especially the donors) is happy with the status quo. If there's patience it's because people like the trend and can see what needs to change and how to improve things. But that patience will end if we were to, for example, lose Wilcox because we aren't giving him the resources he needs. People are trying to ensure that doesn't happen.

---

The problem as I see it is the football trend arrow is not pointing upward. It is pointing in the same direction as it has over the last couple of years (neither up nor down). Patience is ok when the arrow is decidedly pointing upward (see 2002, a year in which it was obvious to everyone that great things were on the horizon). Otherwise, patience can easily be confused with disinterest.

Anyway, if the donor community is turning the screws on the AD, I would say "that is a good thing". Thanks again for chiming in.....

---

The lagging indicators (on field performance) are flat. However, the leading indicator is up: this years' recruiting class is #3 in the conference, when Wilcox's best so far was #8. Moreover the top recruits are on offense. The same is true with the 2022 class.

I think there is reason for hope that we will finally pair an adequate offense with a Wilcox defense. If we can win more PAC-12 games than we lose we will be a team on the ascent and recruiting will continue to improve and the results will follow.

Big C said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

How to demand excellence? Here's a primer:

If you're not donating, then donate.

If you are donating, donate more.

If you're already donating a lot, then speak up.

When people say that Oregon's fans demand excellence what they really mean is that Phil Knight demands excellence.

Most of these decisions - whether it is facilities or the salaries of coaches - have a financial component to them.

If the academic side of Cal saw a benefit to athletics in terms of finances a lot of them would strike a different tune, but most of them see Cal going into the red spending money on athletic futility that could be used to enhance academic excellence. In plain terms, Cal they don't see Cal getting a good ROI on its investment in athletic programs.

---

That sounds too hard (not to mention expensive). I was hoping somebody might tell me I could stamp my foot every morning and exclaim, "I demand excellence!!!" (Note the three exclamation marks, because I mean business... hell, I might even be willing to go ALL CAPS!)

---

I intend to write a strongly worded letter.

"And now the end is here

And so I face that final curtain
My friend I'll make it clear
I'll state my case, of which I'm certain
I've lived a life that's full
I traveled each and every highway
And more, much more
I did it, I did it my way
Regrets, I've had a few
But then again too few to mention
I did what I had to do
I saw it through without exemption
I planned each charted course
Each careful step along the byway
And more, much, much more
I did it, I did it my way...." FS

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

---

No, his observation is that the Pac-10/12 got worse between when he started as an assistant at Arizona and when he was a head coach at Cal.

Except the evidence doesn't bear that out. When Dykes was at Cal the conference had more ranked teams and one that made it to the National Championship game. When he was at Arizona they didn't.

sycasey said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

---

No, his observation is that the Pac-10/12 got worse between when he started as an assistant at Arizona and when he was a head coach at Cal.

Except the evidence doesn't bear that out. When Dykes was at Cal the conference had more ranked teams and one that made it to the National Championship game. When he was at Arizona they didn't.

---

The overall quality of the teams over the last 10 years has remained about the same. The relative strengths within the conference have changed, different teams have risen and fallen, some years we have more parity with no real dominant (unbeaten) teams making the playoffs, but it is not true that the league as a whole has declined in overall strength. Sagarin bears this out.

I lay more blame on the writer, it is his thesis, Dykes was just a reliable big mouth provider of material to fit his thesis when given the right leading question.

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

---

No, his observation is that the Pac-10/12 got worse between when he started as an assistant at Arizona and when he was a head coach at Cal.

Except the evidence doesn't bear that out. When Dykes was at Cal the conference had more ranked teams and one that made it to the National Championship game. When he was at Arizona they didn't.

---

The overall quality of the teams over the last 10 years has remained about the same. The relative strengths within the conference have changed, different teams have risen and fallen, some years we have more parity with no real dominant (unbeaten) teams making the playoffs, but it is not true that the league as a whole has declined in overall strength. Sagarin bears this out.

---

Yeah, I think that's probably right. But even if you are only looking at the top-level teams the conference actually got better between Dykes' time at Arizona (2007-09) and his time at Cal (2013-16).

The one thing I agree with in the article is that if FBS is to keep a playoff system, the Pac-12 should definitely campaign to have an automatic bid for every conference (at least the Power 5 conferences). There are so few non-conference games in college football that no one really knows how strong each conference is. May as well give every one a shot at the top prize.

dimitrig said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

What I've learned about being a Cal fan is enjoy the wins when you get them. And never let your feelings about the trend of the program or the deficiencies of a team overshadow that joy. To do otherwise is to be in a perpetual state of misery.

---

...and the program will remain in a perpetual state of mediocrity.

Demand excellence! Anything short of that is not acceptable.

Does that mean you can't enjoy the occasional wins? Of course not. But it does mean that you expect to see occasional become regular become sustained. Otherwise why bother even fielding a program?

Perhaps I misread the intent of your comment but it sure sounded like you are satisfied with having four good days a season if your team finishes 4-8. If so, in a word: Yikes! Considering you are a donor, you have painted a grim picture of the current state of affairs.

---

I can't speak for him, but I'm kind of doubting that Sebastabear is "satisfied with having four good days a season if his team finishes 4-8".

Perhaps you could expand a little bit about how folks like you and I can "demand excellence" and how that would translate into better on-field performance for the Golden Bears. It is a concept I've heard expressed here before by multiple posters and it's just not registering with me how this works, exactly.

If I thought it would help, I'd start "demanding excellence" for Cal Football and Basketball tomorrow morning (would need until then to rest up, I expect), I'm just not sure exactly what it would entail (or how it would bear fruit).

---

How to demand excellence?

Here's a primer:

If you're not donating, then donate.

If you are donating, donate more.

If you're already donating a lot, then speak up.

When people say that Oregon's fans demand excellence what they really mean is that Phil Knight demands excellence.

Most of these decisions - whether it is facilities or the salaries of coaches - have a financial component to them.

If the academic side of Cal saw a benefit to spending money on athletics in terms of finances a lot of them would strike a different tune, but most of them see Cal going into the red spending money on athletic futility that could be used to enhance academic excellence. In plain terms, they don't see Cal getting a good ROI on its investment in athletic programs.

---

Just like any investment I make, I want a clear understanding of why it makes sense. I never invest based on emotion. I only consider factual data and forecasts based upon solid evidence.

Unfortunately, the Cal AD has not demonstrated a reason to invest. The recent results are poor and the future does not promise to be any better.

Donate money? No thanks. I prefer to use my resources in other more rewarding activities.

sycasey said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

---

No, his observation is that the Pac-10/12 got worse between when he started as an assistant at Arizona and when he was a head coach at Cal.

Except the evidence doesn't bear that out. When Dykes was at Cal the conference had more ranked teams and one that made it to the National Championship game. When he was at Arizona they didn't.

---

The overall quality of the teams over the last 10 years has remained about the same. The relative strengths within the conference have changed, different teams have risen and fallen, some years we have more parity with no real dominant (unbeaten) teams making the playoffs, but it is not true that the league as a whole has declined in overall strength. Sagarin bears this out.

---

Yeah, I think that's probably right. But even if you are only looking at the top-level teams the conference actually got better between Dykes' time at Arizona (2007-09) and his time at Cal (2013-16).

The one thing I agree with in the article is that if FBS is to keep a playoff system, the Pac-12 should definitely campaign to have an automatic bid for every conference (at least the Power 5 conferences). There are so few non-conference games in college football that no one really knows how strong each conference is. May as well give every one a shot at the top prize.

---

The need to have 1 or no losses to win the beauty contest has all but eliminated match-ups between the power conferences.

If the playoffs are primarily conference champs, there will be no penalty for playing tough non-conference opponents. In fact, the increased revenue will be an incentive to play big name opponents instead of unknown body bag opponents. Much better for the game, the fans, TV, everyone.

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

---

No, his observation is that the Pac-10/12 got worse between when he started as an assistant at Arizona and when he was a head coach at Cal.

Except the evidence doesn't bear that out. When Dykes was at Cal the conference had more ranked teams and one that made it to the National Championship game. When he was at Arizona they didn't.

---

The overall quality of the teams over the last 10 years has remained about the same. The relative strengths within the conference have changed, different teams have risen and fallen, some years we have more parity with no real dominant (unbeaten) teams making the playoffs, but it is not true that the league as a whole has declined in overall strength. Sagarin bears this out.

---

Yeah, I think that's probably right. But even if you are only looking at the top-level teams the conference actually got better between Dykes' time at Arizona (2007-09) and his time at Cal (2013-16).

The one thing I agree with in the article is that if FBS is to keep a playoff system, the Pac-12 should definitely campaign to have an automatic bid for every conference (at least the Power 5 conferences). There are so few non-conference games in college football that no one really knows how strong each conference is. May as well give every one a shot at the top prize.

---

The need to have 1 or no losses to win the beauty contest has all but eliminated match-ups between the power conferences.

If the playoffs are primarily conference champs, there will be no penalty for playing tough non-conference opponents. In fact, the increased revenue will be an incentive to play big name opponents instead of unknown body bag opponents. Much better for the game, the fans, TV, everyone.

---

Actually, the transition towards playing marquee opponents has already begun. Fans of big-time schools have been expressing their displeasure of their school scheduling crappy teams by not attending games (i.e., games v. non-P5 competition). This has become a particular problem in the SEC where attendance has been negatively impacted by the number of lousy OOC opponents. This has resulted in the addition of a bunch of name opponents in lieu of the usual fare.

As you suggested, good matchups will be even more frequent after the expansion of the CFP. In fact, the expectation is a 12 team format beginning as early as the 2023 season (there was an interesting article on this subject at The Athletic today).

71Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

---

No, his observation is that the Pac-10/12 got worse between when he started as an assistant at Arizona and when he was a head coach at Cal.

Except the evidence doesn't bear that out. When Dykes was at Cal the conference had more ranked teams and one that made it to the National Championship game. When he was at Arizona they didn't.

---

The overall quality of the teams over the last 10 years has remained about the same. The relative strengths within the conference have changed, different teams have risen and fallen, some years we have more parity with no real dominant (unbeaten) teams making the playoffs, but it is not true that the league as a whole has declined in overall strength. Sagarin bears this out.

---

Yeah, I think that's probably right. But even if you are only looking at the top-level teams the conference actually got better between Dykes' time at Arizona (2007-09) and his time at Cal (2013-16).

The one thing I agree with in the article is that if FBS is to keep a playoff system, the Pac-12 should definitely campaign to have an automatic bid for every conference (at least the Power 5 conferences). There are so few non-conference games in college football that no one really knows how strong each conference is. May as well give every one a shot at the top prize.

---

The need to have 1 or no losses to win the beauty contest has all but eliminated match-ups between the power conferences.

If the playoffs are primarily conference champs, there will be no penalty for playing tough non-conference opponents. In fact, the increased revenue will be an incentive to play big name opponents instead of unknown body bag opponents. Much better for the game, the fans, TV, everyone.

---

Actually, the transition towards playing marquee opponents has already begun. Fans of big-time schools have been expressing their displeasure of their school scheduling crappy teams by not attending games (i.e., games v. non-P5 competition). This has become a particular problem in the SEC where attendance has been negatively impacted by the number of lousy OOC opponents. This has resulted in the addition of a bunch of name opponents in lieu of the usual fare.

As you suggested, good matchups will be even more frequent after the expansion of the CFP. In fact, the expectation is a 12 team format beginning as early as the 2023 season (there was an interesting article on this subject at The Athletic today).

---

More marquee matchups would help, but ultimately the football season is too short to get a decent representative sample of cross-conference matchups.

If there are auto-bids for every conference that helps to mitigate the problem though. The Pac-12's performance in the men's basketball tournament shows it: COVID prevented the usual slate of non-conference games from happening, but even with low seeds the P12 teams still got in and got a chance to show they were worthy. Maybe Oregon would have pulled off some upsets in a 2020 football tournament, who knows?

sycasey said:

---

71Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sycasey said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

GMP said:

---

The Athletic published an article this week about the deterioration of Pac-12 football and what needs to happen to rejoin the elite conferences. Here's Sonny Dykes:

Quote:

---

"While I was there, it seemed like the brand deteriorated every single year," said SMU coach Sonny Dykes, who was Cal's head coach from 2013-16. "I was at Arizona (as an assistant from 2007-09), left to go to Louisiana Tech. I came back three years later and the quality of football had deteriorated so much in those years.

---

Sonny Dykes' Cal record in conference games? 10-26. What does that say about your coaching, Sonny, if you went 10-26 in a severely deteriorated league. What a dumba-s.

https://theathletic.com/2524400/2021/04/20/they-have-to-want-to-win-how-to-save-the-pac-12-for-the-sake-of-college-football/

---

Yah, he wasn't a good coach for Cal. By Pac 12 win standards, neither is Wilcox.

But what about is observation is "dumb"? He's right, the Pac 12 brand went from mediocre to complete garbage over the past 10 years. It really hasn't been any good since Pete left SC and Chip left Oregon. Sure, Dykes didn't do anything to improve it, but his observation is accurate.

---

No, his observation is that the Pac-10/12 got worse between when he started as an assistant at Arizona and when he was a head coach at Cal.

Except the evidence doesn't bear that out. When Dykes was at Cal the conference had more ranked teams and one that made it to the National Championship game. When he was at Arizona they didn't.

---

The overall quality of the teams over the last 10 years has remained about the same. The relative strengths within the conference have changed, different teams have risen and fallen, some years we have more parity with no real dominant (unbeaten) teams making the playoffs, but it is not true that the league as a whole has declined in overall strength. Sagarin bears this out.

---

Yeah, I think that's probably right. But even if you are only looking at the top-level teams the conference actually got better between Dykes' time at Arizona (2007-09) and his time at Cal (2013-16).

The one thing I agree with in the article is that if FBS is to keep a playoff system, the Pac-12 should definitely campaign to have an automatic bid for every conference (at least the Power 5 conferences). There are so few non-conference games in college football that no one really knows how strong each conference is. May as well give every one a shot at the top prize.

---

The need to have 1 or no losses to win the beauty contest has all but eliminated match-ups between the power conferences.

If the playoffs are primarily conference champs, there will be no penalty for playing tough non-conference opponents. In fact, the increased revenue will be an incentive to play big name opponents instead of unknown body bag opponents. Much better for the game, the fans, TV, everyone.

---

Actually, the transition towards playing marquee opponents has already begun. Fans of big-time schools have been expressing their displeasure of their school scheduling crappy teams by not attending games (i.e., games v. non-P5 competition). This has become a particular problem in the SEC where attendance has been negatively impacted by the number of lousy OOC opponents. This has resulted in the addition of a bunch of name opponents in lieu of the usual fare.

As you suggested, good matchups will be even more frequent after the expansion of the CFP. In fact, the expectation is a 12 team format beginning as early as the 2023 season (there was an interesting article on this subject at The Athletic today).

---

More marquee matchups would help, but ultimately the football season is too short to get a decent representative sample of cross-conference matchups.

If there are auto-bids for every conference that helps to mitigate the problem though. The Pac-12's performance in the men's basketball tournament shows it: COVID prevented the usual slate of non-conference games from happening, but even with low seeds the P12 teams still got in and got a chance to show they were worthy. Maybe Oregon would have pulled off some upsets in a 2020 football tournament, who knows?

---

Auto bids for the P5 conference champs for sure. I think +3 of the other conference champs (selected by the committee) is the way to go.

PAC-12 champ hosts their first round game at the Rose Bowl on New Year's Day every single year. Tradition restored.