Smart AD's….well that it…we're F-ed.

Cal Strong! said:

---

Tonges and Nikko just entered the transfer portal. Very strange, since Cal Strong read on this thread that Wilcox had created such a strong locker room culture that it hardly mattered that he lost more games than he won.

---

If you bothered to spend an ounce of brain power on this, you'd find a recent quote from Wilcox where he said that they would not be recruiting most of these guys to stay. This is not a one party decision.

GMP said:

---

Cal Strong! said:

---

Tonges and Nikko just entered the transfer portal. Very strange, since Cal Strong read on this thread that Wilcox had created such a strong locker room culture that it hardly mattered that he lost more games than he won.

---

If you bothered to spend an ounce of brain power on this, you'd find a recent quote from Wilcox where he said that they would not be recruiting most of these guys to stay. This is not a one party decision.

---

Yeah, why on earth would we want these guys? Good riddance!!! We scored too many TDs this year. This will help solve that problem.

Calypso said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

71Bear said:

---

3146gabby said:

---

As to all 3 communities - optimists, pessimists, realists - it always seems a zero sum game in the analysis.

Reality is not what we need, but what is realistic in getting those needs filled.

There are serious extant limitations for football.e.g., narrowness in recruiting because of academic requirements, lack of historic success, too frequent turnover in coaches, etc. etc.

All of which has limited who would come here to coach. We are not going to get a nick saban.

I see significantly more plusses in Wilcox than negatives especially when factoring in what is reality right now. That the players buy in, don't give up, understand the many values of playing FB @ an academic institution like Cal, respond to adversity, and extol what is a one for all mentality, is big for me. But that is just me.

---

First of all, the academic issue is absolute bull****. Stanford has commitments from 22 players, including 8 four stars and currently ranks 11th in the country. Cal has commitments from 10 players, including zero four stars and ranks 65th in the country. Source: 247 Sports. Note: I understand the size of a class varies due to availability of scholarships. However, the quality is something that shouldn't vary. It should always be stellar.

There is absolutely no reason that Cal cannot sign a Top 20 class every year, occasionally breaking into the Top Ten depending on the strength of the California-based class. If Stanford can sign a strong class, so can Cal. Period.

Historic success, particularly in the recent past, is a very big hurdle. That can be addressed by finding a "pied piper" type of recruit. Russell White is an excellent example of a recruit who caused others to think, "why not?" He led a resurgence of Cal football.

Turnover of coaches - absolutely an issue. Cal has long been known as the "graveyard of coaches". The key is hiring a guy who wants to be at Cal, understands the relationship of athletics to other departments within the campus community, and is an able coach.

While I have some significant concerns about Wilcox, I fully support bringing him back next year. My biggest concerns are whether he can bring in the talent necessary to compete for a conference championship and whether he can hire assistants who are capable of executing a complex game plan and motivating players to reach their maximum potential, this means hiring from a pool that includes only young, innovative coaches (retreads need not apply). At this time, I would not consider extending his contract. If he can produce an eight win season in 2022, that will be a very good sign given the talent that will be available.

---

Academic restrictions are real and impact the recruiting pool Cal can go after - its a simple fact. There are VERY few exceptions made for a sub 3.0 Gpa and those include a gaunlet for the prospective student/athlete to go thru (including facing a panel of administrators/professor/compliance/AD etc to address potential academic course load concerns etc). Yes that Stanford pulls in high level Student athletes and that is the sole exception (relative to competitive D1 programs) Stanford is simply a different playing field in many ways. Cal very rarely wins out head to head regardless of the situation. The other issues not mentioned where Cal is woefully behind the Top 25 schools and the majority of conference members, is housing ( difficult to find close to campus - 10 players housed 15 minutes away off campus and in tough areas due to lower cost. Overall quality of housing is below average and very expensive for a schlorship player receiving $1700/month - the basketball model for Cal is unique (in that a few passionate alums stepped up to provide quality close to campus housing at a affordable cost). Second issue is the salaries for All of the assistants and Especially the lower level assistant recruiting/strength/support coaches, is extremely low relative to our conference members. IE SC pays $175k to a support coach that Cal for the same position, is able to pay just $75K to. Yes there recently was 8 generous Bear Backers who have put together an annual bump of $250K (each of next 3 seasons) toward the Assistant coaches pool and that helps certainly - but again the delta between Cal and the majority of schools is much greater than is commonly known.

---

What would be the process for trying to relax the academic restrictions a bit? As I understand it the Academic Senate voted in the restrictions in 2014, and there was a "Chancellor's Task Force on Athletics and Academics" that made recommendations. So would someone need to successfully lobby the Chancellor to form another task force to take another look at this and get another Senate vote?

---

I've been a big advocate for lowering our admissions requirements to the UCLA level

and although I still think we should lower our admissions requirements, I had to pause a little when I saw UCLA was last in the Pac12 APR

Cal Strong! said:

---

GMP said:

---

Didn't you just answer your own dumb, sarcastic question? These are 5th and 6th year seniors and we lost. If they stick around, it screws up class balance and you risk younger, hopefully more talented guys leaving because they don't want to sit another year. Certainly there are some guys the coaches would like to keep. But not all of them. And not the ones you are making idiotic sarcastic statements about.

---

Our more talented recruits have already bolted to other schools. Tonges and Nikko would be far more valuable to us next year than whatever 2 or 3 star recruits we can find to replace them.

Stop posting Weak GMP. Try to be more like Cal, and less like a weak internet pervert.

---

Our 2021 class included two 4 Star WRs, one 4 star TE and one 4 star QB. Our 2022 class has OLs and DLS and probably will include incoming transfer portal guys.

The guys leaving have played 4 seasons at Cal and would be gone if not for the extra COVID year anyway. It is not a critical issue.

"It is quite obvious to me that when UC pays for bricks and mortar projects that may be included in any one or all of these, they are using student fees, tuition or endowment funds to pay for some or part of it."

I don't believe that's accurate. Capital improvements (i.e., brick and mortar projects) are typically not financed by student fees, tuition or as part of the current operations budgets. They are very often (if not always) financed at the UC level, often through the issuance of bonds. And when that happens, the UC system - not the on-campus department - pays those costs. In other words, when an econ building is retrofitted, UC picks up the tab without reducing the econ department's operating budget.

If I understand it correctly, Wife's point is important even if it is somewhat tangential to your main concerns. The Cal AD, and in particular football, was expected to pick up the stadium capital expenses via payments made at least in part from its operating budget (or funds that would otherwise be available for operations). This is different than every other capital improvement benefitting other UC initiatives/programs. And as a result, there was less money to spend on football and other sports. Why did the Cal AD get a worse deal? How does Cal let that happen when football is the driving force behind revenue for the entire AD, not to mention handicapping winning.

calumnus said:

---

Cal Strong! said:

---

GMP said:

---

Didn't you just answer your own dumb, sarcastic question? These are 5th and 6th year seniors and we lost. If they stick around, it screws up class balance and you risk younger, hopefully more talented guys leaving because they don't want to sit another year. Certainly there are some guys the coaches would like to keep. But not all of them. And not the ones you are making idiotic sarcastic statements about.

---

Our more talented recruits have already bolted to other schools. Tonges and Nikko would be far more valuable to us next year than whatever 2 or 3 star recruits we can find to replace them.

Stop posting Weak GMP. Try to be more like Cal, and less like a weak internet pervert.

---

Our 2021 class included two 4 Star WRs, one 4 star TE and one 4 star QB. Our 2022 class has OLs and DLS and probably will include incoming transfer portal guys.

The guys leaving have played 4 seasons at Cal and would be gone if not for the extra COVID year anyway. It is not a critical issue.

---

Those TE and WR recruits were not good enough to beat out Tonges and Nikko. What makes you think they could beat them out next year? Sure, the young guys will likely get stronger. But so will Tonges and Nikko.

Our 4 Star QB recruit from last year couldn't even beat out Ryan Glover -- who was absolutely terrible and couldn't put more than 3 points on the board against Arizona. Safe to say he probably not the answer.

Cal Strong! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Cal Strong! said:

---

GMP said:

---

Didn't you just answer your own dumb, sarcastic question? These are 5th and 6th year seniors and we lost. If they stick around, it screws up class balance and you risk younger, hopefully more talented guys leaving because they don't want to sit another year. Certainly there are some guys the coaches would like to keep. But not all of them. And not the ones you are making idiotic sarcastic statements about.

---

Our more talented recruits have already bolted to other schools. Tonges and Nikko would be far more valuable to us next year than whatever 2 or 3 star recruits we can find to replace them.

Stop posting Weak GMP. Try to be more like Cal, and less like a weak internet pervert.

---

Our 2021 class included two 4 Star WRs, one 4 star TE and one 4 star QB. Our 2022 class has OLs and DLS and probably will include incoming transfer portal guys.

The guys leaving have played 4 seasons at Cal and would be gone if not for the extra COVID year anyway. It is not a critical issue.

---

Those TE and WR recruits were not good enough to beat out Tonges and Nikko. What makes you think they could beat them out next year? Sure, the young guys will likely get stronger. But so will Tonges and Nikko.

Our 4 Star QB recruit from last year couldn't even beat out Ryan Glover -- who was absolutely terrible and couldn't put more than 3 points on the board against Arizona. Safe to say he probably not the answer.

---

We don't know that. Why was Arrington the starter and Marshawn the backup? Many coaches practice the seniority system. And they were clearly redshirting Millner. Maybe the other guys too. I even think they may have been keeping Millner under wraps hoping to send a message to Martin that the QB position was wide open.

.

Golden One said:

---

Wilcox hasn't recruited any high level players in 5 years. What is going to make the future any different with him as head coach? He would have to hire a top tier offensive coordinator, which, given his history, is highly unlikely.

---

My biggest problem with Wilcox has been the OC position.

I dont think he really has a philosophy on what kind of an offensive "identity" he wants to have.
He simply brings in an OC, and the OC applies his philosophy to our player personnel; which (as we've seen with Garbers at QB), is not always the right fit.

When Beau Baldwin continued to be terribly stubborn with Brandon McIlwain citing his athleticism, even though he was a turnover machine in 2018 (see Oregon game, 2 fumbles, 2 interceptions), it occurred to me that Wilcox either has no idea how our offense should be run, doesnt feel that it's in any way, shape, or form his responsibility, or he's way too loyal.

Cal Strong! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

We don't know that. Why was Arrington the starter and Marshawn the backup? Many coaches practice the seniority system. And they were clearly redshirting Millner. Maybe the other guys too. I even think they may have been keeping Millner under wraps hoping to send a message to Martin that the QB position was wide open.

---

The first part of calumnus' post is a fair point. But JJ was the best RB in the country that year, and Marshawn still played enough to gain 1,000 yards as a backup. Neither of our WR/TE recruits from last year were deemed good enough to make similar contributions this year.

The QB part of calumnus' post not valid. Coaches who might be getting fired soon no risk losing games to schools like Arizona in order to preserve a redshirt . . . especially when CFB players now have an extra year.

---

(Joke). John Robinson found an unknown superstar in small Arkansas town and got him into USC. The kid dominated the practices from day one - a true diamond in the rough. First year, Robby kept him on the bench. The kid asked if he could go in and Robby said, "you're my secret weapon. I'm waiting until we need you to win a game." Second year, the same - the kid asked, Robby said no. Third year the same - the kid begged, Robby said no. Finally, the kid is a senior and Robby kept him on the bench until the ND game. SC was behind in the 4th quarter. Robby goes over to the bench and says, "Now's your chance, kid. Go in and win the game." Kid says, "I can't coach." Robby, astonished, said, "Why not?" Kid says, "My legs are asleep."

If Millner had been capable to go in and play winning football, no coach in his right mind wouldn't have given him a try.

So, if I understand what you're getting at, the Bears didn't go 1-3 last year in order to stealthy unleash our Super Seniors, on the way to this year's playoffs?