We can't lose next week.

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

ducky23 said:

---

Strykur said:

---

DavisBear said:

---

Totally physically dominated, we gave up 445 yards, 317 on the ground. They could have won the game without throwing a pass. Their offensive line was routinely pushing us 3-4 yards back at the line of scrimmage. Sirmon missing was a huge hit, he's been great at cleaning things up all year, without him we were getting gashed.

---

Again, one ****ing linebacker is not worth 300 yards rushing

---

The Dline was getting pushed back 3-4 yards every time. Sirmon ain't going to make a difference

Last year the excuse was the Dline had injuries. What's the excuse this year?

---

Browning was just another bad Wilcox Oregon-Boise buddy hire kept too long. Above all else we need a great recruiter at DL coach. Great DL are big, fast and powerful athletes who play with a reckless abandon. They rarely fly under the radar.

Tyson Alualu is retiring from the NFL. He is from Hawaii, played for Cal and starred in the NFL in Pittsburgh and Jacksonville, two future ACC recruiting hotbeds. I am 100% confident he can bring in great, highly rated DL would love to be mentored by a former All-Pro. And bring in OL or DL that get moved to the other side of the ball.

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

We are not a mediocre PAC-12 team. Under Wilcox we are a perennial bottom dweller.

However, we cannot fire him because of the stupid extension and buyout, but when we move to the ACC and only 8 conference games, we will schedule 3 OOC patsies and go 3-5 on conference, get to a bowl and call it "progress." Just watch.

Mendoza is good enough alone to get to 6 wins next year. Imagine what he could do with a real team and a real coaching staff.

Such a waste.

ducky23 said:

---

Mendoza is good enough alone to get to 6 wins next year. Imagine what he could do with a real team and a real coaching staff.

Such a waste.

---

But not with our Defense.

ducky23 said:

---

Mendoza is good enough alone to get to 6 wins next year. Imagine what he could do with a real team and a real coaching staff.

Such a waste.

---

We have some players. I'm still really high on Ott and Ifanse. Hunter is good not great. Thomas has some talent.

golden sloth said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Mendoza is good enough alone to get to 6 wins next year. Imagine what he could do with a real team and a real coaching staff.

Such a waste.

---

We have some players. I'm still really high on Ott and Ifanse. Hunter is good not great. Thomas has some talent.

---

Ott will get lots of noise elsewhere but Mendoza may be the guy who keeps this offense together going forward, defense we can throw out everybody along with both Sirmons.

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Travel costs are included in the deal apparently

KenBurnski said:

---

calumnus said:

---

john.olsonjr said:

---

You know what would be awesome? … a pass rush. I watch other teams, and the opposing quarterback is… at least on occasion… hurried, harassed, sometimes even tackled before he throws. We should totally do that. It's seems really effective and beneficial. Anyone know if JW knows about doing that? Doesn't really seem like it.

---

Replace Browning with a DL coach that can recruit.

Tyson Alualu

---

Browning earned sacred status because somebody once said that USC wants him.

---

all his recruits cannot rush the passer or apparently stop the run

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

They will have to cut sports, is what will happen.

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

The baseball team could form a partnership with the Giants to play there in the Spring or play games at the Oakland Coliseum ($1 admission)…. Maybe Cal baseball could even be a Giants minor league team? Players in their minor league system who have the grades for Cal could play professionally and attend college?

The landscape has been completely changed and we need to adapt quickly or die. Cal alums are brilliant innovators. Cal? Other than research, not so much.

calumnus said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

---

This makes too much sense ... Only Cal's bureaucracy can prevent it from ever happening.

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

I understand the bitterness but I'm pretty sure that starving the NIL of money will not help us get good players. And having good players is kind of required for winning games.

JimSox said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst head coach in the Power 5.



"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

Having a good coach is just as important
This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

I understand the bitterness but I'm pretty sure that starving the NIL of money will not help us get good players. And having good players is kind of required for winning games.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst coach in the power 5.

Golden One said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst head coach in the Power 5.



"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

Having a good coach is just as important
This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

I understand the bitterness but I'm pretty sure that starving the NIL of money will not help us get good players. And having good players is kind of required for winning games.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst coach in the power 5.

---

But I'm not sure I see how having worse players gets us a better coach. Anyway you're not under any obligation to contribute, and if you don't want to, that's your choice. I choose differently.

bearister said:

---

Utah is a real class act. Tafuna tried to deliberately maim both our QBs.

---

That's what I got.
An enforcer hit, superficially justified by our D lineman's late hit on Barnes.

calumnus said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

We are not a mediocre PAC-12 team. Under Wilcox we are a perennial bottom dweller.

However, we cannot fire him because of the stupid extension and buyout, but when we move to the ACC and only 8 conference games, we will schedule 3 OOC patsies and go 3-5 on conference, get to a bowl and call it "progress." Just watch.

---

I think for a few years out three OOCs are already scheduled.

calumnus said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

The baseball team could form a partnership with the Giants to play there in the Spring or play games at the Oakland Coliseum ($1 admission)…. Maybe Cal baseball could even be a Giants minor league team? Players in their minor league system who have the grades for Cal could play professionally and attend college?

The landscape has been completely changed and we need to adapt quickly or die. Cal alums are brilliant innovators. Cal? Other than research, not so much.

---

The model works except the NCAA would never allow it. If you think of the NCAA as a guild/cabal designed to drive AD salaries higher it all starts to make sense.

Bowlesman80 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

We are not a mediocre PAC-12 team. Under Wilcox we are a perennial bottom dweller.

However, we cannot fire him because of the stupid extension and buyout, but when we move to the ACC and only 8 conference games, we will schedule 3 OOC patsies and go 3-5 on conference, get to a bowl and call it "progress." Just watch.

---

I think for a few years out three OOCs are already scheduled.

---

Right, usually 1 FCs, one G5 and one P5 team, but now we can add a 4th OOC game because the ACC only plays 8 conference games. We <could> add OSU or WSU,but my bet is we add a far more bearable G5 team.

socaltownie said:

---

calumnus said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

The baseball team could form a partnership with the Giants to play there in the Spring or play games at the Oakland Coliseum ($1 admission)…. Maybe Cal baseball could even be a Giants minor league team? Players in their minor league system who have the grades for Cal could play professionally and attend college?

The landscape has been completely changed and we need to adapt quickly or die. Cal alums are brilliant innovators. Cal? Other than research, not so much.

---

The model works except the NCAA would never allow it. If you think of the NCAA as a guild/cabal designed to drive AD salaries higher it all starts to make sense.

---

You may have missed the unanimous Supreme Court ruling that college sports is a business, US antitrust laws fully apply and any restriction by the NCAA as a cartel to restrict trade and earnings of players is illegal.

Think about that, the conservatives and the liberals ALL agreed on something.

While it does go beyond "NIL" what the NCAA member institutions fear is the next ruling will declare student athletes "employees" of the university. They will not challenge anything outside of that. People are effectively paying players now, far beyond "compensation for their name, image and likeness."

The NCAA will not risk opposing, the key will be whether whatever conference we are in opposes. However, I think most ACC teams, located near major east coast cities with baseball teams, would be able to do something similar and might well embrace the idea.

calumnus said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

calumnus said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

The baseball team could form a partnership with the Giants to play there in the Spring or play games at the Oakland Coliseum ($1 admission)…. Maybe Cal baseball could even be a Giants minor league team? Players in their minor league system who have the grades for Cal could play professionally and attend college?

The landscape has been completely changed and we need to adapt quickly or die. Cal alums are brilliant innovators. Cal? Other than research, not so much.

---

The model works except the NCAA would never allow it. If you think of the NCAA as a guild/cabal designed to drive AD salaries higher it all starts to make sense.

---

You may have missed the unanimous Supreme Court ruling that college sports is a business, US antitrust laws fully apply and any restriction by the NCAA as a cartel to restrict trade and earnings of players is illegal.

Think about that, the conservatives and the liberals ALL agreed on something.

While it does go beyond "NIL" what the NCAA member institutions fear is the next ruling will declare student athletes "employees" of the university. They will not challenge anything outside of that. People are effectively paying players now, far beyond "compensation for their name, image and likeness."

The NCAA will not risk opposing, the key will be whether whatever conference we are in opposes. However, I think most ACC teams, located near major east coast cities with baseball teams, would be able to do something similar and might well embrace the idea.

---

that court will never rule that athletes are employees. They will be designated as independent contractors and get 1099'ed

JimSox said:

---

Golden One said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst head coach in the Power 5.



"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

Having a good coach is just as important
This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

I understand the bitterness but I'm pretty sure that starving the NIL of money will not help us get good players. And having good players is kind of required for winning games.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst coach in the power 5.

---

But I'm not sure I see how having worse players gets us a better coach. Anyway you're not under any obligation to contribute, and if you don't want to, that's your choice. I choose differently.

---

A better coach can recruit better players. Wilcox is a terrible recruiter in addition to being a horrible coach.

BarcaBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

calumnus said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

The baseball team could form a partnership with the Giants to play there in the Spring or play games at the Oakland Coliseum ($1 admission)…. Maybe Cal baseball could even be a Giants minor league team? Players in their minor league system who have the grades for Cal could play professionally and attend college?

The landscape has been completely changed and we need to adapt quickly or die. Cal alums are brilliant innovators. Cal? Other than research, not so much.

---

The model works except the NCAA would never allow it. If you think of the NCAA as a guild/cabal designed to drive AD salaries higher it all starts to make sense.

---

You may have missed the unanimous Supreme Court ruling that college sports is a business, US antitrust laws fully apply and any restriction by the NCAA as a cartel to restrict trade and earnings of players is illegal.

Think about that, the conservatives and the liberals ALL agreed on something.

While it does go beyond "NIL" what the NCAA member institutions fear is the next ruling will declare student athletes "employees" of the university. They will not challenge anything outside of that. People are effectively paying players now, far beyond "compensation for their name, image and likeness."

The NCAA will not risk opposing, the key will be whether whatever conference we are in opposes. However, I think most ACC teams, located near major east coast cities with baseball teams, would be able to do something similar and might well embrace the idea.

---

that court will never rule that athletes are employees. They will be designated as independent contractors and get 1099'ed

---

Doubtful. They do not direct their own work. They work very strict hours under the strict direction of highly paid university employee "supervisors", with potentisl injury and long term health impacts, in order produce a joint product that brings in revenue for the university,

The conservatives and liberals all agreed that college sports, especially football and basketball, is a multi $billion business and the players are being exploited. Every single one of them. If you want an idea of the conservatives position (more free market in basis) read Brett Kavanaugh's consenting opinion in which he says players are "employees" and destroys the idea of enforced "amateurism" rhetorically asking (paraphrasing) "where else in America or American history is the business model predicated on having the people who do the actual work producing a roduct worth $millions getting nothing?" Yes, comparing college sports to slavery. And that is from a conservative/libertarian (on some issues) Trump appointee, so you can imagine how the Obama appointees will vote.

That is why the NCAA will do almost anything to stay out of court, They know they will get slaughtered if another case ends up in front of the court. It will take an act of Congress to exempt college sports from the antitrust laws otherwise players as employees is inevitable.

Golden One said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Golden One said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst head coach in the Power 5.



"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

Having a good coach is just as important
This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

I understand the bitterness but I'm pretty sure that starving the NIL of money will not help us get good players. And having good players is kind of required for winning games.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst coach in the power 5.

---

But I'm not sure I see how having worse players gets us a better coach. Anyway you're not under any obligation to contribute, and if you don't want to, that's your choice. I choose differently.

---

A better coach can recruit better players. Wilcox is a terrible recruiter in addition to being a horrible coach.

---

True. But the discussion was about contributing to the NIL.

JimSox said:

---

Golden One said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Golden One said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst head coach in the Power 5.



"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

Having a good coach is just as important
This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

I understand the bitterness but I'm pretty sure that starving the NIL of money will not help us get good players. And having good players is kind of required for winning games.

---

Having a good coach is just as important, if not more so. And we have arguably the worst coach in the power 5.

---

But I'm not sure I see how having worse players gets us a better coach. Anyway you're not under any obligation to contribute, and if you don't want to, that's your choice. I choose differently.

---

A better coach can recruit better players. Wilcox is a terrible recruiter in addition to being a horrible coach.

---

True. But the discussion was about contributing to the NIL.

---

If you give money to a charity to feed the poor and they take your cash, walk over to a meat grinder, and shove it through, is your response to say "I know they just shredded all your cash, but how will the poor get fed if you don't donate?" The poor aren't getting fed either way and in one scenario, you get to keep your money. That is the argument here. No one thinks not donating to the NIL is going to improve the outcome. It is whether they think donating is going to improve the outcome. I make no argument either way. That is a personal choice and an analysis each person has to make about whether they think their money will be used well. But when a person says they don't want to donate because they think their money will be wasted, saying that not donating doesn't help isn't an argument that would convince them. You need to show them that their donation isn't going to be wasted. You haven't addressed that point at all.

calumnus said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

calumnus said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

The baseball team could form a partnership with the Giants to play there in the Spring or play games at the Oakland Coliseum ($1 admission)…. Maybe Cal baseball could even be a Giants minor league team? Players in their minor league system who have the grades for Cal could play professionally and attend college?

The landscape has been completely changed and we need to adapt quickly or die. Cal alums are brilliant innovators. Cal? Other than research, not so much.

---

The model works except the NCAA would never allow it. If you think of the NCAA as a guild/cabal designed to drive AD salaries higher it all starts to make sense.

---

You may have missed the unanimous Supreme Court ruling that college sports is a business, US antitrust laws fully apply and any restriction by the NCAA as a cartel to restrict trade and earnings of players is illegal.

Think about that, the conservatives and the liberals ALL agreed on something.

While it does go beyond "NIL" what the NCAA member institutions fear is the next ruling will declare student athletes "employees" of the university. They will not challenge anything outside of that. People are effectively paying players now, far beyond "compensation for their name, image and likeness."

The NCAA will not risk opposing, the key will be whether whatever conference we are in opposes. However, I think most ACC teams, located near major east coast cities with baseball teams, would be able to do something similar and might well embrace the idea.

---

the NCAA can absolutely restrict the participatioin of whatever the thing you are calling from their sponsored competitions to teams affiliated with accredited 4 year universities as defined by X. Clearly they already do.

ducky23 said:

---

Mendoza is good enough alone to get to 6 wins next year. Imagine what he could do with a real team and a real coaching staff.

Such a waste.

---

That's exactly why Jack Plummer left

DoubtfulBear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Mendoza is good enough alone to get to 6 wins next year. Imagine what he could do with a real team and a real coaching staff.

Such a waste.

---

That's exactly why Jack Plummer left

---

The freshman, in his first game starting, came close to beating one loss ranked OSU, who just whooped UCLA. Losing star running back Ott for the second half and a key turnover doomed the bears, a long with mediocre defense.

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Mendoza is good enough alone to get to 6 wins next year. Imagine what he could do with a real team and a real coaching staff.

Such a waste.

---

That's exactly why Jack Plummer left

---

The freshman, in his first game starting, came close to beating one loss ranked OSU, who just whooped UCLA. Losing star running back Ott for the second half and a key turnover doomed the bears, a long with mediocre defense.

---

What's your point? A loss is a loss, no matter how much you try to rationalize it.

calumnus said:

---

Bowlesman80 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

We are not a mediocre PAC-12 team. Under Wilcox we are a perennial bottom dweller.

However, we cannot fire him because of the stupid extension and buyout, but when we move to the ACC and only 8 conference games, we will schedule 3 OOC patsies and go 3-5 on conference, get to a bowl and call it "progress." Just watch.

---

I think for a few years out three OOCs are already scheduled.

---

Right, usually 1 FCs, one G5 and one P5 team, but now we can add a 4th OOC game because the ACC only plays 8 conference games. We <could> add OSU or WSU,but my bet is we add a far more bearable G5 team.

---

Yes, cupcakes. The perennial powerhouses do it all the time. Looks like the PAC2 might merge with the MWC. I kind of hoped we could campaign for them going to the ACC to form a larger western pod.

socaltownie said:

---

calumnus said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

calumnus said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoOskie said:

---

We just need to be patient and give Wilcox 3 years to build up the defense.

---

"We need stability as we move to the ACC" the reality is we probably add another patsie to next year's schedule, get to 6-6 and a bowl and Wilcox gets an extension. Instead of becoming a contender in the ACC we settle for mediocrity (a level above where we are in the PAC-12).

---

This - it doesn't matter what conference we are in. It could be the MWC - the admin is fine with mediocrity so that is where we will always be.

---

On a slightly different note, I'm still trying to figure out how we can afford the ACC, given the shortfall in media rights payments from the ACC and the increased travel costs. Chancellor Christ, of course, will be long gone. I guess she just leaves this problem to the next chancellor. And the problem of Knowlton. Sad.

---

Between the reduced media rights, this coach in place for another 3 (or 4?) years, I think the perfect storm has just transpired to kill off Cal sports. 50 years of not caring about football so I guess it is warranted.

I am honestly unsure whether it is worth contributing to NIL. Even if we get players like Ott, look at what we do to them .... The guy is getting no exposure on a 3 win team. So why give money when it's just going to be wasted?

---

Yeah, I'm afraid the situation is much worse than most people think. Really, my only hope is that we somehow get new a chancellor who really, really supports cal athletics. If you make something a priority, you find a way to make it happen. But I don't think it's likely that we will have such a new chancellor.

---

My out of the box idea is to separate sports from the academic bureaucracy and outsource the revenue sports (or the entire athletics department) to an alumni-run not for profit. Voting shares would be based on contributions encouraging more donations. Eventually, players will be employees of this organization. Football and basketball would be treated like the professional sport that they are, marketed under the brand "California" the home teams of the East Bay.

The baseball team could form a partnership with the Giants to play there in the Spring or play games at the Oakland Coliseum ($1 admission)…. Maybe Cal baseball could even be a Giants minor league team? Players in their minor league system who have the grades for Cal could play professionally and attend college?

The landscape has been completely changed and we need to adapt quickly or die. Cal alums are brilliant innovators. Cal? Other than research, not so much.

---

The model works except the NCAA would never allow it. If you think of the NCAA as a guild/cabal designed to drive AD salaries higher it all starts to make sense.

---

You may have missed the unanimous Supreme Court ruling that college sports is a business, US antitrust laws fully apply and any restriction by the NCAA as a cartel to restrict trade and earnings of players is illegal.

Think about that, the conservatives and the liberals ALL agreed on something.

While it does go beyond "NIL" what the NCAA member institutions fear is the next ruling will declare student athletes "employees" of the university. They will not challenge anything outside of that. People are effectively paying players now, far beyond "compensation for their name, image and likeness."

The NCAA will not risk opposing, the key will be whether whatever conference we are in opposes. However, I think most ACC teams, located near major east coast cities with baseball teams, would be able to do something similar and might well embrace the idea.

---

the NCAA can absolutely restrict the participatioin of whatever the thing you are calling from their sponsored competitions to teams affiliated with accredited 4 year universities as defined by X. Clearly they already do.

---

The NCAA merely enforces whatever rules the participating schools have ratified. Either the NFL creates a stand-alone minor league or we push for minor league teams that affiliate with schools- it's not a ridiculous idea, even if unlikely.