Glad to see it end.

All the coaching changes are much more interesting to read about.

Can we also lock shocky's and calstrong's threads.

MiZery said:

---

Can we also lock shocky's and calstrong's threads.

---

Oh no! Now Cal Strong is creating a second account to praise and support himself. I don't mind him giving his opinions. I believe he's living in New Zealand. He purports to be an expert about Cal football and in frequent contact with the highest level of the Cal administrators, which seems highly unlikely given that he lives half way around the world from Berkeley. What I do object to is his repeating his opinions endlessly and taking over threads where his opinions go well beyond the topic being discussed.

Cal Strong should remember that while he has the right to state his opinions, the rest of us have the right to tell him that we think he's way off the mark.

My view on the collective is tied to my view on NIL itself and the larger set of changes in college football over the last decade plus which aggregately are highly objectionable to me. That said, I appreciate the work that is done to operate the collective and the funds fellow Cal fans donate insofar as these contributions benefit our athletes and programs.

However, I think it is an ill thing that posters are subjected to censorship over collective-related speech. While Cal Strong's style can be obnoxious to some, he is obviously a passionate Cal football fan and his view on withholding donations to the collective, whether strategically correct or not, appears to be earnestly based on what he feels is in the best interest of the program. Censoring sincere opinions about Cal's best interests runs contrary to the ethos of our university and its community.

Of course Bear Insider is a private website and management is legally entitled to censor anything they choose, but private censorship is still censorship. The justification for the censorship, that the speech in question hurts the interests of our student-athletes and athletics programs, is analogous to the justification used by governments including our own for censoring critical speech. The more important the issue, the stronger the justification appears for censorship.

Derogatory speech against the state can be easily justified in these terms. Should a citizen be suffered to impede the war effort by their disloyal complaints? Speech against appropriations or the draft or invading another country can be said to jeopardize our soldiers' safety and our odds of victory over the enemy. If we refuse to allow free speech in our Cal community when the stakes are frankly nothing compared to the life-and-death cases above, we make ourselves petty hypocrites when advocating for free speech elsewhere.

How far will the censorship here on behalf of our athletes and programs extend? If I say I think it's in our alma mater's best interest to simply go Ivy and fold its major athletic department, will I be censored for my take since if enough people came to agree it would obviously be detrimental to our athletic programs?

Does our university community, of which athletics are merely one relatively minor facet, not benefit when its members can speak their minds with total candor when it comes to Cal issues? Do we no longer subscribe to a marketplace of ideas when a monopoly on expression serves some narrow interest of ours? Why are the censors so afraid of Cal Strong and his opinion? Do they really believe that his views will prevail amongst the most passionate Cal football fans in a free and open discourse? If they would, isn't it in our university's best interest that they be brought forward and discussed?

I am a long long long long time lurker on this website (going back to the good ol' CyberBears days). I have read it everyday for years and years, and have posted something only a handful of times.

I am shocked and disappointed that the thread was locked and Cal Strong! was given a time-out for criticizing the Collective.

Coming from Cal, a symbol of free speech, it is profoundly disappointing. We are better than that. As noted by other posters, BearGreg certainly has the right to do so, but should he have?

I am embarrassed that this happened on a site I read daily. And worse, I feel embarrassed FOR BearGreg--giving a time out to someone for criticizing something he and many other posters support? It was a terrible decision and I hope that it is reversed.

MiZery said:

---

Can we also lock shocky's and calstrong's threads.

---

I don't think Shocky is posting the same kind of damaging BS that Strong does.

calwhoyou? said:

---

I am a long long long long time lurker on this website (going back to the good ol' CyberBears days). I have read it everyday for years and years, and have posted something only a handful of times.

I am shocked and disappointed that the thread was locked and Cal Strong! was given a time-out for criticizing the Collective.

Coming from Cal, a symbol of free speech, it is profoundly disappointing. We are better than that. As noted by other posters, BearGreg certainly has the right to do so, but should he have?

I am embarrassed that this happened on a site I read daily. And worse, I feel embarrassed FOR BearGreg--giving a time out to someone for criticizing something he and many other posters support? It was a terrible decision and I hope that it is reversed.

---

Why would posting on this site be protected by "free speech?" Not a legal expert by any stretch, but I am open to what I am missing. What symbol associated with Cal and the 60s, when the focus was on speaking out against the Government, and be critical of certain polices, pertains to a privately owned fan board?
This isn't journalism here: this is a site devoted to the promotion and celebration of Cal sports. Specifically, NIL is independent of the university (in theory) and the site has willingly taken up the gauntlet of promoting NIL in very clear and deliberate terms.
We can think we post here (or other fan boards) under own guidelines, and rules in our head. But in reality, if you find actions here to be inconsistent to your personal liking, you have a choice of declining to participate, unsubscribe, go to another board, or open your own.

calwhoyou? said:

---

I am a long long long long time lurker on this website (going back to the good ol' CyberBears days). I have read it everyday for years and years, and have posted something only a handful of times.

I am shocked and disappointed that the thread was locked and Cal Strong! was given a time-out for criticizing the Collective.

Coming from Cal, a symbol of free speech, it is profoundly disappointing. We are better than that. As noted by other posters, BearGreg certainly has the right to do so, but should he have?

I am embarrassed that this happened on a site I read daily. And worse, I feel embarrassed FOR BearGreg--giving a time out to someone for criticizing something he and many other posters support? It was a terrible decision and I hope that it is reversed.

---

Looking at this accounts post history, it's very clear that it is another of The Duke's sock accounts, just like CalStrong, WifeStrong, and likely others.

Personally, I am against giving a forum to those that want to badger and denigrate those that volunteer and engage in charitable activities.

calwhoyou? said:

---

I am a long long long long time lurker on this website (going back to the good ol' CyberBears days). I have read it everyday for years and years, and have posted something only a handful of times.

I am shocked and disappointed that the thread was locked and Cal Strong! was given a time-out for criticizing the Collective.

Coming from Cal, a symbol of free speech, it is profoundly disappointing. We are better than that. As noted by other posters, BearGreg certainly has the right to do so, but should he have?

I am embarrassed that this happened on a site I read daily. And worse, I feel embarrassed FOR BearGreg--giving a time out to someone for criticizing something he and many other posters support? It was a terrible decision and I hope that it is reversed.

---

Exactly. I don't read Strong's posts so I don't even know what he said. Isn't that what the "ignore" function is for?

I just want to thank BearGreg for his unwavering support of the collective and for Cal sports in general. Running this site is a thankless job and he has to deal with all kinds of "personalities." But I think it's one of the great forums in all of college football with a lot of fascinating and engaged posters who write thoughtful and nuanced arguments supporting their positions. I learn something on here virtually every day. If Cal ever makes it to the promised land, BearGreg will be one of the true unsung heroes of that moment and fully deserving of his face being carved into the Mount Rushmore of Cal athletics. Or at least a free drink or two being sent his way at the CFP.

To the suggestion that there was some golden age of BI where ideas flowed freely here and no one was ever suppressed regardless of how nutty they were, all I can say is L to the OL. By the end, GreyBear was zapping posts and posters faster than a dermatologist trying to pay for his new Porsche. Read the Albany Bowl thread some time (the semi-fictitious account of a poster allegedly running into Brendan Bigelow and the Cal team at the local bowling alley while carrying an 8"x10" glossy photo of Bigelow in his pocket). It's borderline incoherent now (not that it ever made a ton of sense). You often couldn't even tell what GreyBear was deleting or why. By contrast this current version of the forum is a paradigm of openness.

But I think the problem with the CalStrong posts (and those of his various sock puppets) wasn't that I object to having to defend what we are doing or why. The problem is that there's no rational analysis behind them. It's just pure repetition and he's in no way open to information of others. He asked why I was doing this and I answered. Basically my argument is that whether you like Wilcox or hate Wilcox, his contract means we are stuck together for the moment and so the collective is working to create the best team possible. With the amount of money we'd have to pay Wilcox to leave we could bring in world class talent and give ourselves a real chance to make some noise in the ACC. In my view that's a better plan than putting $20m into Justin's bank account and then having to reconstruct everything from scratch.

More importantly, my argument hinges on the idea that I don't think that Cal has the luxury of time here. Even if you believed at some point that the long-term interests of Cal could be served by allowing the roster to be decimated and the talent level to plummet, thereby forcing Cal to make a coaching change, you can't rationally think that's a good idea in the year 2024. We just saw a few months ago that Cal football (and by extension all of its athletics) are on the fringe of relegation. The market has spoken. If we don't get our act together now, the next round of realignment coming in the next few years is absolutely going to find us on the outside looking in. We simply don't have the luxury of a 2-10 season or whatever to "force" a change. And by the way, the idea that Cal would absolutely make a change if we went 2-10 (or whatever) seems to be "optimistic" to say the least. Remember that our AD told us how incredibly difficult it was to fire our MBB coach who literally set the P5 record for single season losses last year. And that was "incredibly difficult". Yikes.

So IMHO we can't burn it down now. We need to use NIL to make the best team possible now. We need to win now. And our best (indeed only) lever to pull is this one. So we're pulling it.

I explained this. In response I was told my arguments were "BS" and it was "lawyerly." I was told Wilcox "no good coach" and "Cal no have good players". We were told that Cal football is "already dead" and that given our $30m deficit we should have no problem paying another $20m to buy out Wilcox (yeah, that makes total sense. When your house is already on fire what difference does it make if you throw a few barrels of gasoline on it?).

But there's no other plan being put forward by this poster other than "get good coach". And it's just stated over, and over, and over again without any ideas even being put forward on "how." How do we afford a $20m buyout and come up with the money to hire a better coach and staff and do this all while holding onto the talent we've brought in through the portal and win enough games in 2024 to prevent prevent imminent relegation? How?

It also can't escape attention that the more successful the collective becomes the more determined certain posters seem to derail its momentum. We now have the 6th ranked portal class according to On3. And yes to forestall those who want to point out the methodology used there, I understand that this ranking only evaluates how the team is doing vis-a-vis its current roster. But that's the point and why On3 uses this methodology. If you're trying to determine if your NIL is working or not, this is the exact right way to look at it. Are you making your team better or worse compared to what others are doing? Of course if you prefer a more conventional analysis, 247, etc. rank us in the top 25 nationally which is still great for a program that has suffered a lot of football mediocrity for a lot of years. Bottom line Cal fans are making a difference in the team's talent level and that should manifest itself on the field. And if it doesn't, well then we have our definitive answer on exactly what needs to change.

You really can't imagine all the impediments to winning at Cal. Much as you think you can, you can't. But we've collectively made huge strides in fixing this program and this team over the last few years. The hopefully last piece is significantly upgrading the talent. I'm working on the thesis that this will be enough, but whether I'm right or wrong I believe it's still the only avenue open to us so we need to follow it. And for what it's worth, the California Legends Collective is a pure labor of love and altruism. We don't make one dime off our efforts. 100% of what we collect goes to the players. As far as I know, that's unique across all NIL collectives operating today. All of the costs of running the collective are being borne by me and the other directors (this is the most expensive "job" I've ever had). I'm trying my hardest to help Cal in the only way I can.

If CalStrong doesn't want to give to the collective then that's his right. I don't tell anyone what to do with their money. If he thinks all of Cal athletics is doomed and wants to disengage altogether, then fine. Also his right. But if all he wants to do is use sock puppets to post over and over again that no one should give to the collective and that the collective is a bunch of "yahoos", without any other plan or any constructive critique of what we should be doing differently (other than maybe "stop being so successful in getting such good players") then yeah, I don't see why he has any right to use BI as a platform.. It doesn't seem like the actions of someone with the best interests of the program at heart.

Back to my day job.

great post ^ but can I also comment how hysterically funny it is that a grown man pretended to be his wife on an alternate account on a Cal sports forum just to pretend like there were people supporting his argument. LOL it's straight out of an SNL skit

Can't wait to meet Son Strong and Cousin Strong too! Maybe Father Strong will make an appearance if things really get out of hand

Strong post!

Sebastabear said:

---

I just want to thank BearGreg for his unwavering support of the collective and for Cal sports in general. Running this site is a thankless job and he has to deal with all kinds of "personalities." But I think it's one of the great forums in all of college football with a lot of fascinating and engaged posters who write thoughtful and nuanced arguments supporting their positions. I learn something on here virtually every day. If Cal ever makes it to the promised land, BearGreg will be one of the true unsung heroes of that moment and fully deserving of his face being carved into the Mount Rushmore of Cal athletics. Or at least a free drink or two being sent his way at the CFP.

To the suggestion that there was some golden age of BI where ideas flowed freely here and no one was ever suppressed regardless of how nutty they were, all I can say is L to the OL. By the end, GreyBear was zapping posts and posters faster than a dermatologist trying to pay for his new Porsche. Read the Albany Bowl thread some time (the semi-fictitious account of a poster allegedly running into Brendan Bigelow and the Cal team at the local bowling alley while carrying an 8"x10" glossy photo of Bigelow in his pocket). It's borderline incoherent now (not that it ever made a ton of sense). You often couldn't even tell what GreyBear was deleting or why. By contrast this current version of the forum is a paradigm of openness.

But I think the problem with the CalStrong posts (and those of his various sock puppets) wasn't that I object to having to defend what we are doing or why. The problem is that there's no rational analysis behind them. It's just pure repetition and he's in no way open to information of others. He asked why I was doing this and I answered. Basically my argument is that whether you like Wilcox or hate Wilcox, his contract means we are stuck together for the moment and so the collective is working to create the best team possible. With the amount of money we'd have to pay Wilcox to leave we could bring in world class talent and give ourselves a real chance to make some noise in the ACC. In my view that's a better plan than putting $20m into Justin's bank account and then having to reconstruct everything from scratch.

More importantly, my argument hinges on the idea that I don't think that Cal has the luxury of time here. Even if you believed at some point that the long-term interests of Cal could be served by allowing the roster to be decimated and the talent level to plummet, thereby forcing Cal to make a coaching change, you can't rationally think that's a good idea in the year 2024. We just saw a few months ago that Cal football (and by extension all of its athletics) are on the fringe of relegation. The market has spoken. If we don't get our act together now, the next round of realignment coming in the next few years is absolutely going to find us on the outside looking in. We simply don't have the luxury of a 2-10 season or whatever to "force" a change. And by the way, the idea that Cal would absolutely make a change if we went 2-10 (or whatever) seems to be "optimistic" to say the least. Remember that our AD told us how incredibly difficult it was to fire our MBB coach who literally set the P5 record for single season losses last year. And that was "incredibly difficult". Yikes.

So IMHO we can't burn it down now. We need to use NIL to make the best team possible now. We need to win now. And our best (indeed only) lever to pull is this one. So we're pulling it.

I explained this. In response I was told my arguments were "BS" and it was "lawyerly." I was told Wilcox "no good coach" and "Cal no have good players". We were told that Cal football is "already dead" and that given our $30m deficit we should have no problem paying another $20m to buy out Wilcox (yeah, that makes total sense. When your house is already on fire what difference does it make if you throw a few barrels of gasoline on it?).

But there's no other plan being put forward by this poster other than "get good coach". And it's just stated over, and over, and over again without any ideas even being put forward on "how." How do we afford a $20m buyout and come up with the money to hire a better coach and staff and do this all while holding onto the talent we've brought in through the portal and win enough games in 2024 to prevent prevent imminent relegation? How?

It also can't escape attention that the more successful the collective becomes the more determined certain posters seem to derail its momentum. We now have the 6th ranked portal class according to On3. And yes to forestall those who want to point out the methodology used there, I understand that this ranking only evaluates how the team is doing vis-a-vis its current roster. But that's the point and why On3 uses this methodology. If you're trying to determine if your NIL is working or not, this is the exact right way to look at it. Are you making your team better or worse compared to what others are doing? Of course if you prefer a more conventional analysis, 247, etc. rank us in the top 25 nationally which is still great for a program that has suffered a lot of football mediocrity for a lot of years. Bottom line Cal fans are making a difference in the team's talent level and that should manifest itself on the field. And if it doesn't, well then we have our definitive answer on exactly what needs to change.

You really can't imagine all the impediments to winning at Cal. Much as you think you can, you can't. But we've collectively made huge strides in fixing this program and this team over the last few years. The hopefully last piece is significantly upgrading the talent. I'm working on the thesis that this will be enough, but whether I'm right or wrong I believe it's still the only avenue open to us so we need to follow it. And for what it's worth, the California Legends Collective is a pure labor of love and altruism. We don't make one dime off our efforts. 100% of what we collect goes to the players. As far as I know, that's unique across all NIL collectives operating today. All of the costs of running the collective are being borne by me and the other directors (this is the most expensive "job" I've ever had). I'm trying my hardest to help Cal in the only way I can.

If CalStrong doesn't want to give to the collective then that's his right. I don't tell anyone what to do with their money. If he thinks all of Cal athletics is doomed and wants to disengage altogether, then fine. Also his right. But if all he wants to do is use sock puppets to post over and over again that no one should give to the collective and that the collective is a bunch of "yahoos", without any other plan or any constructive critique of what we should be doing differently (other than maybe "stop being so successful in getting such good players") then yeah, I don't see why he has any right to use BI as a platform.. It doesn't seem like the actions of someone with the best interests of the program at heart.

Back to my day job.

---

Agree 100% Thanks for all you do Sebasta. It IS the way forward and as I argued in the locked thread, we are killing it in the portal. Moneyball. We need to be smart and fortunately there is no smarter alumni base.

And for the record, while I was banned at the same time as Cal Strong, it was not for debating him on the thread I started that is now locked. Greg banned me for responding to a political post. It being an election year he wants to avoid politics taking over the forum which is understandable. I messaged him and was granted clemency and given an early release.

Thanks Sebasta.

Sebastabear said:

---

I just want to thank BearGreg for his unwavering support of the collective and for Cal sports in general. Running this site is a thankless job and he has to deal with all kinds of "personalities." But I think it's one of the great forums in all of college football with a lot of fascinating and engaged posters who write thoughtful and nuanced arguments supporting their positions. I learn something on here virtually every day. If Cal ever makes it to the promised land, BearGreg will be one of the true unsung heroes of that moment and fully deserving of his face being carved into the Mount Rushmore of Cal athletics. Or at least a free drink or two being sent his way at the CFP.

To the suggestion that there was some golden age of BI where ideas flowed freely here and no one was ever suppressed regardless of how nutty they were, all I can say is L to the OL. By the end, GreyBear was zapping posts and posters faster than a dermatologist trying to pay for his new Porsche. Read the Albany Bowl thread some time (the semi-fictitious account of a poster allegedly running into Brendan Bigelow and the Cal team at the local bowling alley while carrying an 8"x10" glossy photo of Bigelow in his pocket). It's borderline incoherent now (not that it ever made a ton of sense). You often couldn't even tell what GreyBear was deleting or why. By contrast this current version of the forum is a paradigm of openness.

But I think the problem with the CalStrong posts (and those of his various sock puppets) wasn't that I object to having to defend what we are doing or why. The problem is that there's no rational analysis behind them. It's just pure repetition and he's in no way open to information of others. He asked why I was doing this and I answered. Basically my argument is that whether you like Wilcox or hate Wilcox, his contract means we are stuck together for the moment and so the collective is working to create the best team possible. With the amount of money we'd have to pay Wilcox to leave we could bring in world class talent and give ourselves a real chance to make some noise in the ACC. In my view that's a better plan than putting $20m into Justin's bank account and then having to reconstruct everything from scratch.

More importantly, my argument hinges on the idea that I don't think that Cal has the luxury of time here. Even if you believed at some point that the long-term interests of Cal could be served by allowing the roster to be decimated and the talent level to plummet, thereby forcing Cal to make a coaching change, you can't rationally think that's a good idea in the year 2024. We just saw a few months ago that Cal football (and by extension all of its athletics) are on the fringe of relegation. The market has spoken. If we don't get our act together now, the next round of realignment coming in the next few years is absolutely going to find us on the outside looking in. We simply don't have the luxury of a 2-10 season or whatever to "force" a change. And by the way, the idea that Cal would absolutely make a change if we went 2-10 (or whatever) seems to be "optimistic" to say the least. Remember that our AD told us how incredibly difficult it was to fire our MBB coach who literally set the P5 record for single season losses last year. And that was "incredibly difficult". Yikes.

So IMHO we can't burn it down now. We need to use NIL to make the best team possible now. We need to win now. And our best (indeed only) lever to pull is this one. So we're pulling it.

I explained this. In response I was told my arguments were "BS" and it was "lawyerly." I was told Wilcox "no good coach" and "Cal no have good players". We were told that Cal football is "already dead" and that given our $30m deficit we should have no problem paying another $20m to buy out Wilcox (yeah, that makes total sense. When your house is already on fire what difference does it make if you throw a few barrels of gasoline on it?).

But there's no other plan being put forward by this poster other than "get good coach". And it's just stated over, and over, and over again without any ideas even being put forward on "how." How do we afford a $20m buyout and come up with the money to hire a better coach and staff and do this all while holding onto the talent we've brought in through the portal and win enough games in 2024 to prevent prevent imminent relegation? How?

It also can't escape attention that the more successful the collective becomes the more determined certain posters seem to derail its momentum. We now have the 6th ranked portal class according to On3. And yes to forestall those who want to point out the methodology used there, I understand that this ranking only evaluates how the team is doing vis-a-vis its current roster. But that's the point and why On3 uses this methodology. If you're trying to determine if your NIL is working or not, this is the exact right way to look at it. Are you making your team better or worse compared to what others are doing? Of course if you prefer a more conventional analysis, 247, etc. rank us in the top 25 nationally which is still great for a program that has suffered a lot of football mediocrity for a lot of years. Bottom line Cal fans are making a difference in the team's talent level and that should manifest itself on the field. And if it doesn't, well then we have our definitive answer on exactly what needs to change.

You really can't imagine all the impediments to winning at Cal. Much as you think you can, you can't. But we've collectively made huge strides in fixing this program and this team over the last few years. The hopefully last piece is significantly upgrading the talent. I'm working on the thesis that this will be enough, but whether I'm right or wrong I believe it's still the only avenue open to us so we need to follow it. And for what it's worth, the California Legends Collective is a pure labor of love and altruism. We don't make one dime off our efforts. 100% of what we collect goes to the players. As far as I know, that's unique across all NIL collectives operating today. All of the costs of running the collective are being borne by me and the other directors (this is the most expensive "job" I've ever had). I'm trying my hardest to help Cal in the only way I can.

If CalStrong doesn't want to give to the collective then that's his right. I don't tell anyone what to do with their money. If he thinks all of Cal athletics is doomed and wants to disengage altogether, then fine. Also his right. But if all he wants to do is use sock puppets to post over and over again that no one should give to the collective and that the collective is a bunch of "yahoos", without any other plan or any constructive critique of what we should be doing differently (other than maybe "stop being so successful in getting such good players") then yeah, I don't see why he has any right to use BI as a platform.. It doesn't seem like the actions of someone with the best interests of the program at heart.

Back to my day job.

---

*Admin comment: Edited to remove response from Sebastabear's quote and put it here below the quote instead for clarity*

Thank you. I usually don't read long posts, but I read every word word. How true and insightful. Making us worse to get better is definitely not the answer. The cave man routine is old and tired and takes away from any point he is trying to make. I put him on block long ago so not sure about his recent post..

Am I a fan of Wilcox? No. I have really seen enough but not believing knowlton would pay the ransom to make a change. So we march on and try to get better players who will make a difference. My hope is the money will persuade some really good players to come here even if Wilcox can't convince them. It's our only hope at this time. We need difference makers like Ott.

If brevity is the soul of wit, then I am witless

That's a softball if there was one folks.

Lessons learned.

Don't piss off the boomer doners.

bear2034 said:

---

Exactly. I don't read Strong's posts so I don't even know what he said. Isn't that what the "ignore" function is for?

---

His personal attacks are something else than just being annoying. But thanks, I also now have him on ignore. Enough of calstrong sez in the third person.

bear2034 said:

---

Lessons learned.

Don't piss of the boomer doners.

---

Lesson learned don't go on a site that is free and constantly post rinse and repeat bs. You don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. Start your own site and pay for the costs if you like….

My friends, I have a request.

When typing LONG posts, could we please include at the top or bottom a TLDR ("Too Long, Didn't Read") 1-3 sentence summary.

I intend to read Kommunist's and, of course, SebastaB's posts in their entirety later when I have the time & patience but would appreciate short summaries to lure me back to their considered thoughts. There is something mysterious about the combo of our Cal education plus sixty-four years of football misery that makes us extra logorrheic and discursive, producing mountain ranges of text. I don't see this rarity in any other sports board. Thank you and happy belated new year.

TLDR: Request for 1-3 sentence TLDR summaries for long posts.

Thank you, SebastaBear, for all you do. While I generally fall on the side of more discussion the better (even discussion I don't agree with), I generally ignore CalStrong's posts as I simply don't believe him/her. Access to top university administrators? Don't believe it. Had discussions with Christ about Knowlton and Wilcox? Don't believe it. And when folks say we can't afford to buy out Knowlton and Wilcox, s/he asks folks to prove it but never proves or shows how we could actually afford it. And for someone, allegedly so well connected and familiar with university leadership politics and operations, s/he seems incredibly ignorant about how quickly decisions like this can be made even if the folks involved wanted to make a change.

The one thing Strong may have right is that Christ doesn't seem to want to fire Knowlton, and Knowlton doesn't seem to want to fire Wilcox. Whether Christ feels this way because she thinks Knowlton is a top notch AD or some other reason (like she isn't going to do anything that controversial before she takes off), it doesn't really matter. Nothing is happening on that front until after she retires and likely for some time thereafter as any new Chancellor likely isn't going to fire Knowlton within the first 1-4 months of his/her tenure. So practically speaking, Wilcox will be our coach for the 2024 season unless HE decides he wants to coach somewhere else. Given that, if our goal is to prove our worthiness to be included with the other top football programs when the next realignment happens, our options are fairly limited. We can support CalLegends and try to win as many games as possible or...(can't really think of another option). I really hope Wilcox finds a way to put it all together but am cynical he can based on past performance.

One note to this discussion:

There has been some discussion on this boards about Knowlton being responsible for the buyout terms of Wilcox's contract being so heavily in his favor. This is only partially true.

The way coaching contracts work at Cal (they may work this place at other universities, but Cal is the only school whose contracts I've ever had an interest in examining), you have the original contract that is signed when the coach is first hired. Any changes subsequent to the original come in the form of contract addendums, which reflect the new terms of the contract. The addendums can change any language in the original contract. For example, the base salary, talent fee, and retention bonus amounts have changed over the lifetime of Wilcox's tenure.

I believe this is the third contract addendum Wilcox has had since signing the original contract in June 2017. Other addendums have been in 2018, 2020, and the current effective addendum, which took effect January 2022.

Knowlton does take some blame for Wilcox being due 100% of his contract in that he would have had the ability to negotiate a change in terms of any of the provisions of the contract since he's been the athletic director. Unfortunately, none of the contract addendums have ever addressed the original language in Section 12 of the original contract, which reads as follows:



And the two folks who signed off on that contract:



So yes, Jim Knowlton is a bad athletic director who deserves to be fired, but this latest contract addendum is not out of line with Cal's history. Cal has been signing bad coaching contracts for years and the language is almost always identical in all of them.

If you are someone that donates money to Cal for either coaching talent fees or to pay off fired coaches, you might want to harp on this point when they come to you hat in hand for the next handout.

Goobear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Lessons learned.

Don't piss of the boomer doners.

---

Lesson learned don't go on a site that is free and constantly post rinse and repeat bs. You don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. Start your own site and pay for the costs if you like….

---

Well yes, if you don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. And yet, people can't resist. They can't help but respond to Strong's posts.

bear2034 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Lessons learned.

Don't piss of the boomer doners.

---

Lesson learned don't go on a site that is free and constantly post rinse and repeat bs. You don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. Start your own site and pay for the costs if you like….

---

Well yes, if you don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. And yet, people can't resist. They can't help but respond to Strong's posts.

---

Gee I can't imagine why people wouldn't want Bear Insider to be filled with posts talking about how no one should give to the Collective and it's just run by a bunch of yahoos. I mean what possible damage could there be in just letting that sit there unrefuted and potential recruits and donors read that with no one arguing against it? Anyone?

The "if you don't like what he says then just ignore him" theme is deliberately missing the point. Issue is not that the Duke (or whatever name he's using at that moment) doesn't want to give to NIL. The issue is that he has decided to take the premiere forum for Cal athletics dedicated to the furtherance and support of Cal Athletics and use it his personal platform to try to denigrate the efforts of everyone donating (which is a lot of you). And then he created a bunch of sock puppets to support his position. He isn't just expressing a view. He isn't advocating another plan. He doesn't have a plan. He is just trying to hurt the program. Over and over and over again. And no matter what you say or how you explain it you just get back some nonsense about how "Carol Christ never told CalStrong that when she consulted with CalStrong" nonsense. Which of course never happened.

There's no rational debate here. There's just a statement of a position over and over again. And that position is designed to damage Cal.

Again if he doesn't want to give, that's his right. But I don't see why Bear insider has any obligation to give him a platform to try to do damage. An arsonist can buy his own damn matches. He doesn't have the right to force BearGreg to supply them.

Sebastabear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Lessons learned.

Don't piss of the boomer doners.

---

Lesson learned don't go on a site that is free and constantly post rinse and repeat bs. You don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. Start your own site and pay for the costs if you like….

---

Well yes, if you don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. And yet, people can't resist. They can't help but respond to Strong's posts.

---

Gee I can't imagine why people wouldn't want Bear Insider to be filled with posts talking about how no one should give to the Collective and it's just run by a bunch of yahoos. I mean what possible damage could there be in just letting that sit there unrefuted and potential recruits and donors read that with no one arguing against it? Anyone?

The "if you don't like what he says then just ignore him" theme is deliberately missing the point. Issue is not that the Duke (or whatever name he's using at that moment) doesn't want to give to NIL. The issue is that he has decided to take the premiere forum for Cal athletics dedicated to the furtherance and support of Cal Athletics and use it his personal platform to try to denigrate the efforts of everyone donating (which is a lot of you). And then he created a bunch of sock puppets to support his position. He isn't just expressing a view. He isn't advocating another plan. He doesn't have a plan. He is just trying to hurt the program. Over and over and over again. And no matter what you say or how you explain it you just get back some nonsense about how "Carol Christ never told CalStrong that when she consulted with CalStrong" nonsense. Which of course never happened.

There's no rational debate here. There's just a statement of a position over and over again. And that position is designed to damage Cal.

Again if he doesn't want to give, that's his right. But I don't see why Bear insider has any obligation to give him a platform to try to do damage. An arsonist can buy his own damn matches. He doesn't have the right to force BearGreg to supply them.

---

I get it that you disagree with Strong and his puppets. But he's been here for years, he's a fan like everyone else here. How has he personally caused damage to the program? And since you're itching to name names, who else is "denigrating the efforts of everyone donating"?

bear2034 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Lessons learned.

Don't piss of the boomer doners.

---

Lesson learned don't go on a site that is free and constantly post rinse and repeat bs. You don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. Start your own site and pay for the costs if you like….

---

Well yes, if you don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. And yet, people can't resist. They can't help but respond to Strong's posts.

---

Gee I can't imagine why people wouldn't want Bear Insider to be filled with posts talking about how no one should give to the Collective and it's just run by a bunch of yahoos. I mean what possible damage could there be in just letting that sit there unrefuted and potential recruits and donors read that with no one arguing against it? Anyone?

The "if you don't like what he says then just ignore him" theme is deliberately missing the point. Issue is not that the Duke (or whatever name he's using at that moment) doesn't want to give to NIL. The issue is that he has decided to take the premiere forum for Cal athletics dedicated to the furtherance and support of Cal Athletics and use it his personal platform to try to denigrate the efforts of everyone donating (which is a lot of you). And then he created a bunch of sock puppets to support his position. He isn't just expressing a view. He isn't advocating another plan. He doesn't have a plan. He is just trying to hurt the program. Over and over and over again. And no matter what you say or how you explain it you just get back some nonsense about how "Carol Christ never told CalStrong that when she consulted with CalStrong" nonsense. Which of course never happened.

There's no rational debate here. There's just a statement of a position over and over again. And that position is designed to damage Cal.

Again if he doesn't want to give, that's his right. But I don't see why Bear insider has any obligation to give him a platform to try to do damage. An arsonist can buy his own damn matches. He doesn't have the right to force BearGreg to supply them.

---

I get it that you disagree with Strong and his puppets. But he's been here for years, he's a fan like everyone else here. How has he personally caused damage to the program? And since you're itching to name names, who else is "denigrating the efforts of everyone donating"?

---

LOL. I don't think what I wrote was unclear. But since it is being misinterpreted, let me say it again. What I said was a lot of you were donating. I did not say a lot of you were denigrating. As far as I know, no one else is engaged in a jihad to try to convince people not to give to the collective. Because, of course, why would you if you were interested in seeing Cal be successful?

On that note will just drop this here. Remind me the last time Cal was tied for 5th IN THE NATION in landing 4 and 5 star recruits in any recruiting cycle. And with some luck we may even squeeze one more in. Stay tuned on that.

Most blue chip (4/5 star) transfer players added in the 2024 cycle (per 247 Sports):

1. Florida State (10)
2. Texas A&M (8)
3. Ole Miss (7)
4. Colorado (6)
T-5. Cal (5)
T-5. Louisville (5)
T-5. Oregon (5)
T-5. Southern Cal (5)
T-5. Texas (5)

— Robert Behrens (@rcb05) January 17, 2024

let it go. Sebasta has done a lot more than you know to help save this program from the brink of complete collapse, but we're not out of the woods yet. Arguing this point is not a hill you want to die on. There aren't any kudos points to give out here regarding your thoughts on Cal Strong

calumnus said:

---

And for the record, while I was banned at the same time as Cal Strong, it was not for debating him on the thread I started that is now locked. Greg banned me for responding to a political post. It being an election year he wants to avoid politics taking over the forum which is understandable. I messaged him and was granted clemency and given an early release.

---

Who is your attorney?
I need his number.

bear2034 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Lessons learned.

Don't piss of the boomer doners.

---

Lesson learned don't go on a site that is free and constantly post rinse and repeat bs. You don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. Start your own site and pay for the costs if you like….

---

Well yes, if you don't like it, go to OT or don't visit the site. And yet, people can't resist. They can't help but respond to Strong's posts.

---

Gee I can't imagine why people wouldn't want Bear Insider to be filled with posts talking about how no one should give to the Collective and it's just run by a bunch of yahoos. I mean what possible damage could there be in just letting that sit there unrefuted and potential recruits and donors read that with no one arguing against it? Anyone?

The "if you don't like what he says then just ignore him" theme is deliberately missing the point. Issue is not that the Duke (or whatever name he's using at that moment) doesn't want to give to NIL. The issue is that he has decided to take the premiere forum for Cal athletics dedicated to the furtherance and support of Cal Athletics and use it his personal platform to try to denigrate the efforts of everyone donating (which is a lot of you). And then he created a bunch of sock puppets to support his position. He isn't just expressing a view. He isn't advocating another plan. He doesn't have a plan. He is just trying to hurt the program. Over and over and over again. And no matter what you say or how you explain it you just get back some nonsense about how "Carol Christ never told CalStrong that when she consulted with CalStrong" nonsense. Which of course never happened.

There's no rational debate here. There's just a statement of a position over and over again. And that position is designed to damage Cal.

Again if he doesn't want to give, that's his right. But I don't see why Bear insider has any obligation to give him a platform to try to do damage. An arsonist can buy his own damn matches. He doesn't have the right to force BearGreg to supply them.

---

I get it that you disagree with Strong and his puppets. But he's been here for years, he's a fan like everyone else here. How has he personally caused damage to the program? And since you're itching to name names, who else is "denigrating the efforts of everyone donating"?

---

I'm pretty sure that "which is a lot of you" is referring to the number of people donating, not the number of people denigrating people for donating.

Also, I think this notion that there were a bunch of sock puppets that were agreeing with that position is risible. Go read that locked thread right now. You won't see a bunch of posts that say people shouldn't donate to the collective.

Sebastabear said:

---

Again if he doesn't want to give, that's his right. But I don't see why Bear insider has any obligation to give him a platform to try to do damage. An arsonist can buy his own damn matches. He doesn't have the right to force BearGreg to supply them.

---

Amen Sebasta.