Up big 21-0 at Kansas State, massive turnaround from 3-9 last year by 34-year old Kenny Dillingham, in coaching year 2

happens to a bunch of teams every year

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Yep, it's no guarantee the next guy will be 'the guy', but it is guaranteed that the current guy is not that guy.

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can win a conference championship at Cal.

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can win a conference championship at Cal.

---

1-5 in the ACC and in last place, #17 out of 17 mostly weak programs.

Where else could Wilcox win a conference championship? Who would give him the chance? FCS? Probably not G5. My guess is he drops back down to being a DC if he doesn't just retire on the $50 milllion+ Cal will have given him.

Before they hired a new coach, ASU hired a new AD: the former head of development who had previously worked at the Diamondbacks in charge of fan experience. Just some food for thought.

With BYU's loss tonight, ASU controls its own destiny and can make the Big 12 title game by winning their next two games, starting with BYU next Saturday.

bencgilmore said:

---

happens to a bunch of teams every year

---

I'm assuming that as a CAL fan you are smrt and thus are exercising some sarcasm here?

wifeisafurd said:

---

Before they hired a new coach, ASU hired a new AD: the former head of development who had previously worked at the Diamondbacks in charge of fan experience. Just some food for thought.

---

Hiring someone (preferably for us a Cal alum) with success in professional sports management, finance, analytics and marketing (for Giants, Niners, Raiders, Nets, Mavericks, G League…) makes a ton of sense in the current and future era of college athletics.

The AD needs to treat the revenue sports like a new professional sports franchise in the East Bay but at the same time retaining the Cal game day and other traditions that differentiate college from professional sports.

We've whiffed at every turn for the last 15 years trying to hire a competent head coach. Insane that Wilcox is still employed.

pingpong2 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

---

Except we don't have a viable OL and the best you can do around a shoddy OL, realistically, is probably 7 or 8.

Of course the OL is also on Wilcox, so...

There's a pretty good chance Stanford and smu finish this, imo

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Before they hired a new coach, ASU hired a new AD: the former head of development who had previously worked at the Diamondbacks in charge of fan experience. Just some food for thought.

---

Hiring someone (preferably for us a Cal alum) with success in professional sports management, finance, analytics and marketing (for Giants, Niners, Raiders, Nets, Mavericks, G League…) makes a ton of sense in the current and future era of college athletics.

The AD needs to treat the revenue sports like a new professional sports franchise in the East Bay but at the same time retaining the Cal game day and other traditions that differentiate college from professional sports.

---

The current AD has shown that he can't do it. He should be fired as soon as the SMU game is over. The women's swim coach fiasco is the way to save money in doing so. I assume the Chancellor has been gearing up for this. No way should Knowlton be allowed to fire and hire any fb coach. He is lazy within a lucrative entrenchment and, maybe corrupt. How else to explain this catastrophe?

We should ignore the enticement of choosing a Cal alum for any replacements. We should choose the best man for the job.

pingpong2 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

Cal88 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

---

And the person who recruited them must be fired.

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can win a conference championship at Cal.

---

Let's just start with a conference record of at least .500. Maybe in the 9th year?

Cal88 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

---

JW decided not to have a dedicated OL coach for some inexplicable reason. OL has been an issue pretty much his entire tenure so it could also mean he doesn't know how to recruit for that spot. All roads lead back to JW.

Cal88 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

---

I really dislike like it when people throw the players under the bus to defend the coaches. Especially when it has been refuted time and again.

He has had 8 years to recruit and develop an OL. If he thought OL was important, why would he have Bloesch managing it as his side job? It is all on Wilcox.

Moreover, we actually are the #40 offense through quarters 1. 2 and 3 but are only the #117 offense in the 4th quarter. If the OL is good enough to have us be the #40 offense through 3 quarters, it is good enough to be #40 offense for the entire game. Yes, Wilcox's turtle strategy with a 4th quarter lead might work with a good to great OL, but a minimally competent coach would recognize that we don't have that and would strategize accordingly:

We had leads going into the 4th quarter in 4 of our 5 losses and lost every one due to Wilcox's turtle strategy. So that means we could easily be 9-1. However, if we were 9-0 and ranked, playing in front of a sold out CMS on national TV yesterday. I highly doubt our team plays so flat and demoralized and we easily beat Syracuse too. I honestly believe Wilcox has squandered what could be a 10-0 and highly confident team right now in the thick of the hunt for an ACC Championship and potentially a CFP berth (where we likely get exposed, but get a HUGE boost in recruiting for another great run next year).

calumnus said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

---

He has had 8 years to recruit and develop an OL.

---

Here you're starting to get it. The issue is recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. Every CFB coaching staff that I am aware of makes lots of in-game decisions that can be second-guessed. (Example from a game late last night: Why in the world didn't BYU's coaches anticipate the possibility of a pooch punt in the situation in which Kansas did it? Any close following fan of the sport could guess that on 4th and 14 from the BYU 40, a pooch punt was a possibility.)

Every staff sometimes has to deal with a game in which players perform far below their peak level. But coaching staffs that recruit a hell of a lot better than Wilcox and staff have the talent advantage that allows the players to usually overcome iffy coaching decisions and the occasional off day from peak players. Wilcox's teams have none of that, because the recruiting has been consistently substandard. That is why obstacles that are usually overcome by elite teams trip up our Bears over and over again.

KoreAmBear said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

---

JW decided not to have a dedicated OL coach for some inexplicable reason. OL has been an issue pretty much his entire tenure so it could also mean he doesn't know how to recruit for that spot. All roads lead back to JW.

---

Maybe we can trade him to Oregon State for their best OL? Looks like they're gonna need a new guy next year.

Ok. ASU? Takes players we don't. You just need a pulse there. I have first hand knowledge that I can't share. Maybe with the transfer portal and NIL, we will gather more talent? In terms of coaching, Nick Saban wouldn't get us a championship team under the circumstances that have always had Cal distance itself from football across the board. We aren't a football school and never will be. Yes, Ucla has made inroads and we will see how their new coach does. You want a Colorado program? Heck, they might go to the national playoffs this year!!

Transfer portal and NIL will even bring less allegiance to being a Bear for those who return. And no doubt we will continue to lose players after a year or so in the system, and bring new ones in who need to learn our system!. Tough to build on.

Top recruits from high school smell the NFL before a degree now days. Transfer portal players also look out for "me' first, and will to whomever benefits them. Yes, Arizona had their year, but what happened? Coach left and there you go. Cal isn't one of the other ACC schools - we are a research university on the crazy West Coast in the even nuttier Bay Area. Go ahead and call for Wilcox to leave, but please can we wait until after the season?? Ranting to fire him now seems counterproductive. We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

BearSD said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

---

He has had 8 years to recruit and develop an OL.

---

Here you're starting to get it. The issue is recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. Every CFB coaching staff that I am aware of makes lots of in-game decisions that can be second-guessed. (Example from a game late last night: Why in the world didn't BYU's coaches anticipate the possibility of a pooch punt in the situation in which Kansas did it? Any close following fan of the sport could guess that on 4th and 14 from the BYU 40, a pooch punt was a possibility.)

Every staff sometimes has to deal with a game in which players perform far below their peak level. But coaching staffs that recruit a hell of a lot better than Wilcox and staff have the talent advantage that allows the players to usually overcome iffy coaching decisions and the occasional off day from peak players. Wilcox's teams have none of that, because the recruiting has been consistently substandard. That is why obstacles that are usually overcome by elite teams trip up our Bears over and over again.

---

No, I always say the lifeblood of college sports is recruiting and Wilcox and staff have been horrible recruiters. Not a single Wilcox HS recruit to Cal has ever made the NFL, offense or defense. All Dykes recruits or a single transfer (that Wilcox didn't offer out of HS even though he was the brother of a Cal player).

OL and DL in particular is recruiting. It is about being big and fast and strong. Other than illegal PEDs, there is only so much that can be done in strength training and technique. You need OL and DL coaches who are great recruiters. My preference is Cal alums with an NFL background and natural ties to our key recruiting areas. We have mostly had guys with no NFL experience and ties to Oregon.

So while I agree 100% that you need to recruit the best players you can get at each and every position, you then, each season, need to scheme to what you have and make adjustments in game and from game to game. You need to put the players you have in the best position to win. That is good coaching.

Any idiot should be able to win with an overwhelming talent advantage at every position. That is just never going to be the case at Cal. You need to know your strengths and weaknesses each year and play to your strengths and not to your weaknesses, even while trying to get better recruits next year,

And again, we have more or less done that (play to our strengths) through 3 quarters in the first 4 games we lost (and again against Wake) only going away from that and playing to our weakness in the 4th.

So bad recruiting does not excuse a bad scheme or bad play calling, it just exacerbates it, when good scheme and good play calling can largely cover it up. It is not either or, it is both. And again, Wilcox is responsible for both. With the OL we have we could be 9-1 or even 10-0 with better coaching and mostly 4th quarter coaching,

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

---

Once again, I can tell some of you may not have played. .The Bears, especially the seniors, are not going to lay or play down vs Stanford in their final home game!. They are all competitors in spite of what people may think of the coaching staff. In so many cases, the head coach is nothing more than a figurehead (coach speak) to the players themselves. They have shown they trust one another, battle to the end, and have family, friends, and teammates to pridefully play for. It doesn't appear that their fight lessens at the end. Not to mention the incredible history behind Big Game. They don't "blame" the coaches as you suggest, they watch the tape and take personal responsibility (listen to Mendoza's presser after the game)..They have personal pride which I suggest is bigger than "playing for the coach". Being in the post game film room is their come-to-jesus-time, and no one wants to look bad or worse, look like they have given up on a play. Go Bears! Beat Furd!!

72CalBear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

---

Once again, I can tell some of you may not have played. .The Bears, especially the seniors, are not going to lay or play down vs Stanford in their final home game!. They are all competitors in spite of what people may think of the coaching staff. In so many cases, the head coach is nothing more than a figurehead (coach speak) to the players themselves. They have shown they trust one another, battle to the end, and have family, friends, and teammates to pridefully play for. It doesn't appear that their fight lessens at the end. Not to mention the incredible history behind Big Game. They don't "blame" the coaches as you suggest, they watch the tape and take personal responsibility (listen to Mendoza's presser after the game)..They have personal pride which I suggest is bigger than "playing for the coach". Being in the post game film room is their come-to-jesus-time, and no one wants to look bad or worse, look like they have given up on a play. Go Bears! Beat Furd!!

---

In minor league football, many players are in it for the paycheck, and some also for a Certificate of participation. I doubt that "the incredible history of the Big Game" has much meaning.

72CalBear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

---

Once again, I can tell some of you may not have played. .The Bears, especially the seniors, are not going to lay or play down vs Stanford in their final home game!. They are all competitors in spite of what people may think of the coaching staff. In so many cases, the head coach is nothing more than a figurehead (coach speak) to the players themselves. They have shown they trust one another, battle to the end, and have family, friends, and teammates to pridefully play for. It doesn't appear that their fight lessens at the end. Not to mention the incredible history behind Big Game. They don't "blame" the coaches as you suggest, they watch the tape and take personal responsibility (listen to Mendoza's presser after the game)..They have personal pride which I suggest is bigger than "playing for the coach". Being in the post game film room is their come-to-jesus-time, and no one wants to look bad or worse, look like they have given up on a play. Go Bears! Beat Furd!!

---

Your ad hominem argument is just absurd. Worse, you're entirely missing the point. No one accused the players of not caring. My point is I'm concerned they've tuned out the coaches. If that is the case, then it's effectively eleven individuals on the field each trying to do his individual best but still getting beat because they're not an unified whole. As someone who's played the game, you should know that teamwork is fundamental to success in football. Eleven individuals on different pages is unlikely to beat a team of eleven guys working in sync.

But go ahead and go back to defending Wilcox and his incompetent OC and HC. Tell us all about how because you played football, it doesn't matter if Wilcox has never had a winning conference record . Or how Wilcox is a great coach because you "can tell some of [us] may not have played." Surely you understand how absurd these arguments are. Yet, you seem to think they're worth posting.

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

---

Once again, I can tell some of you may not have played. .The Bears, especially the seniors, are not going to lay or play down vs Stanford in their final home game!. They are all competitors in spite of what people may think of the coaching staff. In so many cases, the head coach is nothing more than a figurehead (coach speak) to the players themselves. They have shown they trust one another, battle to the end, and have family, friends, and teammates to pridefully play for. It doesn't appear that their fight lessens at the end. Not to mention the incredible history behind Big Game. They don't "blame" the coaches as you suggest, they watch the tape and take personal responsibility (listen to Mendoza's presser after the game)..They have personal pride which I suggest is bigger than "playing for the coach". Being in the post game film room is their come-to-jesus-time, and no one wants to look bad or worse, look like they have given up on a play. Go Bears! Beat Furd!!

---

Your ad hominem argument is just absurd. Worse, you're entirely missing the point. No one accused the players of not caring. My point is I'm concerned they've tuned out the coaches. If that is the case, then it's effectively eleven individuals on the field each trying to do his individual best but still getting beat because they're not an unified whole. As someone who's played the game, you should know that teamwork is fundamental to success in football. Eleven individuals on different pages is unlikely to beat a team of eleven guys working in sync.

But go ahead and go back to defending Wilcox and his incompetent OC and HC. Tell us all about how because you played football, it doesn't matter if Wilcox has never had a winning conference record . Or how Wilcox is a great coach because you "can tell some of [us] may not have played." Surely you understand how absurd these arguments are. Yet, you seem to think they're worth posting.

---

The Cal coach before Wilcox, Sonny Dykes, had a #1 overall draft pick QB and still never had a winning conference record in four seasons. Six years after being fired by Cal, he went 9-0 and won the Big 12 Conference, won the Fiesta Bowl over Michigan but lost to Georgia in the National Championship Game, finishing #2 or 3 in the Nation. Hopefully, our next coach has the Tedford magic (prior to Cal sucking the life out of him) and finishes with a winning conference record, which Cal hasn't managed since 2009, which was before they put intense academic restrictions on football players admissions

oski003 said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

---

Once again, I can tell some of you may not have played. .The Bears, especially the seniors, are not going to lay or play down vs Stanford in their final home game!. They are all competitors in spite of what people may think of the coaching staff. In so many cases, the head coach is nothing more than a figurehead (coach speak) to the players themselves. They have shown they trust one another, battle to the end, and have family, friends, and teammates to pridefully play for. It doesn't appear that their fight lessens at the end. Not to mention the incredible history behind Big Game. They don't "blame" the coaches as you suggest, they watch the tape and take personal responsibility (listen to Mendoza's presser after the game)..They have personal pride which I suggest is bigger than "playing for the coach". Being in the post game film room is their come-to-jesus-time, and no one wants to look bad or worse, look like they have given up on a play. Go Bears! Beat Furd!!

---

Your ad hominem argument is just absurd. Worse, you're entirely missing the point. No one accused the players of not caring. My point is I'm concerned they've tuned out the coaches. If that is the case, then it's effectively eleven individuals on the field each trying to do his individual best but still getting beat because they're not an unified whole. As someone who's played the game, you should know that teamwork is fundamental to success in football. Eleven individuals on different pages is unlikely to beat a team of eleven guys working in sync.

But go ahead and go back to defending Wilcox and his incompetent OC and HC. Tell us all about how because you played football, it doesn't matter if Wilcox has never had a winning conference record . Or how Wilcox is a great coach because you "can tell some of [us] may not have played." Surely you understand how absurd these arguments are. Yet, you seem to think they're worth posting.

---

The Cal coach before Wilcox, Sonny Dykes, had a #1 overall draft pick QB and still never had a winning conference record in four seasons. Six years after being fired by Cal, he went 9-0 and won the Big 12 Conference, won the Fiesta Bowl over Michigan but lost to Georgia in the National Championship Game, finishing #2 or 3 in the Nation. Hopefully, our next coach has the Tedford magic (prior to Cal sucking the life out of him) and finishes with a winning conference record, which Cal hasn't managed since 2009, which was before they put intense academic restrictions on football players admissions

---

This Cal team could easily be 9-1 or even 10-0 right now with better coaching.

oski003 said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

---

Once again, I can tell some of you may not have played. .The Bears, especially the seniors, are not going to lay or play down vs Stanford in their final home game!. They are all competitors in spite of what people may think of the coaching staff. In so many cases, the head coach is nothing more than a figurehead (coach speak) to the players themselves. They have shown they trust one another, battle to the end, and have family, friends, and teammates to pridefully play for. It doesn't appear that their fight lessens at the end. Not to mention the incredible history behind Big Game. They don't "blame" the coaches as you suggest, they watch the tape and take personal responsibility (listen to Mendoza's presser after the game)..They have personal pride which I suggest is bigger than "playing for the coach". Being in the post game film room is their come-to-jesus-time, and no one wants to look bad or worse, look like they have given up on a play. Go Bears! Beat Furd!!

---

Your ad hominem argument is just absurd. Worse, you're entirely missing the point. No one accused the players of not caring. My point is I'm concerned they've tuned out the coaches. If that is the case, then it's effectively eleven individuals on the field each trying to do his individual best but still getting beat because they're not an unified whole. As someone who's played the game, you should know that teamwork is fundamental to success in football. Eleven individuals on different pages is unlikely to beat a team of eleven guys working in sync.

But go ahead and go back to defending Wilcox and his incompetent OC and HC. Tell us all about how because you played football, it doesn't matter if Wilcox has never had a winning conference record . Or how Wilcox is a great coach because you "can tell some of [us] may not have played." Surely you understand how absurd these arguments are. Yet, you seem to think they're worth posting.

---

The Cal coach before Wilcox, Sonny Dykes, had a #1 overall draft pick QB and still never had a winning conference record in four seasons. Six years after being fired by Cal, he went 9-0 and won the Big 12 Conference, won the Fiesta Bowl over Michigan but lost to Georgia in the National Championship Game, finishing #2 or 3 in the Nation. Hopefully, our next coach has the Tedford magic (prior to Cal sucking the life out of him) and finishes with a winning conference record, which Cal hasn't managed since 2009, which was before they put intense academic restrictions on football players admissions

---

Dykes's successful year was the result of his inheriting a team heavy with experienced seniors. Check his record the following year. Did he suddenly forget how to coach? Or did his seniors graduate?

While I'm glad Jared went #1 overall in the draft, let's not kid ourselves that it was because Sonny Dykes was a good coach. If anything, the Dykes OLs were so bad that Jared had to get rid of the ball in about 2 seconds or risk taking a sack. This combined with Jared's success running the Bear Raid showed off the latter's quick decision making and accuracy. That's likely what attracted the NFL scouts since in the NFL, QBs don't get much time in the pocket.

Cal88 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

… and a bunch of teams every year hire a new coach who doesn't win.

It's time to give someone else a chance to win at Cal, but don't assume that hiring a new coach is a guarantee of winning.

---

Keeping Wilcox is a guarantee of not winning. I'd rather roll the dice, and if comes up snake eyes, keep rolling.

---

We have won 5 games this season. But, yeah, I doubt Wilcox can we in a conference championship at Cal.

---

5 games with a team that has the talent to get to double digit wins. Plus at this rate we will still have a losing record by the end of the season. That doesn't sound like winning to me.

---

People are getting carried away here. Our OL as a unit is in the bottom third or quarter of the conference, and skill players on offense are not very good at blocking. You can't win 10 games with that kind of an impedement.

---

Who recruits the players? Who is tasked with hiring coordinators and position coaches that are supposed to evaluate and develop OL talent? Wilcox is the reason we've had a mediocre-downright awful OL for 8 years.

calumnus said:

---

oski003 said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

We have two important games that the players want to win and also bowl chances that they will fight for.

---

Are you certain Wilcox hasn't already lost the team? Based on yesterday's performance, I'd guess the team's tuned out Wilcox and company. They're tired of losing. They're smart kids. They know Wilcox's playcalling and coaching is largely responsible for their lack of on-field success. Why should they continue to follow Wilcox? Which of them will run through a wall for him? How many kids now second guess his decisions?

---

Once again, I can tell some of you may not have played. .The Bears, especially the seniors, are not going to lay or play down vs Stanford in their final home game!. They are all competitors in spite of what people may think of the coaching staff. In so many cases, the head coach is nothing more than a figurehead (coach speak) to the players themselves. They have shown they trust one another, battle to the end, and have family, friends, and teammates to pridefully play for. It doesn't appear that their fight lessens at the end. Not to mention the incredible history behind Big Game. They don't "blame" the coaches as you suggest, they watch the tape and take personal responsibility (listen to Mendoza's presser after the game)..They have personal pride which I suggest is bigger than "playing for the coach". Being in the post game film room is their come-to-jesus-time, and no one wants to look bad or worse, look like they have given up on a play. Go Bears! Beat Furd!!

---

Your ad hominem argument is just absurd. Worse, you're entirely missing the point. No one accused the players of not caring. My point is I'm concerned they've tuned out the coaches. If that is the case, then it's effectively eleven individuals on the field each trying to do his individual best but still getting beat because they're not an unified whole. As someone who's played the game, you should know that teamwork is fundamental to success in football. Eleven individuals on different pages is unlikely to beat a team of eleven guys working in sync.

But go ahead and go back to defending Wilcox and his incompetent OC and HC. Tell us all about how because you played football, it doesn't matter if Wilcox has never had a winning conference record . Or how Wilcox is a great coach because you "can tell some of [us] may not have played." Surely you understand how absurd these arguments are. Yet, you seem to think they're worth posting.

---

The Cal coach before Wilcox, Sonny Dykes, had a #1 overall draft pick QB and still never had a winning conference record in four seasons. Six years after being fired by Cal, he went 9-0 and won the Big 12 Conference, won the Fiesta Bowl over Michigan but lost to Georgia in the National Championship Game, finishing #2 or 3 in the Nation. Hopefully, our next coach has the Tedford magic (prior to Cal sucking the life out of him) and finishes with a winning conference record, which Cal hasn't managed since 2009, which was before they put intense academic restrictions on football players admissions

---

This Cal team could easily be 9-1 or even 10-0 right now with better coaching.

---

Sure, why not?

Dykes record at Cal: 19-30
Dykes record elsewhere: 75-45, including winning the Fiesta Bowl and going to the Championship Game

Dykes conf record at Cal: 10-26
Dykes conf record elsewhere: 47-28

oski003 said:

---

Dykes record at Cal: 19-30
Dykes record elsewhere: 75-45, including winning the Fiesta Bowl and going to the Championship Game

Dykes conf record at Cal: 10-26
Dykes conf record elsewhere: 47-28

---

Keith Gilbertson record at Cal 20-26
Keith Gilbertson record at UW 7-16