From where we were? Yes it would be. It can't be the high-water mark going forward.

sluggo said:

---

Is 8 wins a possibility? Cal fans say yes. I say no.

---

it is possible, but not probable.

I am hoping Sagapolutele tears it up which would help.

calumnus said:

---

oskithepimp said:

---

Ron Rivera says yes. I say no.

Wilcox's overall record at Cal is 42-50. He's never had a winning conference season. We've paid him over $25M. He's extremely unlikely to change and become a great coach in his 9th season. We've seen what he can do, and it ain't much. I say unless we win 10 games and go to a really good bowl game, make his ass walk the plank and let's get a good coach before Cal has to walk the plank into college football nothingness.

I'm tired of this ***** The fans are ready (see the GameDay turnout last year - can't blame them for not turning out for lots of other games when we consistently suck), the collective is doing its part, we're getting good players, so it's time for the coach to elevate his game, or hit the ****ing bricks.

Go Bears.

---

I agree with everything you wrote except that
Wilcox has been paid closer to $40 million and will have received at least $50 million from Cal no matter what happens after the season assuming he is not extended.

And rather than his overall record, what is critical is his conference record where he loses twice as many as he wins. Even with a much easier ACC schedule last year he went 2-6 and now it is not just the $5 million a year we pay him, we are hiring and surrounding him with other head coaches as advisors and GMs in an effort to prop him up.

It was insanely stupid to keep extending him but it was almost as bad to not cut him loose and bring in Rivera instead last year or this when we had the chance. It really would not have cost more money, Wilcox is getting his no matter what. Keeping him another year with 7 or 8, even 9 wins is not going to move the needle. We need a new story to sell.

---

Is Rivera even interested in college coaching? Was that even a possibility?

Ron has presumably watched every Cal practice, and I suspect his answer reflects that.

• He thinks this team can/should be an 8-win team.
• However, will Cal 8-4 record get anybody's attention as an up an coming ACC team in the near future? I don't think so.

Ron does correctly identify the need to improve attendance and TV view-share as critical to the perception of Cal as a successful program. Unfortunately, this traditionally lags on-field improvement by a season or two. Tedford didn't draw consistently big crowds until his third season.

If we don't at least win more than 5.5 I'm going to have a kidney for sale.

sycasey said:

---

From where we were? Yes it would be. It can't be the high-water mark going forward.

---

nope. sorry. where we were is Wilcox's doing and after 9 years would be the high water mark. We are already in the going forward as far as Wilcox goes.

I'm sure it will be for Cal though.

I don't think we will have the luxury of the debate

JeffMcd said:

---

I think Willcox is a high-quality human being. I think he's a gracious guy. I think he's stoic, and has high integrity. I think if it has not been a "successful season" in Ron's eyes, Wilcox will make a smooth transition to new leadership. And I trust Ron to make that determination.

---

This. W/L is the most important metric, of course, but also Ron Rivera's take on how things are being run, after having closely observed the program for a year.

8-4 doesn't mean we're a success, or that Wilcox has turned the corner and can take us higher, but it would maybe be a launching pad for better things, no matter who's at the helm. And it would certainly catch the eye of some of these MFs who think we're going 4-8.

Anarchistbear said:

---

We've had 8 wins two times in ten years. This is the high water mark

---

we have better talent than the best Boise state teams, and the same coaching staff. They will get this done.

"Being a high quality human being in this era (rightfully) means upholding your contractual commitments and expecting others to do the same."

lol

To be fair the first metrics of success he mentioned were butts in seats and eyes on tv. So the required win total is whatever it takes to achieve first two. Might be 10, might be 8 idk. But I feel like the first 2 are more likely to matter in realignment than W/L.

It is hard to envision a scenario where we realize that without a step change in victories. Nothing has taken the winds out of the sails of attendance quicker than an uninspiring loss as soon as we get to 4-0 or crack the rankings.

bearsandgiants said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

We've had 8 wins two times in ten years. This is the high water mark

---

we have better talent than the best Boise state teams, and the same coaching staff. They will get this done.

---

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Quote:

---

and the same coaching staff.

---

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

sycasey said:

---

From where we were? Yes it would be. It can't be the high-water mark going forward.

---

nope. sorry. where we were is Wilcox's doing and after 9 years would be the high water mark. We are already in the going forward as far as Wilcox goes.

I'm sure it will be for Cal though.

I don't think we will have the luxury of the debate

---

Well yes, for Wilcox himself he needs to do better than his own high-water mark (which is 8 wins).

Big C said:

---

JeffMcd said:

---

I think Willcox is a high-quality human being. I think he's a gracious guy. I think he's stoic, and has high integrity. I think if it has not been a "successful season" in Ron's eyes, Wilcox will make a smooth transition to new leadership. And I trust Ron to make that determination.

---

This. W/L is the most important metric, of course, but also Ron Rivera's take on how things are being run, after having closely observed the program for a year.

8-4 doesn't mean we're a success, or that Wilcox has turned the corner and can take us higher, but it would maybe be a launching pad for better things, no matter who's at the helm. And it would certainly catch the eye of some of these MFs who think we're going 4-8.

---

Agree. 8-4 is not where Ron wants to end up. It is just the starting point.
To be accurate Ron has set the minimum starting point at 8 or 9.

We shall see….Some people value principles more than money. Too few perhaps, but they exist.

HearstMining wrote:

• "However, will Cal 8-4 record get anybody's attention as an up an coming ACC team in the near future? I don't think so."

I totally agree. While 8-4 will probably save Wilcox's job, right now Cal needs to be in the national debate. If we don't raise some eyebrows this year, I fear for the future of the program (as we know it). A 9 win season will at least have people talking about us, and we need that badly right now. Then, next year, we'd better get to 10 at least.

Riveras response as to what they would consider success, after noting butts in the seats and eye on the TV was " anything that puts us in a solid bowl...8 or 9 wins". In conjunction with that is the full stadiums by the end of the season and presumably good ratings on the TV.
Taken together this makes lots of sense. It means a team that has gained momentum and fan enthusiasm during the season (instead of deflating like last year), and gained an invitation to a major bowl game that people other than fans actually watch. The win total is an honest answer as to what is acceptable as a successful season this year, not a goal.
As to JW and how many wins saves his job. That is a question to be visited seriously at the end of the season after we have seen what the team gained or lacked and whether fixing the HC is the answer. Firing a head coach is all well and good assuming you hire a better one, but if the team is on an upsurge it can also be an upsetting move. JW's past performance does not bode well for him but 2025 is his. We'll see.

GO BEARS!

We gonna just jump to 10 wins ? Yes want but has the work been done for that result not so much

going4roses said:

---

We gonna just jump to 10 wins ? Yes want but has the work been done for that result not so much

---

Exactly. What Cal needs is unconnected to where the team is. First you need the players (not there yet) and then those players need experience (also not there yet), even if it is at another school.

going4roses said:

---

We gonna just jump to 10 wins ? Yes want but has the work been done for that result not so much

---

this is the easiest schedule we have ever faced. We damn well better just jump to 10 wins.

Honestly, if we have another season like last year, we're probably dead regardless. Changing coaches probably means a full rebuild, including losing JKS, and chances of doing that and making it to the next realignment aren't that great. Need to hope this year is a turning point.

Hmm … I guess maybe I'm just seeing things differently or something lol won't be the first time