Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC

---

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

2009: Rivera - defensive coordinator.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sdg/2009.htm

2010: Rivera - STILL defensive coordinator
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sdg/2010.htm

Quote:

---

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why?

---

Why? Who cares? I'm not the one making the decision. It doesn't matter who I think the next head coach should be. Heck, for all I know Rivera will name himself, but if he does, he won't be making the stupidly low salary you thought he should take to make up for Cal wasting money on Wilcox.

Wanting Rivera to be the head coach is fine. Uninspired, given the success rate of other old ex-NFL head coaches who have had far more NFL success than Rivera ever had, but fine. Spamming the board with it over multiple years when everyone's heard it over and over from you? Annoying as hell.

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC

---

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

2009: Rivera - defensive coordinator.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sdg/2009.htm

2010: Rivera - STILL defensive coordinator
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sdg/2010.htm

Quote:

---

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why?

---

Why? Who cares? I'm not the one making the decision. It doesn't matter who I think the next head coach should be. Heck, for all I know Rivera will name himself, but if he does, he won't be making the stupidly low salary you thought he should take to make up for Cal wasting money on Wilcox.

Wanting Rivera to be the head coach is fine. Uninspired, given the success rate of other old ex-NFL head coaches who have had far more NFL success than Rivera ever had, but fine. Spamming the board with it over multiple years when everyone's heard it over and over from you? Annoying as hell.

---

If you don't like speculating about coaching candidates why are you posting on a thread titled "Hypothetical" that is all about speculating about coaching candidates?

At this point with Rivera already at Cal and on Cal's payroll, I definitely would not call Rivera as head coach "inspired" anyway, it just a pretty obvious option to consider. The other option, which I generally prefer, is an up a coming offensive minded head coach or OC with a dynamic personality that Can recruit to Cal. Whether I actually prefer thst option to Rivera depends on who that guy is.

If we let Wilcox go it will free up about $1.5 million in 2026 and 2027 and $6 million in 2028 and beyond. If we pay any more than that it will need to come from donors. If Rivera is GM and HC it increases to $2.3 million in 2026 and 2027 and $6.8 million in 2028 and beyond. Anything above that is additional money that needs to be raised from donors.

However, here is the key: at Cal, under the House Settlement, unlike nearly every other P4 school, whatever additional money we raise and give to the coach will reduce the pool we can spend on NIL.
In order to be competitive in NIL, which I think is imperative, it looks like we will have to pay below market for a coach in 2026 and 2027.

If Rivera won't accept that and would rather stay GM at $800k and hire a young dynamic up and coming coach that will accept that, great. I will hope it is someone good.

If Rivera takes the job, but pays himself full market salary in 2026 and 2027 and as a result we cannot fully fund NIL, I think that would be a HUGE mistake. We need to surround Sagapolutele with talent and a hire good OC. I would not want Rivera as HC if he is demanding $5 to $10 million salary in 2026 and 2027 and we cannot fully fuind our NIL allowance under House as a result.

If donors step up to pay Rivera a $5million+ salary in 2026 and 2027, pay off Wilcox, hire a top OC and fully fund the $20 million in NIL under House… great, I just don't see that as likely.

That is why I suggest the possibility that Rivera understands that budget constraint and if he wants to be the head coach would wisely accept less (still 7 figures) and spend the budget on a top OC and NIL to have good players. If he doesn't want to, then he won't. If he doesn't understand that and pays himself a huge market salary and has to skimp on the OC and/or NIL then he was a bad choice as GM much less HC. We don't know what he will do, but we can discuss the options. And if you don't like doing that then don't read and comment on a thread that is doing that.

---

We've discussed the Rivera hypothetical enough for me and I just don't think it is going to happen, so I'm not going to address that. But I want to address some underlying assumptions that you are making on the money.

Let's be clear. Cal is not under any restrictions that other schools don't have other than those Cal chooses to impose on itself. UCLA clearly does not have these restrictions, so you can't say they are UC imposed. They are restrictions internal to Cal. And part of the "things are different under Lyons and Rivera" is waiting to see if Cal will continue to have these self imposed restrictions.

In fiscal year 2024, the athletic department got $37M in "Direct Institutional Support". In other words, the chancellor wrote a check. In addition, even with that the athletic department ran a $29M deficit. That had to get paid by somebody. I have to believe that, like every other school, the chancellor has the authority to write a check for the buyout and new contract out of his discretionary fund. Whether he chooses to or has the political capital to may be a different story.

UCLA literally just fired their coach on a dime. They didn't have to spend months lining up donors to pay the buyout before they made a move. If Cal has to do that, it is because Cal has chosen to do that.

To be clear on my personal opinion, I think revenue sports and non-revenue sports spending have gotten completely out of hand. When we were running deficits of $5M, I don't really care. $50M and $60M, that is ridiculous to me. (to be clear, most of that issue is not football and is separate from this discussion). I think at this point if Cal fans and students want a successful program, they need to step up and pay for a successful program. But I don't make those decisions, the chancellor does and he has it in his power to deem this important enough to pay for. And basically, between the university (the chancellor), the donors, and the students, those three are where the money comes from and if Cal wants a competitive program, those three sources need to come up with the money for it. They can't rob Peter to pay Paul. They have to pay the buyout. They have to pay a competitive coaching salary. They have to pay competitive NIL. They have to pay assistant coaches, recruiting budgets, and all the other things that go into running a football program. That is what we are waiting to see. And if they don't want to, hey, cool. We have our answer. If it is not a thing the community values enough, then it isn't.

There is no reason paying the coach more would reduce the amount the school pays in NIL. Cal needs to pay the $20M max in NIL like everyone else. Period.

To be clear, if Cal thinks that other school's alums are not going to be dumping in additional private NIL over the $20M, they are naive. We are already seeing it. And the bottom line is the first time the NCAA rejects an NIL contract between a private party and a player, they will get sued and lose. They know this. They aren't going to reject any. So alums better be ready to contribute to NIL. I don't know how much we will need, but I'd guess tens of millions over and above the $20M. Private donors are not part of the House settlement. Individual players are not part of the House settlement. There is no collective bargaining agreement. The House settlement does not apply to them.

Cal needs to pay the buyout of Wilcox's contract. Cal can do that. If they want to fire Wilcox now or at the end of the season and are requiring donors to pay for it first rather than either footing the bill or paying it now and asking for support later, that is because Cal won't, not because Cal can't. If Cal wants to be competitive, they need to be able to decide today that it isn't working and fire him by the end of the day. If that is a months or years long process, Cal can't be competitive.

I don't care to entertain whether Rivera will do the job for pennies or free and that frees up money because if we need to do that we've already lost. Cal needs to pay a competitive salary. I'd say they need to pay $5M a year now and be prepared to go to $10M if there is rapid, dramatic success, and also be prepared that these numbers keep growing.

I get why you are doing this analysis. This is how Cal has worked. But we are told Cal is supporting football. What I've laid out is supporting football. If we are still under the budget constraints you describe, we are not supporting football. We may be putting more money on it than before. We may be saying "yeah, I like football", but we are not supporting football. Next year, if we are not paying a head coach not named Wilcox a market rate salary in line with median coaching salaries in our conference, if we are not paying assistants in like with median in our conference, if we are not paying NIL in line with median in our conference, if we are not paying football expenses in line with median in our conference, we are cooked. So I don't really care if Rivera will do this for free.

I don't care if money comes from student fees, donors, or the university. If you want to be competitive, it needs to come from somewhere. If you don't want to be competitive. Fine. In the past, the messaging has been "I want to be competitive" and "I want to pay noncompetitive dollars". We need to sync these up. Competitive for Competitive price, or Noncompetitive for Noncompetitive price.

But again. Cal CAN do it. It is whether Cal WANTS to do it.

And if I'm wrong about that and Cal CAN'T do it, like it or not we have our answer. But we have to stop assuming that Cal can't do it because UCLA is running bigger deficits and still doing it.

We shouldn't be entertaining your scenario because it is maintaining excuses Cal has always made. Rivera as coach is a red herring. I'd say Cal needs to spend $70M a year on football to be competitive and be aware that those budgets are ever increasing.

---

calumnus said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC

---

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

2009: Rivera - defensive coordinator.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sdg/2009.htm

2010: Rivera - STILL defensive coordinator
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sdg/2010.htm

Quote:

---

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why?

---

Why? Who cares? I'm not the one making the decision. It doesn't matter who I think the next head coach should be. Heck, for all I know Rivera will name himself, but if he does, he won't be making the stupidly low salary you thought he should take to make up for Cal wasting money on Wilcox.

Wanting Rivera to be the head coach is fine. Uninspired, given the success rate of other old ex-NFL head coaches who have had far more NFL success than Rivera ever had, but fine. Spamming the board with it over multiple years when everyone's heard it over and over from you? Annoying as hell.

---

If you don't like speculating about coaching candidates why are you posting on a thread titled "Hypothetical" that is all about speculating about coaching candidates?

At this point with Rivera already at Cal and on Cal's payroll, I definitely would not call Rivera as head coach "inspired" anyway, it just a pretty obvious option to consider. The other option, which I generally prefer, is an up a coming offensive minded head coach or OC with a dynamic personality that Can recruit to Cal. Whether I actually prefer thst option to Rivera depends on who that guy is.

If we let Wilcox go it will free up about $1.5 million in 2026 and 2027 and $6 million in 2028 and beyond. If we pay any more than that it will need to come from donors. If Rivera is GM and HC it increases to $2.3 million in 2026 and 2027 and $6.8 million in 2028 and beyond. Anything above that is additional money that needs to be raised from donors.

However, here is the key: at Cal, under the House Settlement, unlike nearly every other P4 school, whatever additional money we raise and give to the coach will reduce the pool we can spend on NIL.
In order to be competitive in NIL, which I think is imperative, it looks like we will have to pay below market for a coach in 2026 and 2027.

If Rivera won't accept that and would rather stay GM at $800k and hire a young dynamic up and coming coach that will accept that, great. I will hope it is someone good.

If Rivera takes the job, but pays himself full market salary in 2026 and 2027 and as a result we cannot fully fund NIL, I think that would be a HUGE mistake. We need to surround Sagapolutele with talent and a hire good OC. I would not want Rivera as HC if he is demanding $5 to $10 million salary in 2026 and 2027 and we cannot fully fuind our NIL allowance under House as a result.

If donors step up to pay Rivera a $5million+ salary in 2026 and 2027, pay off Wilcox, hire a top OC and fully fund the $20 million in NIL under House… great, I just don't see that as likely.

That is why I suggest the possibility that Rivera understands that budget constraint and if he wants to be the head coach would wisely accept less (still 7 figures) and spend the budget on a top OC and NIL to have good players. If he doesn't want to, then he won't. If he doesn't understand that and pays himself a huge market salary and has to skimp on the OC and/or NIL then he was a bad choice as GM much less HC. We don't know what he will do, but we can discuss the options. And if you don't like doing that then don't read and comment on a thread that is doing that.

---

We've discussed the Rivera hypothetical enough for me and I just don't think it is going to happen, so I'm not going to address that. But I want to address some underlying assumptions that you are making on the money.

Let's be clear. Cal is not under any restrictions that other schools don't have other than those Cal chooses to impose on itself. UCLA clearly does not have these restrictions, so you can't say they are UC imposed. They are restrictions internal to Cal. And part of the "things are different under Lyons and Rivera" is waiting to see if Cal will continue to have these self imposed restrictions.

In fiscal year 2024, the athletic department got $37M in "Direct Institutional Support". In other words, the chancellor wrote a check. In addition, even with that the athletic department ran a $29M deficit. That had to get paid by somebody. I have to believe that, like every other school, the chancellor has the authority to write a check for the buyout and new contract out of his discretionary fund. Whether he chooses to or has the political capital to may be a different story.

UCLA literally just fired their coach on a dime. They didn't have to spend months lining up donors to pay the buyout before they made a move. If Cal has to do that, it is because Cal has chosen to do that.

To be clear on my personal opinion, I think revenue sports and non-revenue sports spending have gotten completely out of hand. When we were running deficits of $5M, I don't really care. $50M and $60M, that is ridiculous to me. (to be clear, most of that issue is not football and is separate from this discussion). I think at this point if Cal fans and students want a successful program, they need to step up and pay for a successful program. But I don't make those decisions, the chancellor does and he has it in his power to deem this important enough to pay for. And basically, between the university (the chancellor), the donors, and the students, those three are where the money comes from and if Cal wants a competitive program, those three sources need to come up with the money for it. They can't rob Peter to pay Paul. They have to pay the buyout. They have to pay a competitive coaching salary. They have to pay competitive NIL. They have to pay assistant coaches, recruiting budgets, and all the other things that go into running a football program. That is what we are waiting to see. And if they don't want to, hey, cool. We have our answer. If it is not a thing the community values enough, then it isn't.

There is no reason paying the coach more would reduce the amount the school pays in NIL. Cal needs to pay the $20M max in NIL like everyone else. Period.

To be clear, if Cal thinks that other school's alums are not going to be dumping in additional private NIL over the $20M, they are naive. We are already seeing it. And the bottom line is the first time the NCAA rejects an NIL contract between a private party and a player, they will get sued and lose. They know this. They aren't going to reject any. So alums better be ready to contribute to NIL. I don't know how much we will need, but I'd guess tens of millions over and above the $20M. Private donors are not part of the House settlement. Individual players are not part of the House settlement. There is no collective bargaining agreement. The House settlement does not apply to them.

Cal needs to pay the buyout of Wilcox's contract. Cal can do that. If they want to fire Wilcox now or at the end of the season and are requiring donors to pay for it first rather than either footing the bill or paying it now and asking for support later, that is because Cal won't, not because Cal can't. If Cal wants to be competitive, they need to be able to decide today that it isn't working and fire him by the end of the day. If that is a months or years long process, Cal can't be competitive.

I don't care to entertain whether Rivera will do the job for pennies or free and that frees up money because if we need to do that we've already lost. Cal needs to pay a competitive salary. I'd say they need to pay $5M a year now and be prepared to go to $10M if there is rapid, dramatic success, and also be prepared that these numbers keep growing.

I get why you are doing this analysis. This is how Cal has worked. But we are told Cal is supporting football. What I've laid out is supporting football. If we are still under the budget constraints you describe, we are not supporting football. We may be putting more money on it than before. We may be saying "yeah, I like football", but we are not supporting football. Next year, if we are not paying a head coach not named Wilcox a market rate salary in line with median coaching salaries in our conference, if we are not paying assistants in like with median in our conference, if we are not paying NIL in line with median in our conference, if we are not paying football expenses in line with median in our conference, we are cooked. So I don't really care if Rivera will do this for free.

I don't care if money comes from student fees, donors, or the university. If you want to be competitive, it needs to come from somewhere. If you don't want to be competitive. Fine. In the past, the messaging has been "I want to be competitive" and "I want to pay noncompetitive dollars". We need to sync these up. Competitive for Competitive price, or Noncompetitive for Noncompetitive price.

But again. Cal CAN do it. It is whether Cal WANTS to do it.

And if I'm wrong about that and Cal CAN'T do it, like it or not we have our answer. But we have to stop assuming that Cal can't do it because UCLA is running bigger deficits and still doing it.

We shouldn't be entertaining your scenario because it is maintaining excuses Cal has always made. Rivera as coach is a red herring. I'd say Cal needs to spend $70M a year on football to be competitive and be aware that those budgets are ever increasing.

---

UCLA currently gets $60 million from the B1G.
Cal currently gets $15 million from the ACC.

As members of the P4, both schools are committed to paying $20 million in NIL out of those revenues under the House Settlement.

UCLA's buyout of Foster is half of what Cal's buyout of Wilcox will likely be even though Foster had more years left on his contract.

Both schools are under financial attack by the Trump Administration with huge cuts to Federally funded research, the elimination of the Department of Education and the Pell Grants students use to pay the university, lawsuits and lists of professors being sent to the Justice Department accusing professors (many of whom are Jewish) of "antisemitism." The UC system has instituted a system wide hiring freeze and pay freeze. We are now four weeks into a Federal shutdown as well.

I have laid out multiple options. The first is Cal looks at the above and realizes that at least for the next few years, Cal is the Oakland A's competing with the Yankees and the Dodgers and we have to play Moneyball. We can't spend money like the other P4 schools, we have to spend A LOT smarter. We are committed to spending the $20 million on NIL and that is critical. We need good players, starting with Sagapolutele. If we need to find a bargain (high value/low cost) coach to do it, at least until 2028 (or 2029) so be it.

Now another possibility is Cal finds its whale donors, one or more of our 22 billionaire alums and funds that $70 million you want, because I don't think expecting or hoping the university to pay it from the money Cal gets from California taxpayers at this time is realistic. If we find those whale donors we are all overjoyed. Hopefully they write big checks to the university for research and education too. If Rivera is spending his time soliciting those guys for big money and we think Rivera is the best guy to be doing that great. However, I don't think we can plan on whale donors giving us $70 million. That is like planning on winning the Lottery to fund your kids college education next year. The need to move on from Wilcox is urgent.

Another more out there suggestion I have made in the past is Cal outsources the management of the revenue sports to an alumni run non profit that would receive the revenues and hire/fire/pay the coaches and players, manage the game day and media (replacing Learfield) and market the team. Donations would get voting shares which would hopefully spur a lot more donations than the old system of "give your money to Knowlton and watch him flush it down the toilet." Importantly the NewCo could also borrow against future revenues/donations which could help get us to that $70 million you want. However, I doubt this idea would get any traction until we try out the new arrangement with Lyons and Rivera running the show and they fail, in which case it would probably be too late.

So we are back to Moneyball on the coaching hire or hoping Rivera gets the whale donors to step up because our media revenue shortfall is real and I don't think hoping/demanding/expecting "the university" to invest $70 million in 2026 is a realistic strategy,

---

BrightBear said:

---

You sound like you want wilcox .

---

calumnus said:

---

BrightBear said:

---

You sound like you want wilcox .

---

Absolutely NOT. I have been one of Wilcox's biggest critics on this board since he was hired. I was one of the few who was adamant about how horrible the 6 year extension was and that it might kill our program, which it almost did/still might. We tried giving Wilcox back to back Top 20 Portal classes, he had a great defense, the returning Pac-12 rushing leader and great back ups, 4 star WRs and a QB that is the front runner for the Heisman this year, the Calgorithm, a huge Gameday crowd…. And Wilcox went 2-6 in a really weak ACC. And it was ALL on him. He has mismanaged his staff for 9 years. Bad OC hire after bad and then enforcing his ill conceived "conservative" strategy on them. This year's offense is worse than any that we have had since Holmoe, especially given the competition. I am for moving on from Wilcox and just argue that if we have to do it on the cheap because of our financial situation then we have to do it on the cheap. Because we have to do it.

That is where all the Rivera debate comes about. I am not "the President of the Ron Rivera Fan Club" as some seem to think. I am not under the illusion that he is a great hire at this point all things being equal. If he takes the job he will need to hire a top OC and we will need to get him lots of good players to coach up. If he won't move over from GM to HC at a price that allows us to do that I'd rather hire that top OC as head coach. But we have to move on from Wilcox and cannot let money be the reason we don't.

---

Quote:

---

UCLA currently gets $60 million from the B1G.
Cal currently gets $15 million from the ACC.

As members of the P4, both schools are committed to paying $20 million in NIL out of those revenues under the House Settlement.

UCLA's buyout of Foster is half of what Cal's buyout of Wilcox will likely be even though Foster had more years left on his contract.

Both schools are under financial attack by the Trump Administration with huge cuts to Federally funded research, the elimination of the Department of Education and the Pell Grants students use to pay the university, lawsuits and lists of professors being sent to the Justice Department accusing professors (many of whom are Jewish) of "antisemitism." The UC system has instituted a system wide hiring freeze and pay freeze. We are now four weeks into a Federal shutdown as well.

I have laid out multiple options. The first is Cal looks at the above and realizes that at least for the next few years, Cal is the Oakland A's competing with the Yankees and the Dodgers and we have to play Moneyball. We can't spend money like the other P4 schools, we have to spend A LOT smarter. We are committed to spending the $20 million on NIL and that is critical. We need good players, starting with Sagapolutele. If we need to find a bargain (high value/low cost) coach to do it, at least until 2028 (or 2029) so be it. That can also be a coach that accepts back loaded contract. Or maybe private equity can legalize those payments? We are going to need to get creative.

Now another possibility is Cal finds its whale donors, one or more of our 22 billionaire alums and funds that $70 million you want, because I don't think expecting or hoping the university to pay it from the money Cal gets from California taxpayers at this time is realistic. If we find those whale donors we are all overjoyed. Hopefully they write big checks to the university for research and education too. If Rivera is spending his time soliciting those guys for big money and we think Rivera is the best guy to be doing that great. However, I don't think we can plan on whale donors giving us $70 million. That is like planning on winning the Lottery to fund your kids college education next year. The need to move on from Wilcox is urgent.

Another more out there suggestion I have made in the past is Cal outsources the management of the revenue sports to an alumni run non profit that would receive the revenues and hire/fire/pay the coaches and players, manage the game day and media (replacing Learfield) and market the team. Donations would get voting shares which would hopefully spur a lot more donations than the old system of "give your money to Knowlton and watch him flush it down the toilet." Importantly the NewCo could also borrow against future revenues/donations which could help get us to that $70 million you want. However, I doubt this idea would get any traction until we try out the new arrangement with Lyons and Rivera running the show and they fail, in which case it would probably be too late.

So we are back to Moneyball on the coaching hire or hoping Rivera gets the whale donors to step up because our media revenue shortfall is real and I don't think hoping/demanding/expecting "the university" to invest $70 million in 2026 is a realistic strategy,

---

philly1121 said:

---

Quote:

---

UCLA currently gets $60 million from the B1G.
Cal currently gets $15 million from the ACC.

As members of the P4, both schools are committed to paying $20 million in NIL out of those revenues under the House Settlement.

UCLA's buyout of Foster is half of what Cal's buyout of Wilcox will likely be even though Foster had more years left on his contract.

Both schools are under financial attack by the Trump Administration with huge cuts to Federally funded research, the elimination of the Department of Education and the Pell Grants students use to pay the university, lawsuits and lists of professors being sent to the Justice Department accusing professors (many of whom are Jewish) of "antisemitism." The UC system has instituted a system wide hiring freeze and pay freeze. We are now four weeks into a Federal shutdown as well.

I have laid out multiple options. The first is Cal looks at the above and realizes that at least for the next few years, Cal is the Oakland A's competing with the Yankees and the Dodgers and we have to play Moneyball. We can't spend money like the other P4 schools, we have to spend A LOT smarter. We are committed to spending the $20 million on NIL and that is critical. We need good players, starting with Sagapolutele. If we need to find a bargain (high value/low cost) coach to do it, at least until 2028 (or 2029) so be it. That can also be a coach that accepts back loaded contract. Or maybe private equity can legalize those payments? We are going to need to get creative.

Now another possibility is Cal finds its whale donors, one or more of our 22 billionaire alums and funds that $70 million you want, because I don't think expecting or hoping the university to pay it from the money Cal gets from California taxpayers at this time is realistic. If we find those whale donors we are all overjoyed. Hopefully they write big checks to the university for research and education too. If Rivera is spending his time soliciting those guys for big money and we think Rivera is the best guy to be doing that great. However, I don't think we can plan on whale donors giving us $70 million. That is like planning on winning the Lottery to fund your kids college education next year. The need to move on from Wilcox is urgent.

Another more out there suggestion I have made in the past is Cal outsources the management of the revenue sports to an alumni run non profit that would receive the revenues and hire/fire/pay the coaches and players, manage the game day and media (replacing Learfield) and market the team. Donations would get voting shares which would hopefully spur a lot more donations than the old system of "give your money to Knowlton and watch him flush it down the toilet." Importantly the NewCo could also borrow against future revenues/donations which could help get us to that $70 million you want. However, I doubt this idea would get any traction until we try out the new arrangement with Lyons and Rivera running the show and they fail, in which case it would probably be too late.

So we are back to Moneyball on the coaching hire or hoping Rivera gets the whale donors to step up because our media revenue shortfall is real and I don't think hoping/demanding/expecting "the university" to invest $70 million in 2026 is a realistic strategy,

---

UCLA gets more money than us because no one wanted us. That is squarely our issue. We took the scraps the ACC gave us.

I'm interested to know how the government shutdown affects Cal Athletics, since the school and Athletics are supposed to be separate.

This next paragraph of yours is most interesting. When you say "Moneyball" you're talking about sabermetrics. And honestly, that's not possible in college football. There is no hidden value anymore. Players move about the landscape because they are in demand. Schools recognize this and attract with NIL money. Moneyball only applies if you find a hidden gem from high school or junior college. This is why some teams get so good so fast. They see a star player and attract him with money. But we can't be the Oakland A's of college football. We have nothing to attract a star player to come here. No coach. No record. Not enough money.

Donors. Honestly this is the most absurd. Whale donors. You know, Calumnus, if these billionaire alumni cared about the school enough and thought they would get a "return" on their investment, we would have already seen it. The only other conclusion is that the Cal Athletics office or Alumni Association or Ron Rivera is so inept, that they cannot get meetings with these whale donors to make a pitch. So, I'm not sure the whale donors you describe give a rip about the university. Are we willing to give Tony Xu naming rights so we can say Door Dash Stadium? What's the consensus on that?

There's no way the university would allow outsourcing of revenue sports.

You can play moneyball with coaching. There are some coaches who may take a look at us. But is a coach going to want to go to a probable vacancy with FSU or us? Gators? I think the longer it goes, we are going to find it harder and harder to attract a coaching talent when we have no idea what's going to happen past 2030.

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

HearstMining said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

I think Troy Taylor should definitely be on a short list to replace Wilcox. He was always going to be an outsider at Stanford and the reasons for dismissal sounded pretty soft and would have been glossed over if they had believed Taylor was "one of them". Regarding his record there, he was clearly a victim of Stanford's indecision over whether to seriously compete in the new Portal/NIL world.

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

I think Troy Taylor should definitely be on a short list to replace Wilcox. He was always going to be an outsider at Stanford and the reasons for dismissal sounded pretty soft and would have been glossed over if they had believed Taylor was "one of them". Regarding his record there, he was clearly a victim of Stanford's indecision over whether to seriously compete in the new Portal/NIL world.

---

Still pretty crazy that Luck fired him in March soon after taking the job when the hiring cycle was over. Clearly not something that Lyons or Rivera would do

---

HearstMining said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

I think Troy Taylor should definitely be on a short list to replace Wilcox. He was always going to be an outsider at Stanford and the reasons for dismissal sounded pretty soft and would have been glossed over if they had believed Taylor was "one of them". Regarding his record there, he was clearly a victim of Stanford's indecision over whether to seriously compete in the new Portal/NIL world.

---

concernedparent said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

I think Troy Taylor should definitely be on a short list to replace Wilcox. He was always going to be an outsider at Stanford and the reasons for dismissal sounded pretty soft and would have been glossed over if they had believed Taylor was "one of them". Regarding his record there, he was clearly a victim of Stanford's indecision over whether to seriously compete in the new Portal/NIL world.

---

Most schools have NIL issues holding them back. Taylor went 3-9 two seasons straight with no end in sight at the school that most resembles us besides UCLA and maybe UVA. We saw his teams up close when we beat them twice; they played sloppy and undisciplined.That's disqualifying even absent controversy.

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

I think Troy Taylor should definitely be on a short list to replace Wilcox. He was always going to be an outsider at Stanford and the reasons for dismissal sounded pretty soft and would have been glossed over if they had believed Taylor was "one of them". Regarding his record there, he was clearly a victim of Stanford's indecision over whether to seriously compete in the new Portal/NIL world.

---

Most schools have NIL issues holding them back. Taylor went 3-9 two seasons straight with no end in sight at the school that most resembles us besides UCLA and maybe UVA. We saw his teams up close when we beat them twice; they played sloppy and undisciplined.That's disqualifying even absent controversy.

---

The problem at Stanford wasn't NIL so much as it was the Portal itself. Stanford has never like undergrad transfers and admissions needs to vet everyone.

Stanford lost 2 transfers in 2021 and brought in 0.

Stanford lost 9 transfers in 2022 and brought in 1.

Stanford lost 21 transfers in 2023 and brought in 5.

Stanford lost 13 transfers in 2024 and brought in 4,

Stanford lost 27 transfers in 2025 and brought in 18, but that was mostly after Taylor was fired.

Instead Taylor had been trying to build through HS recruiting. In 2023 he had the #39 class (only 20 commits), in 2024 he had the #37 class (only 25 commits) and in 2025 he had the #58 class (only 17 commits).

So you can see it was just massive attrition of scholarship players through the Portal with inadequate replacement. I don't care how good you can coach up the players, you are going to lose a lot of games in the 2023 Pac-12 and even the 2024 ACC with Stanford walkons.

---

You don't hire someone for this type of job on a resume of "he might have been good if only..." Once you need to start making excuses for the performance, why are you looking at him? Because he played for Cal?

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

I think Troy Taylor should definitely be on a short list to replace Wilcox. He was always going to be an outsider at Stanford and the reasons for dismissal sounded pretty soft and would have been glossed over if they had believed Taylor was "one of them". Regarding his record there, he was clearly a victim of Stanford's indecision over whether to seriously compete in the new Portal/NIL world.

---

Most schools have NIL issues holding them back. Taylor went 3-9 two seasons straight with no end in sight at the school that most resembles us besides UCLA and maybe UVA. We saw his teams up close when we beat them twice; they played sloppy and undisciplined.That's disqualifying even absent controversy.

---

The problem at Stanford wasn't NIL so much as it was the Portal itself. Stanford has never like undergrad transfers and admissions needs to vet everyone.

Stanford lost 2 transfers in 2021 and brought in 0.

Stanford lost 9 transfers in 2022 and brought in 1.

Stanford lost 21 transfers in 2023 and brought in 5.

Stanford lost 13 transfers in 2024 and brought in 4,

Stanford lost 27 transfers in 2025 and brought in 18, but that was mostly after Taylor was fired.

Instead Taylor had been trying to build through HS recruiting. In 2023 he had the #39 class (only 20 commits), in 2024 he had the #37 class (only 25 commits) and in 2025 he had the #58 class (only 17 commits).

So you can see it was just massive attrition of scholarship players through the Portal with inadequate replacement. I don't care how good you can coach up the players, you are going to lose a lot of games in the 2023 Pac-12 and even the 2024 ACC with Stanford walkons.

---

You don't hire someone for this type of job on a resume of "he might have been good if only..." Once you need to start making excuses for the performance, why are you looking at him? Because he played for Cal?

---

MrGPAC said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So I do feel some connection to both, but I refuse to make excuses for either. Lyons should have fired Knowlton on day 1, gone with an interim then (Shockey promotes AD McGraw, a Cal grad who has been in charge off the football program). Maybe even ask Rivera to come in as Cal's head coach then, ahead of Fall camp, but more realistically at the end of last season. I will say that Rivera hasn't been in the position, "with the keys," long enough to effect substantive change, but I've been very disappointed with his public statements. I don't know that a midseason firing is best, but I think we need to move on from Wilcox after the last game, regardless.

---

You're one of the few more reasonable ones.

---

Nobody who builds their whole online identity around Ron Rivera coaching Cal football at a wage far below what normal college football coaches make is anywhere in the vicinity of reasonable. At least now we know the backstory about why he stans for him so hard.

Quote:

---

The rest are fanatical in their blind faith in RR and Lyons even though neither have done anything to change the Cal football trajectory since each of them was installed.

---

There's another person that deserves to be on that blind faith list who hasn't done anything to change the Cal football trajectory, but you can't speak that truth out loud on this board.

Quote:

---

Lyons allowed Knownothin to retire instead of firing him for cause

---

Knowlton didn't retire. He was fired. People that retire during a contract don't continue getting paid the rest of their contract after the fact. They allowed Knowlton to pretend that he was leaving of his own accord.

I would have done my best Eddie DeBartolo imitation at the press conference and yelled "He's Gone!"

---

LOL, you joined this forum on August 13, 2025 and have 61 posts.

I have been on this forum since 2008 (and it's earlier predecessors) and, I am somewhat embarrassed to say, am approaching 35,000 posts. Saying my "entire online identity" (all 34,000+ posts!) is that Ron Rivera would take the job below market is so insanely ridiculous I can only laugh, while at the same time misstates what I have actually said about Rivera.

I have never said Rivera would do anything, How can you or I know? We are not him.

I did say when Rivera was fired by the Commanders two years ago that there was a CHANCE he would come back to Cal and work for far less than he could make in the NFL, which many said would "never" happen, but did in fact eventually happen, though as GM instead of HC.

Again, the issue we are trying to address is the cost of moving on from Wilcox, which many thought was insurmountable because they thought it was $16 million (last year) or $10 million (this year) more than we are already spending. However, as I have been saying all along, the cost of firing Wilcox is not Wilcox's contract, which we will actually save money on if he is fired, it is the cost of his replacement and that there are potentially low cost options (which we will need because we need to fund NIL from the same pool of donor money).

As one potential option, I have said that there is a CHANCE Rivera would agree to work as HC with a backloaded contract: ie, below market in 2026 and 2027 (but at least $1million more than he makes now) while we continue to pay Wilcox, then market rates beyond once we are clear of Wilcox and as our ACC media share increases. Again, we don't know until he is asked.

If Ron doesn't want or accept that, and we don't know if he would until he is asked, a second option, which some prefer anyway, is for Ron to hire a young up and coming offensive minded HC or OC who would accept a contract similar to what I laid out for Rivera, below market payments in 2026 and 2027 with market payments beyond when we have more money and if he is successful.

A third remote possibility, which would be great but is like planning on winning the lottery, is Rivera finds a whale donor or group of donors, who will fully fund NIL ($20 million per year) and put up the money to pay an established coach the market rate (something Cal has never done).

I hope that makes my opinion clearer.

---

Brilliant job of showing how your online identity totally isn't built around Ron Rivera by reposting the same garbage you've been posting about Ron Rivera for years.

But then, who bumps a 2010 thread six years later because his online identity isn't completely wrapped around being Ron Rivera's #1 advocate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/37181/replies/1274195

---

So instead of adding anything constructive your whole purpose here is to go after me personally? Even digging up a 9 year old 2016 thread?

And what does it show? That in 2010, I was one of several posters that suggested Ron Rivera, then a Linebackers Coach for the San Diego Chargers, would be a good Head Coaching candidate for the Cal Bears if we ever moved on from Tedford. Many questioned whether he was Head Coaching material, I said that he had the qualities you look for in a head coach and lo and behold 6 years later he took a team to the Super Bowl as Head Coach. I am humiliated.

---

For the president of the Ron Rivera fan club, you don't know his coaching history very well. He was only very briefly the LB coach for the Chargers and was already on his second successful stint as an NFL defensive coordinator. Cal has hired head football coaches with far thinner resumes than Ron Rivera. You didn't uncover any nugget there. The problem was that he was already too successful for a school like Cal to be an appealing job for him. He was looking for a pro job, which he eventually got.

https://commanderswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/commanders/2023/11/25/washington-commanders-ron-riveras-track-record-as-a-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio/79647206007/

But congrats for you. You really know how to pick those career .500 NFL coaches, one of whom got a five year show cause penalty before he could coach in college again.

---

Well, you are the one who thinks I am the "president of the Ron Rivera fan club" despite my criticism of his statements as GM and you claiming you know more about him and what he wants. However, at the time of my 2010 post that you dug up, Rivera was a linebacker coach for the San Diego Chargers after getting let go by Chicago where he was DC, but yes, he clearly had head coach ambitions, which, if we were hiring at the time (which we weren't) Cal might very have fulfilled.

And since you seem so obsessed with me, if you do more research into my posts on the subject you would see that I have always advocated for an offensive oriented head coach in general, which Rivera is not, and you would find even more posts suggesting Troy Taylor and even some suggesting Mike Pawlawski. And yes, Herm Edwards, who I clearly knew turned out to be a bad choice for ASU when I pointed it out to you.

Yeah, a bunch of Cal guys. I am a Cal fan. However, I also believe that when hiring an up and coming guy there is an advantage to hiring a Cal alum because they know Cal and are going to be able recruit to Cal best, and also if successful, are more likely to stay long term rather than use Cal as a stepping stone.

But instead of attacking me, why don't you suggest who you think we should hire as head coach and why? Or did you join this board two months ago just to be a troll and defend the current coaching staff by attacking its critics? Did I criticize a coach that is a family me member? Are you even a Cal fan?

---

I think Troy Taylor should definitely be on a short list to replace Wilcox. He was always going to be an outsider at Stanford and the reasons for dismissal sounded pretty soft and would have been glossed over if they had believed Taylor was "one of them". Regarding his record there, he was clearly a victim of Stanford's indecision over whether to seriously compete in the new Portal/NIL world.

---

Most schools have NIL issues holding them back. Taylor went 3-9 two seasons straight with no end in sight at the school that most resembles us besides UCLA and maybe UVA. We saw his teams up close when we beat them twice; they played sloppy and undisciplined.That's disqualifying even absent controversy.

---

The problem at Stanford wasn't NIL so much as it was the Portal itself. Stanford has never like undergrad transfers and admissions needs to vet everyone.

Stanford lost 2 transfers in 2021 and brought in 0.

Stanford lost 9 transfers in 2022 and brought in 1.

Stanford lost 21 transfers in 2023 and brought in 5.

Stanford lost 13 transfers in 2024 and brought in 4,

Stanford lost 27 transfers in 2025 and brought in 18, but that was mostly after Taylor was fired.

Instead Taylor had been trying to build through HS recruiting. In 2023 he had the #39 class (only 20 commits), in 2024 he had the #37 class (only 25 commits) and in 2025 he had the #58 class (only 17 commits).

So you can see it was just massive attrition of scholarship players through the Portal with inadequate replacement. I don't care how good you can coach up the players, you are going to lose a lot of games in the 2023 Pac-12 and even the 2024 ACC with Stanford walkons.

---

You don't hire someone for this type of job on a resume of "he might have been good if only..." Once you need to start making excuses for the performance, why are you looking at him? Because he played for Cal?

---

I'm sorry but that's our hiring pool. Whoever we get is going to have a wart.

It could be they don't have enough experience.
It could be they got fired for refusing the covid vaccine.
It could be because they were handicapped at their last job making their performance look worse than it was.

I'm not advocating for or against Troy Taylor here, but we have to be realistic about our options. We aren't going out and hiring Saban. The sure things / high profile guys with limited or no warts are going to one of the schools that will pay close to 10 million per year.

The trick is to figure out where we want to aim as far as floor/ceiling are concerned, and most importantly, come up with specific metrics for success and be ready to move on a year too early rather than 5 years too late.

It's worth noting my personal preference is going to lean towards inexperience being the primary wart. They will have a lower floor but higher ceiling. We also have the unique position of having Ron Rivera as an experienced NFL head coach there to help fill in experience gaps.

---