Big C said:

---

Strykur said:

---

Big C said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

I think people will feel a LOT better about everything if we win 3 of our last 4.

---

Only because Cal fans suffer from a lack of imagination and think an 8-4 record against a bunch of weak opponents equals success. I'd rather go 0-4 and keep those people from having a voice.

---

So, you're rooting for Cal to lose, including Big Game?

---

I'm rooting for Cal to give themselves a chance to compete at football. If that means Cal has to lose Big Game to keep people from giving themselves an excuse not to fire a bad football coach, then that's what has to be done. Not my fault Cal is full of people that celebrate mediocrity or worse. It's their fault I've been stuck with a program that's been going nowhere for nine years.

---

Personally, I want Cal to win more, which probably means we need to get a new HC. In the meantime, I am rooting for the California Golden Bears to win every time they take the field! Go Bears!!!

---

I went to Big Game last year, and despite the finish, was indifferent to the result, I will feel the same as such next month.

---

We're in this for the fun of it and it's personal prerogative as to what's fun and what's not. That said, you're indifferent as to the result of Big Game? And you're still going to this year's? That's kind of sad. I assume it's the lack of wins and generally incompetent football that we're playing?

---

Think of it this way, the finish was interesting but a game featuring two lousy teams who nearly got ousted out of P4 is generally not very compelling, versus something like Tennessee-Georgia.

sycasey said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

Fred Bear said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

I think people will feel a LOT better about everything if we win 3 of our last 4.

---

Only because Cal fans suffer from a lack of imagination and think an 8-4 record against a bunch of weak opponents equals success. I'd rather go 0-4 and keep those people from having a voice.

---

So, you're rooting for Cal to lose, including Big Game?

---

Was it worth it for OSU to lose against UM in order to win the natty?

---

Not sure they won the natty because they lost to Michigan though.

---

They were more fired up and determined by the failure

Nobody will touch him with a ten foot cattle prong now

Idk. He should have stepped down a while ago and renegotiated the buyout.

TedfordTheGreat said:

---

going4roses said:

---

Nobody will touch him with a ten foot cattle prong now

---

maybe he can be like Chip? leave a HC job for a DC job somewhere? or is there too much ego involved you think.

---

No P4 team would hire him to be DC. He hasn't exactly delivered excellence in that role.

For the little sisters of the poor ?

I tried to shut them up with my "Shame on you" thread. All that did was inspire more vomit.
But they have more respect for you than they do for me. So maybe you'll have more success.

If not, you can always delete them.

Well stated.

Big C said:

---

First, decades ago, it was "a coach that you plan on keeping can't be on the last year of his contract because recruiting". Then, that became "the last two years". Then Wilcox needed to be extended six years (after already coaching five mediocre years). This is why schools are paying 8-figure buyouts.

Reminds me of insane CEO pay, which only got higher after corporations started to have "compensation committees" to supposedly hold down the salaries.

Also vaguely reminds me of tipping servers at restaurants being 10% back in the day, then somehow going up to 15%, and now it's 20% (so the restaurants can keep paying their employees minimum wage).

---

Personally I don't see the recruiting angle as a persuasive argument why we should sign on to more mediocrity. To begin with we're not recruiting like gangbusters anyway. We might lose some commits if we make an early move before signing day but, with the transfer portal, they could leave at any time regardless. And we might gain some as well. Guys will leave and guys will replace them and fear of that shouldn't stop us from making necessary changes.

I also think that, for us specifically, most guys are committing to the school more than a coach so we may be more resistant to the worst outcomes of a coaching change so the attrition is likely to be less than the momentum gained.

Lastly I have no qualms tipping waiters. I know it's ****ty that the industry puts the onus on customers to provide a living wage but those people bust their ass and it's not their fault we've allowed it to be set up like this. I'm a minimum 25% tipper unless the service is really bad because I've worked in the service industry and lots of people don't understand just how much work they're doing out of site and how much it sucks when people don't tip, even if they think it's just your job to serve them and you're already being paid for it

bearsandgiants said:

---

going4roses said:

---

Nobody will touch him with a ten foot cattle prong now

---

he's considered a top defensive mind.

---

By whom? Certainly not by anyone who has watched most of his Cal teams. This year's defense has especially been a disaster. Giving up 34 points to SDSU says it all. Wilcox is no defensive guru.

calumnus said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

Golden One said:

---

TedfordTheGreat said:

---

going4roses said:

---

Nobody will touch him with a ten foot cattle prong now

---

maybe he can be like Chip? leave a HC job for a DC job somewhere? or is there too much ego involved you think.

---

No P4 team would hire him to be DC. He hasn't exactly delivered excellence in that role.

---

That's just not true Golden One. He's had top defenses at Boise and Wisconsin. His stint at USC was not well received. It's been mixed, but he has had success. If he wants it, he will get a DC job somewhere

---

Wilcox was at Wisconsin for 1 year in 2016. He had the #6 defense. The year before he came, 2015, Wisconsin had the #1 defense. The year after he left, 2017, Wisconsin had the #4 defense.

So they were better before him and better after him but great all three years.

Tough to determine how good he really was from that. My feeling is he has been very fortunate with his career due to his dad, early connections (Tedford, Peterson, Sark…), amenable personality, good looks and the poor judgment of Williams, Knowlton and Cal boosters and fans.

---

Good info. Stats always tell a partial story especially with regards to head football coaches. Well, especially with almost everything.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

I tried to shut them up with my "Shame on you" thread. All that did was inspire more vomit.
But they have more respect for you than they do for me. So maybe you'll have more success.

If not, you can always delete them.

---

Your lack of self awareness is truly baffling. Your "shame on you" thread is the definition of "creating straw man arguments and if then statements designed to inflame or defame people" that BearGreg talked about

---

Huh?
I must have misunderstood something.

Or, I made myself fodder with my take in defending Wilcox.

Or both.

Well put BearGreg. I agree with everything you wrote, except that Cal's schedule was as easy. Living on the East Coast now for many years I can say that there are no easy games in the ACC - especially on the road. Look at Clemson and Florida State this year. The NYTimes/Athletic had forecast Cal to have a 3-9 record this year - given all the offensive talent lost through the portal and on defense to the NFL. So at 5-4 we are doing a bit better than that. This team does not have the talent or depth to win 8 or 9 games. Hopefully with more financial resources that can change - the high school commit list certainly looks better than in recent years. We need to trust that GM Rivera will figure out the coaching situation, one way or the other.

That trust is being tested