Cignetti is described by all as an old school disciplinarian type of coach above all other characteristics. Accountability, professionalism, discipline. His technique features a rigorous practice regime. After seeing so many penalties, poor execution, and mistakes on Saturday I'm all for a Cignetti type, so long as the surrounding culture doesn't reject/undermine him (truth is I fully expect it would- see Troy Taylor at Furd example). He works well in an Indiana but I doubt he'd be accepted here. My point is if we were more disciplined as a team, not coached by an awkward nerdy nice guy, I think we would be sitting at 8-3 or better today. Its not scheme or talent so much as the "being earnest is most important" mediocre culture weve had.

Tedford was pretty hard-nosed and demanding of professionalism, wasn't he? Even with his program managing to host big personalities like Marshawn Lynch and DeSean Jackson. I think a coach like that certainly can be accepted in Berkeley.

I do agree that despite all the NIL/transfer business in college football, a hard-ass coach like Cignetti can still be very successful as long as he can keep players bought in to his philosophy and style, but I also look at a ferocious coach like Nick Saban who quit coaching because he can no longer manage a program the way he has done prior, it's a different sport and there are not many Cignettis to be found, coaches now have to be mindful of what players have available and react accordingly

Strykur said:

---

I do agree that despite all the NIL/transfer business in college football, a hard-ass coach like Cignetti can still be very successful as long as he can keep players bought in to his philosophy and style, but I also look at a ferocious coach like Nick Saban who quit coaching because he can no longer manage a program the way he has done prior, it's a different sport and there are not many Cignettis to be found, coaches now have to be mindful of what players have available and react accordingly

---

It's all good when you are winning.

upsetof86 said:

---

Cignetti is described by all as an old school disciplinarian type of coach above all other characteristics. Accountability, professionalism, discipline. His technique features a rigorous practice regime. After seeing so many penalties, poor execution, and mistakes on Saturday I'm all for a Cignetti type, so long as the surrounding culture doesn't reject/undermine him (truth is I fully expect it would- see Troy Taylor at Furd example). He works well in an Indiana but I doubt he'd be accepted here. My point is if we were more disciplined as a team, not coached by an awkward nerdy nice guy, I think we would be sitting at 8-3 or better today. Its not scheme or talent so much as the "being earnest is most important" mediocre culture weve had.

---

You don't have to be an old school disciplinarian to be about accountability, professionalism and discipline. Some of the toughest coaches I've ever seen rarely yelled at players. Frankly, I think players that are motivated by being yelled at are often weak and frankly in the dustbin of history.

Coaches have one thing over players that is what every player wants. Playing time. The good coaches, whether they are yellers or not, understand this. You play with discipline, you get playing time. You don't, you don't. There is no time to waste during games on someone who isn't there that day. As long as players understand that, things are fine. You struggle in the first quarter and your backup is making plays, your backup is going to get playing time the rest of the game. A good coach makes the switch and doesn't need to yell at the starter because the starter knows full well why the switch was made. A good coach will also give the starter opportunities to get back on the field and will start him again next week (unless this becomes a regular occurrence).

BearSD said:

---

Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. Either the next head coach and his staff vastly improve recruiting, both HS and transfer players, or this isn't going to get any better.

The quick fix in recruiting would be to hire someone who will bring a bunch of good players from his current team, like Cignetti did when he moved to Indiana, or even like Deion did when he moved to Colorado.

But with or without the quick fix, the next head coach has to deliver a roster in the top third of the ACC in order to consistently finish in the top third of the ACC. Forget about fantasies of "doing more with less" or "turning two star players into all-conference players".

---

It is not a good idea to hold up what Deion did at Colorado with what we hope to do at Cal.

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

upsetof86 said:

---

Cignetti is described by all as an old school disciplinarian type of coach above all other characteristics. Accountability, professionalism, discipline. His technique features a rigorous practice regime. After seeing so many penalties, poor execution, and mistakes on Saturday I'm all for a Cignetti type, so long as the surrounding culture doesn't reject/undermine him (truth is I fully expect it would- see Troy Taylor at Furd example). He works well in an Indiana but I doubt he'd be accepted here. My point is if we were more disciplined as a team, not coached by an awkward nerdy nice guy, I think we would be sitting at 8-3 or better today. Its not scheme or talent so much as the "being earnest is most important" mediocre culture weve had.

---

You don't have to be an old school disciplinarian to be about accountability, professionalism and discipline. Some of the toughest coaches I've ever seen rarely yelled at players. Frankly, I think players that are motivated by being yelled at are often weak and frankly in the dustbin of history.

Coaches have one thing over players that is what every player wants. Playing time. The good coaches, whether they are yellers or not, understand this. You play with discipline, you get playing time. You don't, you don't. There is no time to waste during games on someone who isn't there that day. As long as players understand that, things are fine. You struggle in the first quarter and your backup is making plays, your backup is going to get playing time the rest of the game. A good coach makes the switch and doesn't need to yell at the starter because the starter knows full well why the switch was made. A good coach will also give the starter opportunities to get back on the field and will start him again next week (unless this becomes a regular occurrence).

---

When you don't sit the player or when you excuse him by saying he needs more time to ..., the others see that and adjust their commitment accordingly.

Rushinbear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. Either the next head coach and his staff vastly improve recruiting, both HS and transfer players, or this isn't going to get any better.

The quick fix in recruiting would be to hire someone who will bring a bunch of good players from his current team, like Cignetti did when he moved to Indiana, or even like Deion did when he moved to Colorado.

But with or without the quick fix, the next head coach has to deliver a roster in the top third of the ACC in order to consistently finish in the top third of the ACC. Forget about fantasies of "doing more with less" or "turning two star players into all-conference players".

---

It is not a good idea to hold up what Deion did at Colorado with what we hope to do at Cal.

---

Not to mention he's a horrible head coach, who refuses to travel to visit recruits, entertained an absurd QB carousel that cost his 5 star QB his redshirt, has blown multiple games with clock mismanagement, gave up a 5 touchdown lead comeback to Stanford, has a 90 page long thread called "Fire Prime" on the CU board, and has a losing overall and conference record.

ducktilldeath said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. Either the next head coach and his staff vastly improve recruiting, both HS and transfer players, or this isn't going to get any better.

The quick fix in recruiting would be to hire someone who will bring a bunch of good players from his current team, like Cignetti did when he moved to Indiana, or even like Deion did when he moved to Colorado.

But with or without the quick fix, the next head coach has to deliver a roster in the top third of the ACC in order to consistently finish in the top third of the ACC. Forget about fantasies of "doing more with less" or "turning two star players into all-conference players".

---

It is not a good idea to hold up what Deion did at Colorado with what we hope to do at Cal.

---

Not to mention he's a horrible head coach, who refuses to travel to visit recruits, entertained an absurd QB carousel that cost his 5 star QB his redshirt, has blown multiple games with clock mismanagement, gave up a 5 touchdown lead comeback to Stanford, has a 90 page long thread called "Fire Prime" on the CU board, and has a losing overall and conference record.

---

Yeah, I don't know if this is what I'd want for Cal: one flashy season with a top-heavy roster and then crashing again when your best guys go pro.

I wonder how long the new coach will be given to win 8 games in a season, RR's benchmark for success, before being fired. I'm guessing not 9 years. Given everything that works against success at Cal, getting 8 wins anytime soon seems improbable.

sycasey said:

---

ducktilldeath said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. Either the next head coach and his staff vastly improve recruiting, both HS and transfer players, or this isn't going to get any better.

The quick fix in recruiting would be to hire someone who will bring a bunch of good players from his current team, like Cignetti did when he moved to Indiana, or even like Deion did when he moved to Colorado.

But with or without the quick fix, the next head coach has to deliver a roster in the top third of the ACC in order to consistently finish in the top third of the ACC. Forget about fantasies of "doing more with less" or "turning two star players into all-conference players".

---

It is not a good idea to hold up what Deion did at Colorado with what we hope to do at Cal.

---

Not to mention he's a horrible head coach, who refuses to travel to visit recruits, entertained an absurd QB carousel that cost his 5 star QB his redshirt, has blown multiple games with clock mismanagement, gave up a 5 touchdown lead comeback to Stanford, has a 90 page long thread called "Fire Prime" on the CU board, and has a losing overall and conference record.

---

Yeah, I don't know if this is what I'd want for Cal: one flashy season with a top-heavy roster and then crashing again when your best guys go pro.

---

Hell no!!

Coaching search need a hottie thread. I'll start

https://share.google/images/4zu9WcWwIioCmUog2

GoCal80 said:

---

I wonder how long the new coach will be given to win 8 games in a season, RR's benchmark for success, before being fired. I'm guessing not 9 years. Given everything that works against success at Cal, getting 8 wins anytime soon seems improbable.

---

If we get a good coach, keep Sagapolutele and surround him with good players, 8 wins is achievable next year. Shoot, it was easily attainable this year and last year. Just don't choke away games you are winning like last year and this year don't lose to bottom dwelling wankers like San Diego State. Stanford. Virginia Tech and Duke. Beat those 4 and Wilcox has 10 wins going into the SMU game at home. It is not like it was unattainable and it is not anything about "Cal" that made us lose those games.

calumnus said:

---

GoCal80 said:

---

I wonder how long the new coach will be given to win 8 games in a season, RR's benchmark for success, before being fired. I'm guessing not 9 years. Given everything that works against success at Cal, getting 8 wins anytime soon seems improbable.

---

If we get a good coach, keep Sagapolutele and surround him with good players, 8 wins is achievable next year. Shoot, it was easily attainable this year and last year. Just don't choke away games you are winning like last year and this year don't lose to bottom dwelling wankers like San Diego State. Stanford. Virginia Tech and Duke. Beat those 4 and Wilcox has 10 wins going into the SMU game at home. It is not like it was unattainable and it is not anything about "Cal" that made us lose those games.

---

I used the word "improbable" because so much roster rebuilding is needed to get high-skill players on both lines, receiving, running backs, etc., and because we are not likely to see such an easy schedule as we had this year again in our lifetimes. To be successful in football you need more than a few skilled players, you also need depth, which Cal has seldom had in football. One thing I don't know is if Cal is still limited by academic standards that are higher than most of our competition, or if something has changed at Cal in the portal era.

GoCal80 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GoCal80 said:

---

I wonder how long the new coach will be given to win 8 games in a season, RR's benchmark for success, before being fired. I'm guessing not 9 years. Given everything that works against success at Cal, getting 8 wins anytime soon seems improbable.

---

If we get a good coach, keep Sagapolutele and surround him with good players, 8 wins is achievable next year. Shoot, it was easily attainable this year and last year. Just don't choke away games you are winning like last year and this year don't lose to bottom dwelling wankers like San Diego State. Stanford. Virginia Tech and Duke. Beat those 4 and Wilcox has 10 wins going into the SMU game at home. It is not like it was unattainable and it is not anything about "Cal" that made us lose those games.

---

I used the word "improbable" because so much roster rebuilding is needed to get high-skill players on both lines, receiving, running backs, etc., and because we are not likely to see such an easy schedule as we had this year again in our lifetimes. To be successful in football you need more than a few skilled players, you also need depth, which Cal has seldom had in football. One thing I don't know is if Cal is still limited by academic standards that are higher than most of our competition, or if something has changed at Cal in the portal era.

---

Berkeley can feel like a lonely place to non native Mandarin speakers. : )

I hope we go with an Offensive coach. I like Sean Lewis and Ryan Grubb Alabama OC. Also, Gus Malzahn (former UCF coach, Auburn coach (won national championship); now FSU OC), improved FSU's offense from abysmal to top 5 in offense.

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

upsetof86 said:

---

Cignetti is described by all as an old school disciplinarian type of coach above all other characteristics. Accountability, professionalism, discipline. His technique features a rigorous practice regime. After seeing so many penalties, poor execution, and mistakes on Saturday I'm all for a Cignetti type, so long as the surrounding culture doesn't reject/undermine him (truth is I fully expect it would- see Troy Taylor at Furd example). He works well in an Indiana but I doubt he'd be accepted here. My point is if we were more disciplined as a team, not coached by an awkward nerdy nice guy, I think we would be sitting at 8-3 or better today. Its not scheme or talent so much as the "being earnest is most important" mediocre culture weve had.

---

You don't have to be an old school disciplinarian to be about accountability, professionalism and discipline. Some of the toughest coaches I've ever seen rarely yelled at players. Frankly, I think players that are motivated by being yelled at are often weak and frankly in the dustbin of history.

Coaches have one thing over players that is what every player wants. Playing time. The good coaches, whether they are yellers or not, understand this. You play with discipline, you get playing time. You don't, you don't. There is no time to waste during games on someone who isn't there that day. As long as players understand that, things are fine. You struggle in the first quarter and your backup is making plays, your backup is going to get playing time the rest of the game. A good coach makes the switch and doesn't need to yell at the starter because the starter knows full well why the switch was made. A good coach will also give the starter opportunities to get back on the field and will start him again next week (unless this becomes a regular occurrence).

---

The thing that bugged me the most this year was Wilcox, a CB,S in his own right, supposedly known for a tough defense, letting Masses get away with some absolutely horrible tackling (non tackling) efforts. He repeatedly backed away from contact. I know he was our best pass defender but if you are setting a tone for high defensive efforts he has to sit. And he never did. I can only imagine the other play that showed up during 'film' review that left players and coaches know that the level of effort, in everything, didn't really matter.

82gradDLSdad said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

upsetof86 said:

---

Cignetti is described by all as an old school disciplinarian type of coach above all other characteristics. Accountability, professionalism, discipline. His technique features a rigorous practice regime. After seeing so many penalties, poor execution, and mistakes on Saturday I'm all for a Cignetti type, so long as the surrounding culture doesn't reject/undermine him (truth is I fully expect it would- see Troy Taylor at Furd example). He works well in an Indiana but I doubt he'd be accepted here. My point is if we were more disciplined as a team, not coached by an awkward nerdy nice guy, I think we would be sitting at 8-3 or better today. Its not scheme or talent so much as the "being earnest is most important" mediocre culture weve had.

---

You don't have to be an old school disciplinarian to be about accountability, professionalism and discipline. Some of the toughest coaches I've ever seen rarely yelled at players. Frankly, I think players that are motivated by being yelled at are often weak and frankly in the dustbin of history.

Coaches have one thing over players that is what every player wants. Playing time. The good coaches, whether they are yellers or not, understand this. You play with discipline, you get playing time. You don't, you don't. There is no time to waste during games on someone who isn't there that day. As long as players understand that, things are fine. You struggle in the first quarter and your backup is making plays, your backup is going to get playing time the rest of the game. A good coach makes the switch and doesn't need to yell at the starter because the starter knows full well why the switch was made. A good coach will also give the starter opportunities to get back on the field and will start him again next week (unless this becomes a regular occurrence).

---

The thing that bugged me the most this year was Wilcox, a CB,S in his own right, supposedly known for a tough defense, letting Masses get away with some absolutely horrible tackling (non tackling) efforts. He repeatedly backed away from contact. I know he was our best pass defender but if you are setting a tone for high defensive efforts he has to sit. And he never did. I can only imagine the other play that showed up during 'film' review that left players and coaches know that the level of effort, in everything, didn't really matter.

---

1. Masses looked frail and maybe injury prone.
2. Maybe the game films showed that opponents threw away from Masses, thereby eliminating his side of the field from pass attempts. Is this true? Of course, it didn't prevent opponents from throwing screen passes in his direction...which they appeared to do. Anyway, believing that may be the reason why they left him in the game.