The sunk cost fallacy is the tendency to continue an endeavor, project, or relationship because of the time, money, or effort already invested, rather than evaluating whether future costs and benefits make sense. The way out is to ask: "If I walked into this situation today with a clean slate, how would I start?" The trap, which I believe applies to Cal's hiring mistake with Tosh, arises because admitting a plan failed can feel like "losing face." I fear that, because of this, our big donors and Ron Rivera will stay too long with their bad decision to hire Tosh and throw good money after bad. However, they need to recognize that admitting a mistake (cutting your losses) is a strong strategic move, not a permanent blow to one's reputation.
Post Reply
1 of 1
Cal football's sunk cost fallacy
2,326 Views |
24 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by Strykur
this is California, look at the high speed rail project, the train to nowhere, but sunk costs mean we keep pouring money into a wasted space . like cal football
hate to say it, but I started giving up years ago and cal football just not worth taking up much space in my mind anymore
hate to say it, but I started giving up years ago and cal football just not worth taking up much space in my mind anymore
GoCal80 said:
The sunk cost fallacy is the tendency to continue an endeavor, project, or relationship because of the time, money, or effort already invested, rather than evaluating whether future costs and benefits make sense. The way out is to ask: "If I walked into this situation today with a clean slate, how would I start?" The trap, which I believe applies to Cal's hiring mistake with Tosh, arises because admitting a plan failed can feel like "losing face." I fear that, because of this, our big donors and Ron Rivera will stay too long with their bad decision to hire Tosh and throw good money after bad. However, they need to recognize that admitting a mistake (cutting your losses) is a strong strategic move, not a permanent blow to one's reputation.
Unfortunately the fresh start sunk cost fallacy doesn't apply 25 days after you guaranteed $15 million future dollars to a coach, months after doing the same with another coach... Ect
That's not a "we spent so much, already, let's see what happens" it's a "we are on the hook for this cost far into the future"
So there is no clean slate world.
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
California's high-speed rail project promised to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco with trains traveling up to 220 mph. Eighteen years after voters approved Proposition 1A, the ambitious transportation project lacks any finished track and faces an uncertain future. Costs are now projected to reach $126 billion with land acquisition and regulatory hurdles still putting America's largest active infrastructure endeavor in jeopardy.
just substitute Cal football .. similar in that we get promises and nothing is delivered sigh
just substitute Cal football .. similar in that we get promises and nothing is delivered sigh
sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Wilcox, like Dykes, produced of the best phases of the game nationally.
And in Frankenstein fashion, we took the defense from one, and the offense for the other by hiring Tosh
Oakbear said:
California's high-speed rail project promised to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco with trains traveling up to 220 mph. Eighteen years after voters approved Proposition 1A, the ambitious transportation project lacks any finished track and faces an uncertain future. Costs are now projected to reach $126 billion with land acquisition and regulatory hurdles still putting America's largest active infrastructure endeavor in jeopardy.
just substitute Cal football .. similar in that we get promises and nothing is delivered sigh
Do you want to talk politics or football. The two items that you mentioned have NOTHING to do with each other. Please take your political talk OT!
sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
But,a loyal coach, seeing that he got himself in too deep, especially with his top recruits jumping ship, COULD bow out with a digestible parting gift in his pocket.
Yeah, riiiiiight.
Even we were handed a $50M hall pass by a whale Alum to "pay our way" out of this new fiasco, I am totally unconvinced the decision makers and influencers would know what to do with it.
calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
calpoly said:Oakbear said:
California's high-speed rail project promised to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco with trains traveling up to 220 mph. Eighteen years after voters approved Proposition 1A, the ambitious transportation project lacks any finished track and faces an uncertain future. Costs are now projected to reach $126 billion with land acquisition and regulatory hurdles still putting America's largest active infrastructure endeavor in jeopardy.
just substitute Cal football .. similar in that we get promises and nothing is delivered sigh
Do you want to talk politics or football. The two items that you mentioned have NOTHING to do with each other. Please take your political talk OT!
just commenting on how bureaucracies work, sorry you don't like people to voice opinions that differ from yours, now you can criticize me for talking about a third subject ..
Oakbear said:calpoly said:Oakbear said:
California's high-speed rail project promised to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco with trains traveling up to 220 mph. Eighteen years after voters approved Proposition 1A, the ambitious transportation project lacks any finished track and faces an uncertain future. Costs are now projected to reach $126 billion with land acquisition and regulatory hurdles still putting America's largest active infrastructure endeavor in jeopardy.
just substitute Cal football .. similar in that we get promises and nothing is delivered sigh
Do you want to talk politics or football. The two items that you mentioned have NOTHING to do with each other. Please take your political talk OT!
just commenting on how bureaucracies work, sorry you don't like people to voice opinions that differ from yours, now you can criticize me for talking about a third subject ..
Nobody is silencing you or criticizing you for having a different opinion. You're free to discuss bureaucracy all you wantin the appropriate thread. I asked you to keep a football discussion about football, and rather than simply acknowledge that, you've turned a straightforward request to stay on topic into a manufactured debate about censorship. Being asked to stay on topic isn't oppression, and it isn't disagreement. It's basic forum etiquette. Nice try changing the subject, though.
I'm concerned that they botched the selection process to identify a new head coach and will now expend energy and resources trying to save face by propping up Tosh by mandating staff changes, etc., for next season, when the most these efforts will ever accomplish is elevating a terrible coach to mediocrity.
calpoly said:Oakbear said:calpoly said:Oakbear said:
California's high-speed rail project promised to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco with trains traveling up to 220 mph. Eighteen years after voters approved Proposition 1A, the ambitious transportation project lacks any finished track and faces an uncertain future. Costs are now projected to reach $126 billion with land acquisition and regulatory hurdles still putting America's largest active infrastructure endeavor in jeopardy.
just substitute Cal football .. similar in that we get promises and nothing is delivered sigh
Do you want to talk politics or football. The two items that you mentioned have NOTHING to do with each other. Please take your political talk OT!
just commenting on how bureaucracies work, sorry you don't like people to voice opinions that differ from yours, now you can criticize me for talking about a third subject ..
Nobody is silencing you or criticizing you for having a different opinion. You're free to discuss bureaucracy all you wantin the appropriate thread. I asked you to keep a football discussion about football, and rather than simply acknowledge that, you've turned a straightforward request to stay on topic into a manufactured debate about censorship. Being asked to stay on topic isn't oppression, and it isn't disagreement. It's basic forum etiquette. Nice try changing the subject, though.
Well, whether you like it or not, college football is both a business and an institution, now. So, to run it competently, one needs to understand both the bureaucracy and profit side of it. The hiring of a hc is certainly a bureaucratic process and is subject to treating it that way in discussions about it. Now, you would certainly have a point if the discussion went off the football track or if some sort of bias were introduced, but I didn't see that here.
Rushinbear said:calpoly said:Oakbear said:calpoly said:Oakbear said:
California's high-speed rail project promised to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco with trains traveling up to 220 mph. Eighteen years after voters approved Proposition 1A, the ambitious transportation project lacks any finished track and faces an uncertain future. Costs are now projected to reach $126 billion with land acquisition and regulatory hurdles still putting America's largest active infrastructure endeavor in jeopardy.
just substitute Cal football .. similar in that we get promises and nothing is delivered sigh
Do you want to talk politics or football. The two items that you mentioned have NOTHING to do with each other. Please take your political talk OT!
just commenting on how bureaucracies work, sorry you don't like people to voice opinions that differ from yours, now you can criticize me for talking about a third subject ..
Nobody is silencing you or criticizing you for having a different opinion. You're free to discuss bureaucracy all you wantin the appropriate thread. I asked you to keep a football discussion about football, and rather than simply acknowledge that, you've turned a straightforward request to stay on topic into a manufactured debate about censorship. Being asked to stay on topic isn't oppression, and it isn't disagreement. It's basic forum etiquette. Nice try changing the subject, though.
Well, whether you like it or not, college football is both a business and an institution, now. So, to run it competently, one needs to understand both the bureaucracy and profit side of it. The hiring of a hc is certainly a bureaucratic process and is subject to treating it that way in discussions about it. Now, you would certainly have a point if the discussion went off the football track or if some sort of bias were introduced, but I didn't see that here.
Nobody said bureaucracy has no place in a football discussion. That's a straw man. The question is whether comparing Cal football to California's high-speed rail project actually adds anything to a discussion about Cal football.
By your logic, because college football is a business, virtually any discussion of government, economics, or corporate failure is fair game in every thread. That's not a serious standard for relevance; it's an excuse to discuss whatever you want wherever you want.
You're entitled to your opinion. Everyone else is entitled to point out when an analogy is a stretch. Disagreeing with that assessment isn't censorship, and asking for relevance isn't bias.
sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
It was in the early 2000s, when we found Tedford after Willingham took them to the Rose Bowl while we kept Holmoe for 5 years. Pac-10 media revenues were split, so no pressing need. The Pac-10 was lookng to expand, not implode. Stanford did not have the urgency we have now. Before they found Willingham, they fired Hall of Fame HC Bill Walsh after only 3 years (and his first season back he went 10-3). They fired Taylor after 2. They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while in that time we have none (and now the Rose Bowl really doesnt exist as a goal anymore).
calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while on that time we have none.
They also have $40 billion and mega donor money out the ass to play with
Strykur said:calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while on that time we have none.
They also have $40 billion and mega donor money out the ass to play with
True, but you cant claim proverty as your excuse for giving extensions and raises to Holmoe and Wilcox (and Mark Fox in basketball).
According to AI, Walt Harris was only making $600k per season, so firing him and hiring Harbaugh from University of San Diego (where he was making less) was a no brainer. Harbaugh's initial salary at Stanford was reportedly $750k and was only bumped to $1.25 million after his initial success, then they offered $5 million per year only as a counter to the 49ers' verified offer.
It isnt just the times. Stanford reportedly offered Troy Taylor $2-3 million which was plenty more than the $250k he was making at Sac State. We would have offered at least $5 million like we are giving Tosh. At least Tosh's contract is reportedly only 80% guaranteed unlike the 100% we are paying Wilcox.
I dont know why Cal thinks they have to pay DCs like Wilcox and Lupoi, who make $1 million at most as DCs, $5 million to be first-time HCs. Especially when no one else was offering them so we weren't competing with anyone. The first contract should be a much lower, incentive laden contract (Still more money than 99% of people will see in a lifetime). Have THEM bet on themselves. Then if doesnt work out, we can move on with a reasonable buyout. And if they are successful we can always redo (and extend) the contract.
We are supposed to be a school of intelligent people.
calumnus said:Strykur said:calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while on that time we have none.
They also have $40 billion and mega donor money out the ass to play with
I dont know why Cal thinks they have to pay DCs like Wilcox and Lupoi, who make $1 million at most as DCs, $5 million to be first-time HCs.
It's actually pretty simple, we are on the outs in the realignment circus and have to pay a premium for every opening whereas the Trees can pursue whatever path they want, we probably won't have the options they will have in 36 months unless there is drastic improvement, and I said this years ago, a school with the money the trees have is not going to float in the wind of G5
Strykur said:calumnus said:Strykur said:calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while on that time we have none.
They also have $40 billion and mega donor money out the ass to play with
I dont know why Cal thinks they have to pay DCs like Wilcox and Lupoi, who make $1 million at most as DCs, $5 million to be first-time HCs.
It's actually pretty simple, we are on the outs in the realignment circus and have to pay a premium for every opening whereas the Trees can pursue whatever path they want, we probably won't have the options they will have in 36 months unless there is drastic improvement, and I said this years ago, a school with the money the trees have is not going to float in the wind of G5
This explanation is MUCH too sophisticated for the free board. Go back, GO BACK!
Strykur said:calumnus said:Strykur said:calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while on that time we have none.
They also have $40 billion and mega donor money out the ass to play with
I dont know why Cal thinks they have to pay DCs like Wilcox and Lupoi, who make $1 million at most as DCs, $5 million to be first-time HCs.
It's actually pretty simple, we are on the outs in the realignment circus and have to pay a premium for every opening whereas the Trees can pursue whatever path they want, we probably won't have the options they will have in 36 months unless there is drastic improvement, and I said this years ago, a school with the money the trees have is not going to float in the wind of G5
Stanford is on the outside looking in too. TV execs don't care how much money the school has if it isn't translating to eye balls and success. Unless you were referring to buying your way in again, in which case both of us have the pockets but probably not the desire.
concernedparent said:Strykur said:calumnus said:Strykur said:calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while on that time we have none.
They also have $40 billion and mega donor money out the ass to play with
I dont know why Cal thinks they have to pay DCs like Wilcox and Lupoi, who make $1 million at most as DCs, $5 million to be first-time HCs.
It's actually pretty simple, we are on the outs in the realignment circus and have to pay a premium for every opening whereas the Trees can pursue whatever path they want, we probably won't have the options they will have in 36 months unless there is drastic improvement, and I said this years ago, a school with the money the trees have is not going to float in the wind of G5
Stanford is on the outside looking in too. TV execs don't care how much money the school has if it isn't translating to eye balls and success. Unless you were referring to buying your way in again, in which case both of us have the pockets but probably not the desire.
Both schools will probably be remaining in the ACC for the near future. The only thing they might have over us is maybe Notre Dame wanting to drag them along as a partner/rival. But that would require the kind of realignment that required ND to join a conference, and I don't know that I see that happening.
calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
It was in the early 2000s, when we found Tedford after Willingham took them to the Rose Bowl while we kept Holmoe for 5 years. Pac-10 media revenues were split, so no pressing need. The Pac-10 was lookng to expand, not implode. Stanford did not have the urgency we have now. Before they found Willingham, they fired Hall of Fame HC Bill Walsh after only 3 years (and his first season back he went 10-3). They fired Taylor after 2. They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while in that time we have none (and now the Rose Bowl really doesnt exist as a goal anymore).
No argument: even leaving Stanford out if it, Cal has just been way too slow to cut bait on a bad coach in the past. I don't expect it to happen after one year, but if Tosh's second year is similarly disastrous I'd hope we at least consider the Walt Harris treatment.
sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:calumnus said:sycasey said:
I don't know that there's a single program in the country that would fire a coach after one season, absent some kind of big off-field scandal.
But yes, assuming that Tosh is the mistake he looks like I hope we aren't sticking with him for as long as we did with Wilcox or Holmoe or any other mistakes (and to be fair to Wilcox, he gave a lot more reason to hope at the beginning of his tenure).
Stanford not a football power, very comparable to us, fired Teevins after 3 and then Harris after 2 before landing on Palo Alto High alum Harbaugh with Stanford alum Shaw as his OC and successor.
I will note that neither of those was after one season. After 2, yeah, anything is possible.
It was in the early 2000s, when we found Tedford after Willingham took them to the Rose Bowl while we kept Holmoe for 5 years. Pac-10 media revenues were split, so no pressing need. The Pac-10 was lookng to expand, not implode. Stanford did not have the urgency we have now. Before they found Willingham, they fired Hall of Fame HC Bill Walsh after only 3 years (and his first season back he went 10-3). They fired Taylor after 2. They just are quicker to fire coaches that are not working out. It is part of the reason they have been to 6 Rose Bowls since 1970 while in that time we have none (and now the Rose Bowl really doesnt exist as a goal anymore).
No argument: even leaving Stanford out if it, Cal has just been way too slow to cut bait on a bad coach in the past. I don't expect it to happen after one year, but if Tosh's second year is similarly disastrous I'd hope we at least consider the Walt Harris treatment.
If 2027 is anything like this season we will just have to get more desperate with whoever the next hire is
Featured Stories
See All
Friday Night Lights — Week 10
by Ian Firstenberg
Kingston Lopa Named Jim Thorpe Award Semifinalist
by Cal Athletics
Lulu Twidale Named To Ann Meyers Drysdale Award Watchlist
by Cal Athletics
Ruiz Report: JKS Returned to Near-Normalcy in Loss to SMU
by Joaquin Ruiz
The Rodcast: Cal vs OSU Scrimmage
by Rod Benson