Okay, long time Tedford supporter.

My trust in his ability is wearing thin, but since he was responsible for reviving our program and putting the whole new memorial stadium plan/sahpc to the works he deserves our applause.

That said, this year I figured with all of our question marks we'd reach 8-5 (with a bowl win) so a 7-5 season.

I think he deserves at least 1 year in the new stadium and SAHPC, along with a better schedule next year.

But if we don't have at least 11 wins next year, things need to change. It will be officially a plateau. I'm sick of being disappointed, and I want to add that Rose Bowl rose to my tattoo (hehe)


Tedford is one of only 25 FBS coaches getting paid at least 2 million dollars a year, and is almost in the only 9 coaches making 3 million [source USA today]. This means we deserve BCS games.


With a brand new stadium, the #1 public and #2 overall university in the world, being in beautiful bay area with back to back to back (assuming this year) top 15 recruiting classes, a TOP OF THE LINE SAHPC which will be most definitely be tied for 1st in the pac-12 and in the top 15 in the nation, attracting a high profile coach should not be a problem especially if the boosters are willing to expend as much money (2.85 million) on a new HC.


So Tedford, it's your chance to show us that you can still get us to that Rose Bowl game, and beyond.

But in my eyes, you have one year.

I wanna see what you guys think, and any HC that you would like to see if Tedford can't pull it around.

I agree with your sentiments on Tedford. He's done great things as a whole, but he may have plateaued or perhaps regressed. However, I too think he deserves at least one year in the new Memorial. But next year my expectations will also be very high like yours. I would probably give him a pass with a 10 win season next year (as opposed to 11 wins), but once the new stadium is open, I think there has to be a BCS bowl within two years max.

No idea who I would suggest as a replacement because it's impossible to know who might be available at that point.

I agree with everything you've said about Tedford. Here's my problem. The toplight coaches available are all in some way dirty (Tressel, Leach). The idea would be to entice someone from another winning Division I program, in a major conference, but I don't see someone with that profile coming to Cal.

The other alternative is to hire an assistant that is allegedly ready to step up, as Tedford supposedly was when hired here. The problem with that is that there are plenty of examples at both Cal (Gilbertson) and elsewhere (Mike Stoops) of someone who couldn't successfully make the move from assistant to head coach.

That leaves me in a quandary. Yes, I want more than we're getting from Tedford. But I also don't want to go in reverse, because at this point, a serious drop-off in football attendance, such as might occur if we had two or three losing seasons in a row under another coach, might imperil the entire athletic program.

It's a problem.

Two - Four years in the new house.

The past few disappointing seasons could have looked much different if we had good QB play. QB position has been our achilles heel, and I want to believe we're one good (doesn't have to be great) QB away from returning to the top tier of the Pac. From there anything is possible...

Yes, there are other issues such as Tedford's inability to adapt in-game, overall toughness of our team, stubornness with underperforming assistances and players...but unless you demand a perfect coach, those things are acceptable imo.

Without Tedford, you wouldn't be demanding 10-2 minimum seasons.

Note that we will take a sizable hit in recruiting our current crop of prospects.

There is no guarantee the new HC will promote Tosh to DC, which, imo, is his next step. Guarantee if Tedford is fired, Tosh will have numerous DC options in other places.

Jeff82;592322 said:

---

I agree with everything you've said about Tedford. Here's my problem. The toplight coaches available are all in some way dirty (Tressel, Leach). The idea would be to entice someone from another winning Division I program, in a major conference, but I don't see someone with that profile coming to Cal.

The other alternative is to hire an assistant that is allegedly ready to step up, as Tedford supposedly was when hired here. The problem with that is that there are plenty of examples at both Cal (Gilbertson) and elsewhere (Mike Stoops) of someone who couldn't successfully make the move from assistant to head coach.

That leaves me in a quandary. Yes, I want more than we're getting from Tedford. But I also don't want to go in reverse, because at this point, a serious drop-off in football attendance, such as might occur if we had two or three losing seasons in a row under another coach, might imperil the entire athletic program.

It's a problem.

---

That's ridiculous that all the toplight coaches are somehow dirty. You refer to 2 fired head coaches. Fired head coaches aren't the ONLY 2 head coaches. We don't have to hire an assistant either.....We have to move forward, someone with a plan. The biggest problem with Cal right now is we have NO identity, that's a huge problem I want a coach to come in and bring us an identity.

You can look at other teams OC or DC.


Also Leach is not dirty, that's b.s. Fire Craig James.

My expectations are a bit more subtle than yours, but they probably shouldn't be.

All I want this year is a bowl game and to finish over .500 after the bowl game.

Next year I want 8-10 wins (pref 9+)

Year after is the 11 wins OR in the pac12 championship game year to me. It sucks for tedford because thats going to be a hellish road year (@ oregon and @ washington, 4 pac home games 5 pac away games, + Ohio State to open the year), but it is what it is. He can gain a little traction by jumping it a year forward with the favorable home/away schedule next year (@Oregon State @ Washington State, Stanford Oregon Washington all at home in new stadium).

If he can't have us in the pac12 championship game by end of 2013 I think its time to look elsewhere, which, by the way, would give the replacement a great situation to come into. Great talent great new facilities etc.

And I'm probably one of the bigger Tedford supporters on this board.

~MrGPAC

Davidson;592347 said:

---

Without Tedford, you wouldn't be demanding 10-2 minimum seasons.

Note that we will take a sizable hit in recruiting our current crop of prospects.

There is no guarantee the new HC will promote Tosh to DC, which, imo, is his next step. Guarantee if Tedford is fired, Tosh will have numerous DC options in other places.

---

There's so many ridiculous phrases in this statement.


"Without Tedford, you wouldn't be demanding 10-2 minimum seasons." No shi*, but that's exactly why he's plateau-ed. If he can't get use over the edge with him getting paid in the top 5% of college football coaches, then we need someone else.

I'm okay with short term losses for long term goals, so taking a sizeable hit in recruiting is okay with me.

I never said I wanted Tosh as DC....I think it's pretty hilarious that people think that just because a D Line coach is great, and a good recruiter that he will be automatically wanted for D Coordinator, it's WAY DIFFERENT.

LafayetteBear;592352 said:

---

Seymore: You're an undergraduate, aren't you/! In that case, the "long time" qualifier has me chuckling.

---

No I'm a graduate, but I've been a tedford supporter since at least 2003, my good friends dad is huge Cal fan, which made Cal my favorite team for that last 9 years.


9 years of my 22 year old life is nearly 50%, that's a long time, relatively. haha.

SeymoreBear;592302 said:

---

I wanna see what you guys think, and any HC that you would like to see if Tedford can't pull it around.

---

I'm for Tedford all the way. There is not another rational option.

“It is by no means an irrational fancy that, in a future existence, we shall look upon what we think our present existence, as a dream.” -EAP

:beer:

oskihasahearton;592363 said:

---

I'm for Tedford all the way. There is not another rational option.

"It is by no means an irrational fancy that, in a future existence, we shall look upon what we think our present existence, as a dream." -EAP

:beer:

---

You're being facetious right?

Okay, THAT is a positive post. Yes, it's possible to call for a coach's replacement while acknowleding his accomplishments and respecting differing points of view.

This is how a lot of the Cal community feels - that JT has been great for the program, but that it may be time for a change, for a lot of good reasons that can be disucussed.

This is a refreshing contrast to the posts attributing some evil personality flaw on the coach or call anyone who says anything positive about JT a "homer" and accusing Cal fans of not caring about FB for (heaven forbid) suggesting he coach another year before giving him the axe.

This is what disappointed me so much about the Braun discussion. It wasn't that people who thought he should go didn't have a point, but that they were so venemous and dogmatic in their point of view they made the BB board insufferable. Now in hindsight people can say Braun was good, it was time for him to go, and now we're doing better.

I wish we had more JT critics on this board who had this kind of perspective. We could sure use it around here.

SeymoreBear;592291 said:

---

Okay, long time Tedford supporter.

My trust in his ability is wearing thin, but since he was responsible for reviving our program and putting the whole new memorial stadium plan/sahpc to the works he deserves our applause.

That said, this year I figured with all of our question marks we'd reach 8-5 (with a bowl win) so a 7-5 season.

I think he deserves at least 1 year in the new stadium and SAHPC, along with a better schedule next year.

But if we don't have at least 11 wins next year, things need to change. It will be officially a plateau. I'm sick of being disappointed, and I want to add that Rose Bowl rose to my tattoo (hehe)


Tedford is one of only 25 FBS coaches getting paid at least 2 million dollars a year, and is almost in the only 9 coaches making 3 million [source USA today]. This means we deserve BCS games.


With a brand new stadium, the #1 public and #2 overall university in the world, being in beautiful bay area with back to back to back (assuming this year) top 15 recruiting classes, a TOP OF THE LINE SAHPC which will be most definitely be tied for 1st in the pac-12 and in the top 15 in the nation, attracting a high profile coach should not be a problem especially if the boosters are willing to expend as much money (2.85 million) on a new HC.


So Tedford, it's your chance to show us that you can still get us to that Rose Bowl game, and beyond.

But in my eyes, you have one year.

---

This line of reasoning comes up here quite a bit. On the surface it seems reasonable (it is), but I have a couple of issues with it. First, I don't think JT is owed anything. He certainly deserves credit for making Cal football relevant and his role in getting the facilities built, but similarly he deserves the blame for the current slide back to irrelevance JT has been paid many times over for his contributions. I don't believe it is his right to coach in the new facilities, but rather his performance should decide his continued employment, just as it would in other fields. Obviously there are contract issues which probably preclude a change in the near future, but that doesn't mean that a review of performance isn't warranted. The contract isn't the most important factor IMO, as I firmly believe if JT went 3-9 this season he would be fired.

Secondly, people have been saying for at least a year that 2012 is JT's put up or shut up year. Many here expect 10+ wins next year. Why is that. I'm unsure why the common refrain is that this is a rebuilding year looking towards next year. Why will Cal be so much better next year? There are a fair number of key losses, and while I see it as plausible/probable the team is better, I'm not sure I buy that much better. If this year is 6-6 or 7-5 and next year is 8-4/9-3, does the Come to Jesus year change to 2013?

SeymoreBear;592359 said:

---

There's so many ridiculous phrases in this statement.


"Without Tedford, you wouldn't be demanding 10-2 minimum seasons." No shi*, but that's exactly why he's plateau-ed. If he can't get use over the edge with him getting paid in the top 5% of college football coaches, then we need someone else.

I'm okay with short term losses for long term goals, so taking a sizeable hit in recruiting is okay with me.

I never said I wanted Tosh as DC....I think it's pretty hilarious that people think that just because a D Line coach is great, and a good recruiter that he will be automatically wanted for D Coordinator, it's WAY DIFFERENT.

---

You don't know that he can't get us there. There are several example of coaches that start hot, cool down and then succeed--look up Bobby Bowden's career as one.

You're grossly underestimating Tosh Lupoi's impact on this program. This is college football, ask any coach and they will tell you that recruiting is 80% of the game. His ability to recruit and coach his unit is at elite levels. There is a reason why he had offers to become DC at other school this off season.

You big homer!

BeachyBear;592372 said:

---

Okay, THAT is a positive post. Yes, it's possible to call for a coach's replacement while acknowleding his accomplishments and respecting differing points of view.

This is how a lot of the Cal community feels - that JT has been great for the program, but that it may be time for a change, for a lot of good reasons that can be disucussed.

This is a refreshing contrast to the posts attributing some evil personality flaw on the coach or call anyone who says anything positive about JT a "homer" and accusing Cal fans of not caring about FB for (heaven forbid) suggesting he coach another year before giving him the axe.

This is what disappointed me so much about the Braun discussion. It wasn't that people who thought he should go didn't have a point, but that they were so venemous and dogmatic in their point of view they made the BB board insufferable. Now in hindsight people can say Braun was good, it was time for him to go, and now we're doing better.

I wish we had more JT critics on this board who had this kind of perspective. We could sure use it around here.

---

I actually think the majority of Cal fans feel this way.....I know I do..but on this board, the extreme positions SEEM dominate because they are thrust upon us daily by usually the same folks and not unlike the mainstream media, these things get magnified until many people think it is a dominant view... I don't think the negabears or pumpers are dominant, but they get the most attention because they are usually in the middle of a pi$$ing contest..

I've been critical of the Guru, but I still think he can turn things around. However, if you're expecting 11 wins next year then I think you'll be very disappointed.

SeymoreBear;592291 said:

---

Okay, long time Tedford supporter.

My trust in his ability is wearing thin, but since he was responsible for reviving our program and putting the whole new memorial stadium plan/sahpc to the works he deserves our applause.

That said, this year I figured with all of our question marks we'd reach 8-5 (with a bowl win) so a 7-5 season.

I think he deserves at least 1 year in the new stadium and SAHPC, along with a better schedule next year.

But if we don't have at least 11 wins next year, things need to change. It will be officially a plateau. I'm sick of being disappointed, and I want to add that Rose Bowl rose to my tattoo (hehe)


Tedford is one of only 25 FBS coaches getting paid at least 2 million dollars a year, and is almost in the only 9 coaches making 3 million [source USA today]. This means we deserve BCS games.


With a brand new stadium, the #1 public and #2 overall university in the world, being in beautiful bay area with back to back to back (assuming this year) top 15 recruiting classes, a TOP OF THE LINE SAHPC which will be most definitely be tied for 1st in the pac-12 and in the top 15 in the nation, attracting a high profile coach should not be a problem especially if the boosters are willing to expend as much money (2.85 million) on a new HC.


So Tedford, it's your chance to show us that you can still get us to that Rose Bowl game, and beyond.

But in my eyes, you have one year.

---

Blueblood;592394 said:

---

You big homer!

---

No, this is a big homer.

Lucky my girlfriend likes big...really big.....homers! AHAHAHAHAHHHAAAAAA

BeggarEd;592311 said:

---

I agree with your sentiments on Tedford. He's done great things as a whole, but he may have plateaued or perhaps regressed. . .

---

This is my own personal opinion, but I think the media has created a notion of a "plateau" that I don't understand. Sports records are not affected by gravity, but they are often treated that way. I guess age, when it comes to athletes who reach their late-30s, early-40s, is a valid type of "gravity", and it's reasonable to talk about someone having reached a plateau, or being "on the way down". But if you leave a coach in place long enough (how are you, Mr. Paterno?), you see things will go up and down over time. He had back-to-back 11-win seasons in 2008 and 2009, his 42nd and 43rd seasons as HFC at Penn State, after many peaks and valleys along the way.

Here's another coach's first nine seasons as a basketball coach in the Pac-10:

1st 9-9 (6th)
2nd 11-7 (4th)
3rd 15-3 (2nd)
4th 9-9 (6th)
5th 8-10 (T-5th)
6th 10-8 (4th)
7th 2-16 (10th)
8th 10-8 (T-4th)
9th 10-8 (T-5th)

He reached a high of 15 wins in his 3rd season, and then 6 straight seasons of no better than 10-8, with a truly horrible season thrown in for good measure. If that is not a "plateau" (with a big crevice), then I don't know what one is. They should have fired that guy when they had the chance.

By the way, here are the next nine seasons of Mike Montgomery's career at Stanfurd:

10th 12-6 (3rd)
11th 12-6 (T-2nd)
12th 15-3 (2nd)
13th 15-3 (1st)
14th 15-3 (T-1st)
15th 16-2 (1st)
16th 12-6 (T-2nd)
17th 14-4 (2nd)
18th 17-1 (1st)

SeymoreBear;592291 said:

---

O

But if we don't have at least 11 wins next year, things need to change.

---

Uhh...11? Pretty sure he's safe if he hits eight in the reg season next year. Anyone who fires a coach after an eight-nine win season is a little kooky really.

I suspect from 2012 onward, without a Rose Bowl preceding it, the next losing season/6-6 year from Tedford will be his last.

LessMilesMoreTedford;592453 said:

---

Uhh...11? Pretty sure he's safe if he hits eight in the reg season next year.

---

I'm pretty sure I wasn't speculating whether he is going to get fired, I was saying my personal opinion of what should happen. That should mark that smug "uhh" off your post.

He is already getting what he deserves. If we wind up with a losing season again this year-with similar results against Oregon, SC and Stanford- he should be let go. Otherwise his performance next year should dictate.

This would be the last place to ask for a replacement as the names would likely be unrealistic (Chris Peterson), the usual overrated board favorites (Mike Riley) or guys that might not be a good cultural fit (Leach). The question is not whether we know anyone or whether they would be worse; the question is whether Sandy Barbour is capable of getting a top flight choice to come here. I think yes and would be shocked if she didn't have five names rummaging around in her brain. She wouldn't be much of a manager, otherwise.

Say that we continue to underachieve the next two seasons, would it be about time for Urban Meyer to come out of retirement? That said, I want JT to quash all these thoughts and go on a run the rest of this season and for seasons ahead. I think we all want that. Go Bears!

Drunkoski is pounding on his keyboard so hard right now that his fingers are bleeding

dajo9;592509 said:

---

Drunkoski is pounding on his keyboard so hard right now that his fingers are bleeding

---

LOL. I'm sure this involuntary departure from his normal day is giving him withdrawals, something fierce.

Next year, if Cal doesnt make the Rose bowl... then I think he should be out

allen will be a jr, maynard a senior... the defense will be even more seasoned

LMJ and darron thomas will be out, as will andrew luck and matt barkley(probably). no excuses next year

dajo9;592509 said:

---

Drunkoski is pounding on his keyboard so hard right now that his fingers are bleeding

---

LOL....no really, I'm totally laughing my ass off on that one....:rollinglaugh:

SeymoreBear;592302 said:

---

I wanna see what you guys think, and any HC that you would like to see if Tedford can't pull it around.

---

I wanna see you what you think when he can . GO TEDFORD

He's a good coach that has made a lot of positive changes this year. I think we're headed in the right direction. It's no easy task winning the Pac 12 given the quality of the conference. The teams he's fielding by and large are much better than what we had in the Holmoe and Gilby years, and pretty much with the exception of Snyder's 92 game you have to go back to Muncie and Roth. I'd give Tedford at least 5 more years and I wouldn't be in a hurry to give him up. I probably wouldn't even start to think about canning him unless he had 2 losing seasons in a row. He's one of the best recruiters out there. We've had some great talent roll throw in his era. Jackson, Best, Rodgers, Jordan, and now Allen. At a minumum 5 more years. He can stay 10 and I'm ok. I know what we have. He's good enough to win as long as his heart is in it.

SeymoreBear;592350 said:

---

That's ridiculous that all the toplight coaches are somehow dirty. You refer to 2 fired head coaches. Fired head coaches aren't the ONLY 2 head coaches. We don't have to hire an assistant either.....We have to move forward, someone with a plan. The biggest problem with Cal right now is we have NO identity, that's a huge problem I want a coach to come in and bring us an identity.

You can look at other teams OC or DC.


Also Leach is not dirty, that's b.s. Fire Craig James.

---

OK, dirty is the wrong word. To be more specific, at the time he was fired, there was discussion of hiring him at Cal, and more than one poster said they would not want to have their kid playing for him, as I recall. I don't think the alumni would consider him a good representative of the school.

When I referred to assistants, I meant OCs and DCs. Wasn't Gilbertson a DC when he was hired? Mike Stoops was a coordinator for his brother. Coordinators can't always step up to be the head guy. That's why I'm torn.

Hey, Jerrry babes, did you manage to enjoy the Cal oregon game even though you kept reading my posts?

No surprise to anyone, but I also support Tedford. He brings dignity and integrity to the university. I also am disappointed in our recent results, but I am not disappointed in the effort I've seen from the team. It was a killer to lose to the Dogs, but most of us foresaw a loss in Eugene. It is the Husky loss that burns so badly and how it occurred. But the players didn't lay down and roll over for their opponents. They fought their hearts out.

If losses start to mount and it continues for the next two or three years or anytime in between, it is time to think seriously about replacing JT. Most schools nowadays have promoted an asst coach, e.g., Muschamp was supposed to replace Brown; Kelly replaced Bellotti, Shaw has taken Harbaugh's place; even Kiffen was an asst to Carroll. The common denominator in all these replacements has been a knowledge of the capabilities of the assistant. They know him before they elevate him. They know the donors, alumni, students and administration will support his elevation. He will be good for the U, for the team and our image overall. Therefore, when the move is made there are no surprises.

Caveat: we replaced Mooch with Holmoe. Mooch was here for only one season and he used us as a temporary stepping stone to the NFL. The AD didn't spend much time or effort in looking for the right guy, but chose Holmoe because Mooch recommended him. I contend that this was before the fanbase was as involved in the process as it is now. Our knowledge of the candidate will be as thorough as looking at a presidential candidate. No more Holmoes, no more Gilbertson's, the fanbase will let those in power know whether the guy is right for us or not. There will be pros and cons, but it will be a candid look at the person, not just some recommendation by an outgoing coach who could care less and wanted to do something nice for a friend.

LOUMFSG2;592435 said:

---

This is my own personal opinion, but I think the media has created a notion of a "plateau" that I don't understand. Sports records are not affected by gravity, but they are often treated that way. I guess age, when it comes to athletes who reach their late-30s, early-40s, is a valid type of "gravity", and it's reasonable to talk about someone having reached a plateau, or being "on the way down". But if you leave a coach in place long enough (how are you, Mr. Paterno?), you see things will go up and down over time. He had back-to-back 11-win seasons in 2008 and 2009, his 42nd and 43rd seasons as HFC at Penn State, after many peaks and valleys along the way.

Here's another coach's first nine seasons as a basketball coach in the Pac-10:

1st 9-9 (6th)
2nd 11-7 (4th)
3rd 15-3 (2nd)
4th 9-9 (6th)
5th 8-10 (T-5th)
6th 10-8 (4th)
7th 2-16 (10th)
8th 10-8 (T-4th)
9th 10-8 (T-5th)

He reached a high of 15 wins in his 3rd season, and then 6 straight seasons of no better than 10-8, with a truly horrible season thrown in for good measure. If that is not a "plateau" (with a big crevice), then I don't know what one is. They should have fired that guy when they had the chance.

By the way, here are the next nine seasons of Mike Montgomery's career at Stanfurd:

10th 12-6 (3rd)
11th 12-6 (T-2nd)
12th 15-3 (2nd)
13th 15-3 (1st)
14th 15-3 (T-1st)
15th 16-2 (1st)
16th 12-6 (T-2nd)
17th 14-4 (2nd)
18th 17-1 (1st)

---

You are comparing the current state of Cal football to the crappy Stanford basketball in the 80s in the old Maples? They were outdrawn by their women's team.