Based on what I have gleened from the board over the last 24 hrs., the culture has shifted sharply toward an almost uniformly anti-Tedford sentiment. But I thought an actual poll would more accurately measure this to see for sure where folks stand after just 1 game.

Also, feel free to mention names of coaches that you think might be good and realistic replacements. And feel free to mention SB's job as well if that is part of your plan for change.

As for me, I would like to see us go after June Jones, McIntyre at SJs, Bill Belichek or Wilcox at UW. I am all for using Gould as a temporary for the rest of the year.

I throw out Steve Young's name for the sake of discussion as someone who has the qualities we need at Cal. But I don't think he has the experience or interest. Maybe he could be groomed as a potential assistant coach for QBs to start. I think he could be the next Jim Harbaugh under the right circumstances.

Since Tedford is so into ethics and integrity, he should do the noble thing and step down and release himself. Won't happen but is how it should go down. I hate the word fired. Cal is in a tough situation. All this talk about loyalty to Cal, to the athletes and whatever is a touchy topic. I, for one, talk about distancing myself, but not cuz I am a quitter, but I take these losses very hard. Anyway, no more rambling. Go Bears ( or least try to )

Please no one vote on this stupid and divisive poll.

bearblast;841937666 said:

---

Please no one vote on this stupid and divisive poll.

---

We have had much worse polls and much worse threads. Does not have to be devisive

bearblast;841937666 said:

---

Please no one vote on this stupid and divisive poll.

---

I think you should let others express their disapproval with the current state of Cal football. If we do not ask for the head of the coach after losing to Nevada on opening day of our brand new stadium, then we are accepting mediocrity. It's perfectly healthy for those in charge to know that the alumni are not going to let Cal football slide into oblivion. This poll serves that purpose.

Step down at the end of the year, save us some $.

Either way, make a new hire at the end of the year.

Bill Belichick? Is this for real?? What board am I on?

bearblast;841937666 said:

---

Please no one vote on this stupid and divisive poll.

---

Not a stupid poll at all. Tedford needs to go ASAP! This only a stupid poll if you want Cal to remain a less than average foobtall team. Tedford has had plenty of time. It is time forsomeone ew!

bearblast;841937666 said:

---

Please no one vote on this stupid and divisive poll.

---

I didn't create whatever divisiveness exists here. I merely put in poll form what already exists here and in the process gave Tedford fans a chance to voice their approval in an anonymous way.

The next five games are scrimmages (yep, even Ohio State and USC) for the Axe. It is apparent that Tedford is on his way out, the only question is when. If he manages to somehow pull it out, he gets the rest of the year. If the Axe goes back to Palo Alto for the 3rd straight year, send him out that night and see what Pendergast can do versus Washington and Oregon.

heartofthebear;841937661 said:

---

Based on what I have gleened from the board over the last 24 hrs., the culture has shifted sharply toward an almost uniformly anti-Tedford sentiment. But I thought an actual poll would more accurately measure this to see for sure where folks stand after just 1 game.

Also, feel free to mention names of coaches that you think might be good and realistic replacements. And feel free to mention SB's job as well if that is part of your plan for change.

As for me, I would like to see us go after June Jones, McIntyre at SJs, Bill Belichek or Wilcox at UW. I am all for using Gould as a temporary for the rest of the year.

I throw out Steve Young's name for the sake of discussion as someone who has the qualities we need at Cal. But I don't think he has the experience or interest. Maybe he could be groomed as a potential assistant coach for QBs to start. I think he could be the next Jim Harbaugh under the right circumstances.

---

Problem #1 is that Tedford has no buyout, and Problem #2 we're getting a new chancellor. Both of these factors may make firing this year a practical impossibility. OTOH, as a friend pointed out to me, the expectation is that a HC have four years left on his contract to show recruits he isn't going anywhere. JT has four years as of right now, so if he wants to stay, he'll want an extension.

So, assuming that we don't win in Columbus and/or at Southern Cal....

If we lose 2 of the next 3 home games in any combination (i.e. we start 1-5), I hope he resigns, but I fear we'll have to find another $7.5 M and buy him out. He would be unable to recruit at that point, and he'd be unable to get an extension. I agree that Gould should be made interim, and I'd allow him to use the remainder of the season to audition for the vacancy.

We can speculate and throw out replacement names all we want, but until we know what a new chancellor will allow the athletic department to spend, we don't know what we can get. We've been lucky with the past two chancellors -- they've been supportive of athletics.

"Problem #2 we're getting a new chancellor."

That's precisely why Tedford must be fired soon, while Birgeneau is at the helm.

socaliganbear;841937686 said:

---

Bill Belichick? Is this for real?? What board am I on?

---

would you rather go to the rose bowl or national championship game?

that's what board you are on.

:tedford

I am sure that us little people( small time donors ) are specs od dust in the eye to SB. Does anyone think that some of the BIG time donors have mentioned anything about JT or ZM. Although I think that the D was not very great on Saturday, the recurring theme is JT and ZM

He should be fired the next time we show up in white helmets.

6164bear;841938116 said:

---

He should be fired the next time we show up in white helmets.

---

+10000000. Those were gawdawful. Who chose that color combo? The guys sitting in the labs on the 2nd floor of Soda?

...a finish the year and be fired option. I like that one a lot!

:gobears:

SoFlaBear;841937886 said:

---

I agree that Gould should be made interim, and I'd allow him to use the remainder of the season to audition for the vacancy.

---

It's actually too bad you can't actually use the rest of the season to audition multiple candidates for a head coaching job, like they do on late-night talk shows. Might not be the most practical option, but it sure would be entertaining.

Does anyone really think we might get a surprise announcement during the season that JT is gone? That Sandy might just suddenly find the money and pull the plug? (I'm not asking because I'm rooting for that, I'm really wondering.)

Right now, I think that Sandy is still "blindingly" loyal to JT.
But after only winning 3 games this year and no more than 4 (everyone knows just how horrible our "Road" record is), I think that it is safe to say that this will be on the front-burner for Sandy in the following off-season.

Personally, I've never been a big fan of DC Pendergast.
But that's another topic all together.

If JT somehow is allowed to return for the 2013/2014 season, I know one thing for certain, Clancy Pendergast will be gone.

bearblast;841937666 said:

---

Please no one vote on this stupid and divisive poll.

---

You're creating division by supporting a losing cause. Have you thought of that?

We're are an average team. That's the problem.

pappysghost;841938258 said:

---

We're are an average team. That's the problem.

---

I'd like to believe this statement, but we are probably a below average team, and that is a bigger problem.

If we have another game like this, we will be the underdog for the oddsmakers in all but a couple of games this year. Even if we pull off an upset or two, we could be looking at a 4-8 or 3-9 season.


We only learned one thing about this team so far: That they are capable of playing poorly, and if they play like that again, they would likely lose to anyone on the schedule, save perhaps Southern Utah. We have no idea whether they can play well enough to beat any other team on the schedule. Fan loyalty, speeches, press conferences, hype, and recruiting class ratings don't mean this team can win. In the upcoming three weeks, we will see what the coach and his team are made of.

So far, it ain't pretty.

If we are not competitive in the next THREE games (=the anti "floodgates" will be wide open by then), Tedford should be fired.

I don't like this poll's options, so I voted "other/explain".

Sure, the team's current trajectory is going the wrong way and you have to at least consider the prospect of a change at some point in the future but why would anyone decide today on a change to occur at the end of this year, or at the end of year 2 or at the end of year 4? That's a false choice.

Yes, we could go 0-12 this year or next year and a season ending firing would probably be justified. But what if the team turns the season around, wins 9 games and a bowl, and by the end of the season we have a new young QB who looks like he is going to dominate the league for the next 3 years, a lights-out defense and a run game cranking out 8 yards a pop? How would you feel about a decision today to terminate his contract at the end of this year, or at the end of year 2 or year 4? [And for all you guys saying we'll never turn it around under this coach, we're kicking you off the bandwagon if and when it happens.]

This poll isn't really about telling the administration what they should do about the coach because the choices are so nonsensical. It's a poll to vent fan frustration.

Nothing will change. Nothing will get better.We keep hearing we have great recruiting classes and we can't beat anyone.

what did he hope would happen when we ran the ball on third down at the 2 yard line with 5 minutes left in the game?

1. we would someone stop nevada from getting a field goal?
2. maybe they would fumble?

Exlain this. It reminds me of 4th and 1 at the 2 in Arizona when we kicked a field goal to go up 6 and then Arizona drove and scored a TD and beat us by 1.

I watched Jim Mora coach UCLA and I wished we had someone like that.

As FiatSlug pointed out on the board yesterday, I don't think we really have to "buy Tedford out" in the sense that the remainder of his contract would become immediately due and payable upon his firing. In other words, if he's fired at the end of this season, I don't think we have to come up with $7.5 mill ($2.5 mill x 3).

What we would have to do is pay two head coaching salaries through the remainder of JT's contract (with perhaps some savings/offset if JT obtained other football employment).

I'm not sure how the contracts for the assistant coaches are structured. If they are one-year deals, than it wouldn't be a problem, but if they are multiple year deals with provisions similar to Tedford's, we might also have to pay their salaries. But perhaps a new coach could retain some assistants; that would also be a possibility.

So we wouldn't have to come up with a huge lump sum right away, the JT contract error could be paid for over several years, for what that's worth. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Can I change my vote. I am leaning to cleaning out his locker. If ever there was a STRAW THAT BROKE THE CAMELS BACK, this is it. In the preceeding weeks I wonder if JT was thinking, hmmm, New 321 million dollar facilities, fresh new talent, 63,000 plus on hand, Lower Div. football team to play... Hmmmm " I'd better not F^ck this one up" But he did anyway.. Douche

I think I have to agree with Dave's assessment here. We came out and laid a big egg in our new house. It is so embarrassing. I mean, if yer gonna win one game, this one is it!

I wrote in another thread that if we are not 4-2 after 6 games, he should be let go. I don't think that will happen though. He probably will be allowed to finish out the year if we are 6-6 or better. Perhaps we should now be asking, "what record allows him to keep his job?"

Strykur;841937840 said:

---

The next five games are scrimmages (yep, even Ohio State and USC) for the Axe. It is apparent that Tedford is on his way out, the only question is when. If he manages to somehow pull it out, he gets the rest of the year. If the Axe goes back to Palo Alto for the 3rd straight year, send him out that night and see what Pendergast can do versus Washington and Oregon.

---

I'd go one step further, if the next five games look similarly uninspired, announce that Big Game will be his last game.

MolecularBear007;841937675 said:

---

I think you should let others express their disapproval with the current state of Cal football. If we do not ask for the head of the coach after losing to Nevada on opening day of our brand new stadium, then we are accepting mediocrity. It's perfectly healthy for those in charge to know that the alumni are not going to let Cal football slide into oblivion. This poll serves that purpose.

---

My purpose is not to start a pi$$ing match, but to point out something much larger: there would be no upside to firing Tedford now, and it has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity.

Firing the head coach after the season opener would be like taking the ground out from under the team and putting them on quicksand. They would be waiting for the next unsettling development and would not have the focus necessary to win.

Further, if the SS Tedford is going to be righted in the next 11 weeks, then so be it. But if not, then waiting until November 18 will hurt no one.

I understand the frustration that many have and I also believe that it is apparent a change will come by Thanksgiving. But it doesn't serve the team's purposes to throw the captain overboard one game into the season.

Mid-season firings sometimes work out. Early season firing never do.

Wags;841938204 said:

---

Right now, I think that Sandy is still "blindingly" loyal to JT.

---

SB is loyal to the financial health of the Athletic Department. She didn't tie the future of the AD to Tedford. And she didn't tie her future to Tedford.

Will it be easy for SB to fire Tedford? No.

Will she do it? If the circumstances dictate it, yes, SB will fire Tedford.

The truth will be writ large in attendance and revenues. I have faith that SB will do the right thing for the Athletic Department and the football program, regardless of how distasteful she may find it.

FiatSlug;841938794 said:

---

My purpose is not to start a pi$$ing match, but to point out something much larger: there would be no upside to firing Tedford now, and it has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity.

Firing the head coach after the season opener would be like taking the ground out from under the team and putting them on quicksand. They would be waiting for the next unsettling development and would not have the focus necessary to win.

Further, if the SS Tedford is going to be righted in the next 11 weeks, then so be it. But if not, then waiting until November 18 will hurt no one.

I understand the frustration that many have and I also believe that it is apparent a change will come by Thanksgiving. But it doesn't serve the team's purposes to throw the captain overboard one game into the season.

Mid-season firings sometimes work out. Early season firing never do.

---

+1. Exellent post. And I hope we do as you suggest.

However, if the ship SS Tedford is just kept afloat, and not totally righted, such as with a 6-6 or 5-7 season, and an invite to a yet another 2nd or 3rd tier bowl, what then? Do we give him another year? Or do we fire him?

Should Tedford be fired?

1. If he has done something ethically wrong. Don't know of anything here.

2. Have someone substantially better in mind that could be hired in Tedford's place? I just looked up his record in 10 full seasons at Cal, it's 79-48, he's won 62% of those games. Bowl games in 8 of 10 of those years.

3. Yeah but Cal lost it's home opener to Nevada, at the reopening of CMS, in front of 63,000 fans. One loss is not very relevant, see answer to #2 above.

SFCityBear;841939212 said:

---

+1. Exellent post. And I hope we do as you suggest.

However, if the ship SS Tedford is just kept afloat, and not totally righted, such as with a 6-6 or 5-7 season, and an invite to a yet another 2nd or 3rd tier bowl, what then? Do we give him another year? Or do we fire him?

---

I believe the answer to that question will be largely influenced by football revenues; specifically, ESP revenues, ticket revenues (read: attendance), and the impact of the football season on Bear Backer donations.

ESP revenues are particularly critical. IIRC, 56% of seat inventory has been sold; 47% of dollar inventory has been realized as of March 31, 2012. That means that there have been proportionately fewer sales of seats priced at the higher end of the scale. The goal has been to sell 90% of ESP seat and dollar inventory. If ESP subscription renewals threaten to fall off because of team performance as opposed to increasing, it makes it more likely that Tedford will be fired.

I believe that SB's decision in November will be largely economic. It will balance the cost of paying Tedford's contract and the contract of a new football head coach through 2015, projected ESP sales and subscription renewals, projected season ticket sales, and projected Bear Backer donation revenues.

I think that the Pac-12 TV revenue stream is committed elsewhere in the AD budget, so its influence will be minimal or non-existent in the decision to retain or fire.

The foregoing should illustrate another reason why an AD does not fire a head coach after the first game of the season: doing so jeopardizes the trust placed in the AD by major donors and fans to act prudently and as steward of the overall Athletic Department.

A good AD does not fire the football head coach based solely on one game. Having said that, a good AD does not retain the football head coach based solely on one game, either.

FiatSlug;841939932 said:

---

I believe the answer to that question will be largely influenced by football revenues; specifically, ESP revenues, ticket revenues (read: attendance), and the impact of the football season on Bear Backer donations.

ESP revenues are particularly critical. IIRC, 56% of seat inventory has been sold; 47% of dollar inventory has been realized as of March 31, 2012. That means that there have been proportionately fewer sales of seats priced at the higher end of the scale. The goal has been to sell 90% of ESP seat and dollar inventory. If ESP subscription renewals threaten to fall off because of team performance as opposed to increasing, it makes it more likely that Tedford will be fired.

I believe that SB's decision in November will be largely economic. It will balance the cost of paying Tedford's contract and the contract of a new football head coach through 2015, projected ESP sales and subscription renewals, projected season ticket sales, and projected Bear Backer donation revenues.

I think that the Pac-12 TV revenue stream is committed elsewhere in the AD budget, so its influence will be minimal or non-existent in the decision to retain or fire.

The foregoing should illustrate another reason why an AD does not fire a head coach after the first game of the season: doing so jeopardizes the trust placed in the AD by major donors and fans to act prudently and as steward of the overall Athletic Department.

A good AD does not fire the football head coach based solely on one game. Having said that, a good AD does not retain the football head coach based solely on one game, either.

---

What you say about the retaining or the firing of the football coach is very logical and true, based on the values of modern times, and it is one of the tragedies of modern times.

Quite a number of years ago, a coach's job depended on performance alone, as most people's jobs depended on. The influence of money in sports has all but ruined school and amateur sports, or at least certainly transformed them into something reserved for people who have money.

At Haas Pavilion, if you have lots of money, you can spring for a very comfortable seat, a chair with a back, and a cup holder for your beverage. The more money you have to spend, the better location of your seats. If you don't have that kind of money, but still have plenty, you can buy a ticket for a cushioned bench seat. If you can't afford these options, you buy a ticket that gives you a seat on a very poorly contoured, hard, uncomfortable bench seat. And to squeeze as much money out of the patrons as possible, the seats are as narrow as possible, seemingly designed for your average 125 lb person, and then the rows are shoved so close together that the patrons are unpleasantly squished, and it becomes difficult to leave your seat for any reason.

From looking at the photographs, the videos, and reading the comments of fans who attended the last game at Memorial, the seating and fan experience there is about the same as at Haas. For $320 million, this is what we get.

I could see this happening at Stanford (which it has, to some extent), a school of and for the elite, but not at Berkeley, which was, or so I thought was, the school of and for the general public. Our athletic venues seem to be based on a 'soak the rich and screw the poor" philosophy, which really stinks.