CardinalTPS;841986090 said:

---

The college near Oakland is hitting new all-time lows. Not holding your coach accountable a long time ago got you into this mess. Now your players have given up on him and you're losing to better student athletes with less physical talent. It's a downward spiral.

---

The college near Oakland? I suppose we are also the college directly across from San Francisco.

I guess that makes you the college near East Palo Alto (far worse of a place than Oakland) and the College next to San Jose (can't compare with SF).
You're also the college with no fanbase and the college with the largest AD deficit.

Holmoephobic;841986098 said:

---

The college near Oakland? I suppose we are also the college directly across from San Francisco.

I guess that makes you the college near East Palo Alto (far worse of a place than Oakland) and the College next to San Jose (can't compare with SF).
You're also the college with no fanbase and the college with the largest AD deficit.

---

I was reading a Stanfurd forum last week, and everybody -- weirdly -- kept referring to us as "the college next to the BART station." I don't know if that's some kind of slam. I mean, what's wrong with being next to a BART station?

guess it's not as cool as being next to a Caltrain station?

CardinalTPS;841986090 said:

---

The college near Oakland is hitting new all-time lows. Not holding your coach accountable a long time ago got you into this mess. Now your players have given up on him and you're losing to better student athletes with less physical talent. It's a downward spiral.

---

I'm glad we finally have a Troll from the School with Taco Bell Architecture.

You know what's weird, this thread has more Furd posters than Rule of Tree. Kinda cool.

okaydo;841986105 said:

---

I was reading a Stanfurd forum last week, and everybody -- weirdly -- kept referring to us as "the college next to the BART station." I don't know if that's some kind of slam. I mean, what's wrong with being next to a BART station?

---

They think they are being clever, but they are really just being chodes.

Only reason to hate on a BART station is if you like keeping the working class rif-raff out of your exclusive cleanly city.

Strykur;841986072 said:

---

He's already gone, if he does not want to negotiate a buyout arrangement then I am sure we can try to pull this one off.

---

Agreed. FiatSlug's prediction of Tedford being fired on November 18th seems to be right on target.

How come softball was 45/31?

CardinalTPS;841986103 said:

---

The college between Oakland and Richmond is more accurate.

The problem you have is being too close to the People's Republic of Berkeley. You believe in rehabilitation instead of accountability and think the way to get W's is to sing koombaya.

---

Rehabilitation? Is that when a Stanford student fails most of his classes but is allowed to retake all of them and graduate?

Accountability? Is that when a Stanford poster makes a dishonest argument and then follows it up with outdated generalizations that do nothing to advance the posters argument? You're lucky Stanford believes in Rehabilitation.

Wow. What an utter f*cking embarrassment.

I'm assuming this score is based on years where JT was coach (I know with some prior scores there was some years from Holmoe).

Sad sad sad. This is the last thing that JT needed with the performance on the field thus far. In some ways this is something to be more angry about.

calbear289;841986113 said:

---

Agreed. FiatSlug's prediction of Tedford being fired on November 18th seems to be right on target.

---

Depending on how this Saturday goes, it might even move up a bit.

okaydo;841986105 said:

---

I was reading a Stanfurd forum last week, and everybody -- weirdly -- kept referring to us as "the college next to the BART station." I don't know if that's some kind of slam. I mean, what's wrong with being next to a BART station?

---

They are an odd bunch. Public transportation is beneath them but touting a marching band that has the look of a Running Wolf led protest is not. Very weird.

It does suck, and it becomes bad PR for the program. But to me, its insult to injury. But I also argue, no one is going to be mentioning this stat if you are waiting for Cal to run through the Rose Bowl tunnel on Jan. 1. Some of this is the media getting excited about the numbers-I will have real indignation when the rate is below the NCAA minimum.
BUT, I think you also have to ask-so, the study halls, and the academic support that is in place, what isn't working? We are recruiting the "wrong kids?" What do the other Cal sports do that football doesn't?

On further reading, I wonder how much the aberration of 2005 plays into this. According to SB, that year 3 of the football members listed as not graduating actually got their degrees but were outside the 6 year window so were not counted. That year 5 students left early to go to the NFL.

It would be interesting to see how much this skews the data.

turkey02;841986055 said:

---

Positive spin, this allow Cal to bring in the 'fired for cause' argument and avoid payment on the rest of the contract?

---

Maybe, but that's a dangerous game to play. We all know that it's harder to graduate at Cal than other schools, especially for athletes. Tosh, for one, has been using this against us. I don't think it would help hire the next coach if he thinks he'll be fired for cause for something he wouldn't have to pay attention to at a school with community college like standards.

Then again, it may weed out coaches that just pay lip service to academics. For instance, Monty was brought in to not only help the basketball team's on court performance, but because the administration wanted to clean up the academic side too. He's succeeding on both counts, but I'm sure it limits who he can go out and recruit (or more precisely, Monty himself limits who he recruits a bit to those he thinks will fit better).

I do think we are recruiting the wrong kids, and while we may have amazing resources, we probably don't have the right personnel to handle those types. The way SC does because well, they have more experience with the "wrong kids". As I pointed out yesterday, those post NSD recruits had HUGE red flags, yet we took them anyway, and they all failed to qualify. Again, all goes back to who's in charge. These kids want for nothing.

72CalBear;841986085 said:

---

Now I want to see Tedford's birth certificate!!

---

BTW, Tedford was born in Kenya.

ColoradoBear1;841986129 said:

---

Maybe, but that's a dangerous game to play. We all know that it's harder to graduate at Cal than other schools, especially for athletes.

---

Do we all know that?

freshfunk;841986128 said:

---

On further reading, I wonder how much the aberration of 2005 plays into this. According to SB, that year 3 of the football members listed as not graduating actually got their degrees but were outside the 6 year window so were not counted. That year 5 students left early to go to the NFL.

It would be interesting to see how much this skews the data.

---

2005 had a very large impact as it lowered the GSR 4 year average from 54 to 48. Assuming equal size classes, one would expect that 2005 to have a 24% lower GSR than the 2001 class that rolled off the books.

But also of note is that players going to the NFL are not supposed to count against the GSR if they leave in 'good academic standing'. Not sure exactly what that means - is it based on finishing an acceptable level of units completed or just having a qualifying GPA for the previous semester, or both?

freshfunk;841986128 said:

---

On further reading, I wonder how much the aberration of 2005 plays into this. According to SB, that year 3 of the football members listed as not graduating actually got their degrees but were outside the 6 year window so were not counted. That year 5 students left early to go to the NFL.

It would be interesting to see how much this skews the data.

---

From ESPN

Note: These figures are the the NCAA's "Graduation Success Rates," which include transfer and athletes who leave in good academic standing, unlike the federal rate, which does not count transfers. The GSR and federal rate calculations measure graduation over six years from initial college enrollment, so these numbers are for 2004.


It looks like if you leave in good academic standing it will not hurt the GSR rates but will hurt the federal rate.

Fire Poncho Boy today.

Well, I suppose these results help explain why we were the best non-cheating team in the Pac-10 in 2004 and 2006.

ducky23;841986059 said:

---

this guy is either Amy or Drunkoski trying to make the pumpers look stupid.

---

No. I just checked the original story and AMY in just 10 minutes has already turned Wilner's blog into a toxic waste dump.

So I'm a little disappointed with the reporting here. Assuming SB's data is accurate, the GSR could've actually been more like 58% than 48%. This is including the 3 players that aren't being counted that did graduate and 5 players who left early who might've graduated.

58% is a lot better than 48%. However, it still ranks pretty low in the Pac.

It is much higher than our basketball team @ 50%.

The other stat that needs scrutinizing is the direction of the numbers. It sounds like the 2011-12 data reflects the cohort from 2002-05 which would correlate with JT's arrival.

I suppose it's debatable how far back he would be responsible for. Is he responsible for the seniors who graduated/didn't graduate in '02? What about football players who graduated/didn't graduate in '03?

2009-10: 65/62
2010-11: 54/52
2011-12: 48/47

And, actually, a 58% GSR would be an improvement over the prior year which was 54% (which is the cohort 2001-2004).

How many players left in 2004 to the NFL? This is Aaron Rodgers' class.

The hits just keep coming. The longer Tedford stays the more his iconic stature becomes diminished.

Losing trend
Minor bowl appearances
No BCS bowls
10 straight losses to USC
3 straight losses to Stanford
Never once has he done a California sweep
And now poor academics

Letsroll;841986161 said:

---

The hits just keep coming. The longer Tedford stays the more his iconic stature becomes diminished.

Losing trend
Minor bowl appearances
No BCS bowls
10 straight losses to USC
3 straight losses to Stanford
Never once has he done a California sweep
And now poor academics

---

2-13 record in games played in Southern California

(We beat UCLA at the Rose Bowl in 2009 and Texas A&M in San Diego in 2006. That's it.)

Only one remaining option for Tedford to stay in all of our good graces...take a reasonable buyout and resign with dignity.

Tedhead03;841986182 said:

---

Only one remaining option for Tedford to stay in all of our good graces...take a reasonable buyout and resign with dignity.

---

+1 but does Tedford care about the good graces of Cal fans. I am not convinced he does

freshfunk;841986157 said:

---

So I'm a little disappointed with the reporting here. Assuming SB's data is accurate, the GSR could've actually been more like 58% than 48%. This is including the 3 players that aren't being counted that did graduate and 5 players who left early who might've graduated.

58% is a lot better than 48%. However, it still ranks pretty low in the Pac.

It is much higher than our basketball team @ 50%.

The other stat that needs scrutinizing is the direction of the numbers. It sounds like the 2011-12 data reflects the cohort from 2002-05 which would correlate with JT's arrival.

I suppose it's debatable how far back he would be responsible for. Is he responsible for the seniors who graduated/didn't graduate in '02? What about football players who graduated/didn't graduate in '03?

2009-10: 65/62
2010-11: 54/52
2011-12: 48/47

And, actually, a 58% GSR would be an improvement over the prior year which was 54% (which is the cohort 2001-2004).

How many players left in 2004 to the NFL? This is Aaron Rodgers' class.

---

Why should those three players who graduated so late be counted? The metric is for players on track to graduate within a specific time frame. If you fall outside that time frame, you did not meet the criteria.

okaydo;841986105 said:

---

I was reading a Stanfurd forum last week, and everybody -- weirdly -- kept referring to us as "the college next to the BART station." I don't know if that's some kind of slam. I mean, what's wrong with being next to a BART station?

---

Nothing is wrong with being next to a BART station. In fact, that is a positive. It's just that those whiny entitled snotty suburban geeks think that it's better to be next to a shopping mall and really expensive McMansions.

Holmoephobic;841986119 said:

---

They are an odd bunch. Public transportation is beneath them but touting a marching band that has the look of a Running Wolf led protest is not. Very weird.

---

That is their way of expressing "INDIVIDUALITY". Safe, uninspired and bo bo boring as well as loutish.

The whole anti-mass transit thing is so provincial. Silly kids.

Mr. Triangle;841986143 said:

---

From ESPN

Note: These figures are the the NCAA's "Graduation Success Rates," which include transfer and athletes who leave in good academic standing, unlike the federal rate, which does not count transfers. The GSR and federal rate calculations measure graduation over six years from initial college enrollment, so these numbers are for 2004.


It looks like if you leave in good academic standing it will not hurt the GSR rates but will hurt the federal rate.

---

Ah ok. Would be nice to see some concrete numbers here and understand the data.

socaliganbear;841986192 said:

---

Why should those three players who graduated so late be counted? The metric is for players on track to graduate within a specific time frame. If you fall outside that time frame, you did not meet the criteria.

---

Why not? I knew students who stopped half way through school to take extended time off (job, personal matters at home, home sick) who came back and finished up the units they needed to graduate. And, yes, it was outside a 6 year window.

freshfunk;841986248 said:

---

Why not? I knew students who stopped half way through school to take extended time off (job, personal matters at home, home sick) who came back and finished up the units they needed to graduate. And, yes, it was outside a 6 year window.

---

Nothing wrong with that at all. But thats just what the metric is. For everyone, Bama, Furd, Duke, Texas Tech, Cal, Rutgers etc.

It's like complaining about how a teacher grades exams because you were a few points away from passing.

It's just a spin job. Like when JT says players didnt have their degree reqs in order before leaving early. Making it sounds like they were a Stats class away from their degree. What he really means is we weren't able to get our guys back on track i.e. in good standing, before they left early.