3146gabby;842233793 said:

---

There seems to be a distinct division betw two schools of thought here, altho both I believe share in their great concern about the state of affairs, uncertainty about SD, and confusion as to what is the best and most realistic course of action. There is no argument that this is the worst team that any of us can remember (whether better/same than Holmoe' last, who cares?). It is however a lot harder to know what is the right path particularly as we all sit before our computers with a greater or lesser knowledge of football and certainly little info as to what goes on behind the football walls. And none of the critics on this board, including me can point to a SD track record that we had w/Tedford last season.

One group on this board has concerns, tries to analyze with some specifics, and see whether the ensuing picture is fuzzy, partially fuzzy, partially clear or fully clear. That group is uncertain about SD, not happy, recognizes the severity of the problem and ultimately acknowledges that knowing what is the best tact right now is hard to say.

The other relies it seems exclusively on the rant and the attack. Anyone who may think a little differently is an apologist at best, a jerk at worst. This group like Fox news relies on quasi-clever one liners and dismissive retorts.

The former is legitimate, the latter adds only hostility and spleen to the debate.

---

the latter actually adds a lot of good points minus the occasional hyperbole. it can come off as rude or annoying but take a look at sonny's comments from the exit interview. the thought that went into those comments should in no way be representative of this university. it was offensive and arrogant and to many fans gave insight into our failures this year and showed very little forethought.

if you want to ignore the angry fans rant because of the emotion often involved in their rant then thats on you. but if you actually give some thought to it, a lot of what they say is actually odds on right

freshfunk;842233560 said:

---

There is no lack of talent. Stack our last 4 recruiting classes against all the other teams in the PAC. We're at least in the middle, certainly above teams like WSU and Colorado. Heck we blow Portland St away.

Yes, not every recruit panned out but that's true for every program. We also chose to play younger players when we had more experienced players.

---

I guess you haven't been paying attention. Many of our recent recruits (i.e. from 2010) are no longer on the roster and many others are injured. Our playing roster is not more talented than WSU.

Rushinbear;842233689 said:

---

We don't know what the state of the program really was/is.

We don't know what the scuttlebutt was/is among the coaching fraternity as to the desirability of an assistant coach's job at Cal.

We don't know how competitive the assistant coach's pay was/is to enable the attraction of better, at least, ACs.

We don't know how many carry over players really bought in to SD and his staff. There was a lot of talk about how committed the players were, but we don't know if it was just talk.

We don't know a lot that has an impact on the team's performance.

We know that JT made two deals with the devil: 1. too many recruits couldn't/wouldn't do the academic work; and 2. too many recruits were promised things that their football abilities couldn't deliver.

We know that the departure of top performers (for various reasons, each of them diagnostic) showed that the program had become toxic.

We know that cleansing a program of toxicity takes more than winning games and can't be done with a wave of the magic wand.

We know that SD will not be fired this year and maybe not next.

I don't know that SD is or is not the right guy. Neither does anyone else.

We can be disappointed, but let's not be stupid.

---

The best part of this post is how most of the we-knows are conjecture. Well done.

Phantomfan;842233403 said:

---

Bull sh*t.

First, what ifs are ridiculous here.

It only came out that the GSR had dropped to a ridiculous low mid season. Before that, it was not his recruiting class, and the numbers looked VERY good, so your claim that no one cared is way off.

in 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, and 2005 our APR was 2nd in the conference only to Stanfurd.
in 2010 our APR was 6th in conference and people dismissed it as strange... a bad year, a bad class, lots of trouble makers, things will pick up.
in 2011 our APR fell to 9th in conference and people were pissed off.
in 2012 our APR fell to 12th in conference........and people flipped out like crazy and demanded better

So, yeah, in 2012 people kind of lost their **** about it...because it was revealed mid season that, holy ****: all this talk about Tedford "doing it right" was bullshit, and dropping to 9th was no aberration as claimed, it was a trend, and the trend had hit bottom. To top it off, this academic embarrassment was losing games, and if the trend continued, we would be banned from playing a bowl. Basically, the issue did not come up until he had started to lose, and by his last season, the drum beat was at LEAST as much about his 12 place APR as it was about his winning 3 games.

Kind of hard to get mad about something before it is known, though. Dontchathink?


Nice try though.

---

Phantom I don't doubt your sincerity on the issue. But I absolutely doubt Sandy's. Although I do have to tell you that 2012 APR came out in the summer, so it was known publicly long before the season started. But the fans don't make the decision and I'm sorry, RD is right. There is no way a successful Tedford would have been fired for academics. (why would he when guys like Holmoe and Gilby weren't fired for worse.)

Bottom line. Dykes' APR in 2012 was ten points higher than Tedford's and that was the only year his APR was not worse than Tedford's. Had LaTech been in the Pac-12, they would have ranked 10th. Dykes record on academics is not good. If APR was important to her, Sandy would not have hired Dykes.

Also, Cal's admin had the data. They knew for a couple of years that things were sliding and as long as they wanted to keep Tedford they covered for him.

heartofthebear;842234330 said:

---

I guess you haven't been paying attention. Many of our recent recruits (i.e. from 2010) are no longer on the roster and many others are injured. Our playing roster is not more talented than WSU.

---

You're right. Sonny is a spectacular coach and will get us to the Rose Bowl next year. Sandy should give him a 5 year extension. Anyone not being nice to him is a negabear.

Rushinbear;842233689 said:

---

We don't know what the state of the program really was/is.

We don't know what the scuttlebutt was/is among the coaching fraternity as to the desirability of an assistant coach's job at Cal.

We don't know how competitive the assistant coach's pay was/is to enable the attraction of better, at least, ACs.

We don't know how many carry over players really bought in to SD and his staff. There was a lot of talk about how committed the players were, but we don't know if it was just talk.

We don't know a lot that has an impact on the team's performance.

We know that JT made two deals with the devil: 1. too many recruits couldn't/wouldn't do the academic work; and 2. too many recruits were promised things that their football abilities couldn't deliver.

We know that the departure of top performers (for various reasons, each of them diagnostic) showed that the program had become toxic.

We know that cleansing a program of toxicity takes more than winning games and can't be done with a wave of the magic wand.

We know that SD will not be fired this year and maybe not next.

I don't know that SD is or is not the right guy. Neither does anyone else.

We can be disappointed, but let's not be stupid.

---

We do know that our OC and DC pay was very high and much higher than before. Its a matter of (very) public record.

FF is right. Most of your "we know" comments are not based on actual fact.

3146gabby;842233793 said:

---

There seems to be a distinct division betw two schools of thought here, altho both I believe share in their great concern about the state of affairs, uncertainty about SD, and confusion as to what is the best and most realistic course of action. There is no argument that this is the worst team that any of us can remember (whether better/same than Holmoe' last, who cares?). It is however a lot harder to know what is the right path particularly as we all sit before our computers with a greater or lesser knowledge of football and certainly little info as to what goes on behind the football walls. And none of the critics on this board, including me can point to a SD track record that we had w/Tedford last season.

One group on this board has concerns, tries to analyze with some specifics, and see whether the ensuing picture is fuzzy, partially fuzzy, partially clear or fully clear. That group is uncertain about SD, not happy, recognizes the severity of the problem and ultimately acknowledges that knowing what is the best tact right now is hard to say.

The other relies it seems exclusively on the rant and the attack. Anyone who may think a little differently is an apologist at best, a jerk at worst. This group like Fox news relies on quasi-clever one liners and dismissive retorts.

The former is legitimate, the latter adds only hostility and spleen to the debate.

---

There are people who support Dykes that have been extremely quick to say STFU to those who don't, call them expletives, and have posted that they aren't real Cal fans. Actually, the funny thing is that some of those people are now on the anti-Dykes side. But don't act like only the people that disagree with you are ranting and attacking.

Bobodeluxe;842233066 said:

---

When did Teddy start being referred to as TF?

:tedford

---

Yeah, especially when...
a) our OC is Tony Franklin and...
b) Tedford is later referred to as JT in the same post

Who is he, Ted Ford? Hey, newbie, get your initials straight before startin' at BI!

PS: I'm kidding.

OaktownBear;842234565 said:

---

Phantom I don't doubt your sincerity on the issue. But I absolutely doubt Sandy's. Although I do have to tell you that 2012 APR came out in the summer, so it was known publicly long before the season started. But the fans don't make the decision and I'm sorry, RD is right. There is no way a successful Tedford would have been fired for academics. (why would he when guys like Holmoe and Gilby weren't fired for worse.)

Bottom line. Dykes' APR in 2012 was ten points higher than Tedford's and that was the only year his APR was not worse than Tedford's. Had LaTech been in the Pac-12, they would have ranked 10th. Dykes record on academics is not good. If APR was important to her, Sandy would not have hired Dykes.

Also, Cal's admin had the data. They knew for a couple of years that things were sliding and as long as they wanted to keep Tedford they covered for him.

---

You make a fine argument.

But, again, "if" Tedford was winning is just guessing.

The simple counter to the what-if argument is:



If Tedford had the best GSR and APR in the Pac12, he would not have been fired for losing 9 games, especially with Kline the savior on deck.
If Sandy did not have to listen to donors, Tedford would likely have been given lifetime employment.


I concede it was a product of classroom and on-field, but the implication seems to be that the classroom shortfall did not matter. That is kind of a stretch.

OaktownBear;842234582 said:

---

There are people who support Dykes that have been extremely quick to say STFU to those who don't, call them expletives, and have posted that they aren't real Cal fans. Actually, the funny thing is that some of those people are now on the anti-Dykes side. But don't act like only the people that disagree with you are ranting and attacking.

---

I did not say or even imply that those who disagree w/me are ranting and attacking. To me there are those who are opposed to DS express their sentiments with specifics and logic; they are not ranting/attacking. The others who only rant/attack are ranting/attacking.

I am only questioning the quality of dialogue here; I repeat I don't know if SD is the right guy.