jamonit;842340039 said:

---

I think we can realistically beat Northwestern, Sac State is a lock, WSU, Wash, AZ, and maybe an upset or two.

---

Now that you've tempted fate by calling Sac State a lock, I can see the football gods throwing a big fat donut into our win column.

KoreAmBear;842340011 said:

---

Jamonit - for a guy who seems very close to the program being frustrated that people are underplaying our chances this year, I think that is a good sign (as opposed to you resigned to agree). I just think there were too many unfortunate variables last year, esp. on D, that brought a perfect storm of really bad football. A lot of this has changed, especially with super duper key guys like Scarlett, McClure, Avery, Moose, Adcock, Sina, etc. back healthy. Imagine if those guys were healthy, as well as having Forbes and McCain all playing like we should have. I doubt we would have been the laughing stock we were. Then add a guy with the coaching chops of Kaufman. Plus year 2 under tTFS and with Goff adding 20 lbs and no longer a true freshman, how can we not improve not only a little but a lot? This analysis is a reasonable guess, but I would say is more close to reality than any forecast rag that saw last year's result and had their copy for us already made in January. I'm bullish on the Bears!

---

This exactly^^^ nice post

pingpong2;842340041 said:

---

Now that you've tempted fate by calling Sac State a lock, I can see the football gods throwing a big fat donut into our win column.

---

Wow I didn't know I had that kind of power.... It is a lock we lose every game next year!!!

KoreAmBear;842340020 said:

---

That's us in a nutshell for this season. Thanks gobears725. I mean teams like Buffalo, Tulane and UNLV were making bowl games. A bowl game isn't something unreachable this season.

---

The reason we cannot compare ourselves to teams like Buffalo, Tulane and UNLV with regard to bowl eligibility is the fact that we play 10 games against the Big 5 conference teams.

likwid1;842340050 said:

---

The reason we cannot compare ourselves to teams like Buffalo, Tulane and UNLV with regard to bowl eligibility is the fact that we play 10 games against the Big 5 conference teams.

---

yea but we can easily compare ourselves to washington st who had a pretty miserable first year under Leach and then improved and made a bowl game. we run a similar system. id say we have more overall talent than they did last year.

likwid1;842340050 said:

---

The reason we cannot compare ourselves to teams like Buffalo, Tulane and UNLV with regard to bowl eligibility is the fact that we play 10 games against the Big 5 conference teams.

---

Yes I know. Northwestern, Sack (yes pun intended) State, and BYU (esp at home) are beatable. So are Colorado at home, @Wazzu, UW at home. Could steal one at home v. UCLA or Furd. Maybe one year (why not this year) we finally beat $C. Teams we thought were going to be good, may not be. With all due respect to Dennis Green, the Bears are not who we thought they were.

jamonit;842339965 said:

---

I am so tired of the horrible negativity on this site. So many people I believe are just talking negative to just vent or cause trouble. If you truly believe we won't win more than 2 games lets make a bet. Put your negative posting where your fingers are.

If Cal wins 2 games or less I won't post for a month for every 5 takers, 2 months for every 10, 3 months for every 15, and so on....

If Cal does win 3 or more games you can't post for the rest of the season. The second they hit their 3rd win that is it no more posting until the last game.

Here is the thing. Some of you act like you know we have no chance and last year is going to repeat itself. You don't want to see maybe why we had problems and if we have improved those. I am tired of all the people coming onto every thread and spewing this negative crap and I am willing to put my belief that we will win over 3 games on the line... So who here is so firm in their belief that we will win 2 or less games like they are claiming in every thread?

I am betting when put to the sword no one will take the bet.

---

I'm in.

GB54;842340061 said:

---

I'm in.

---

Sweet! One in lets see who else truly believes we can't win more than 2 games

jamonit;842340035 said:

---

How is that realism? It is an unknown. While you can say signs point to a bad season because of how bad the previous year was... If you don't take into count the circumstances that we went through last year. The changes that have been made or improvements won't make a difference in the possibility for success of the team is not realism to me. To be realistic you can make an educated guess, but drawing conclusions of a low win total is not realism.... It is a guess that could be educated or not. Personally I see 4-5 wins this year and we could win less and we could win more. I go off of what makes success teams from year to year and look at last years young inexperienced roster that was slammed by an insane amount of injuries compared to people just looking at the 1-11 record trying to judge future success.

---

Lol, you see us winning 4-5 games this upcoming year? Good luck.

The problem isnt that we mightve improved from last year. The problem is that the Pac-12 is one of the best conferences in the nation and everyone else has improved as well. I agree with the poster above who said Dykes gave us NO INDICATION of being able to win more than a few games for us. We can blame injuries all we want but our team wasn't that badly injured versus Portland State and look at what happened.

Here is how I see this season going down -

If we win against NW, we'll probably win 2-4 more games (wins against NW, SacState, BYU, and possibly Arizona/WSU/Colorado).
If we lose against NW in a close one, and lose to Arizona, we'll win only 2 games for the rest of the season (Sac State and BYU)
If we lose big against NW, we win only 1 game for the rest of the season (Sac State being that win).

Obviously I am banking this all on momentum which I think we will lose completely by Week 3 against Arizona depending on how things turn out.

Either way, if we win less than 5 games this season, we need to let Dykes go. The experiment with Dykes clearly would not be working at that point. Also doesnt help that our recruiting is suffering as evidenced by how bad our recruiting class is shaping out to be. There is simply no optimism for Cal football and anything less than 5 wins = goodbye Dykes IMO.

Cal Panda Bear;842340070 said:

---

Lol, you see us winning 4-5 games this upcoming year? Good luck.

The problem isnt that we mightve improved from last year. The problem is that the Pac-12 is one of the best conferences in the nation and everyone else has improved as well. I agree with the poster above who said Dykes gave us NO INDICATION of being able to win more than a few games for us. We can blame injuries all we want but our team wasn't that badly injured versus Portland State and look at what happened.

Here is how I see this season going down -

If we win against NW, we'll probably win 2-4 more games (wins against NW, SacState, BYU, and possibly Arizona/WSU/Colorado).
If we lose against NW in a close one, and lose to Arizona, we'll win only 2 games for the rest of the season (Sac State and BYU)
If we lose big against NW, we win only 1 game for the rest of the season (Sac State being that win).

Obviously I am banking this all on momentum which I think we will lose completely by Week 3 against Arizona depending on how things turn out.

Either way, if we win less than 5 games this season, we need to let Dykes go. The experiment with Dykes clearly would not be working at that point. Also doesnt help that our recruiting is suffering as evidenced by how bad our recruiting class is shaping out to be. There is simply no optimism for Cal football and anything less than 5 wins = goodbye Dykes IMO.

---

LOL of course everyone else improved and we might have improved.

Washington lost their 3 year SR QB and stud RB who rushed for 1700+ yards and 20TDs not to mention their stud TE also.... Throw in that they are learning a new system and no them being better is very unlikely even with Chris Peterson.

AZ is replacing one of the best college RBs (a Cal killer) and their starting QB who was very good last year. They won't be as good most likely.

USC lost some of their better starters have very little depth. Most likely they won't win 10 games again this year.

Oregon State lost the best college player in the nation last year IMO and while they have a SR QB they probably won't be better

Stanford lost a ton of DEF and DEF leadership not to mention their starting RB... Oh and 4 of their starting OL... Chances are they won't be as good next year

Oregon loses 2700+ of their receiving yards out of the 3600+ they threw last year. They will probably be at least as good with their QB and running game, but that is a ton of production they need to replace.

You see other teams just don't get better every year. The best way to tell is returning talent, returning production, returning experience. Having upperclassmen and heavy SR starters help. Having a lot of return starters help. Having a returning QB helps. So no not all teams got better, but if you are so sure I am more than happy to take your bet?

Cal Panda Bear;842340070 said:

---

The problem is that the Pac-12 is one of the best conferences in the nation and everyone else has improved as well.

---

Sorry, way too early to tell. Even without getting into whatever injuries and other challenges other teams may face, what basis do you have for stating that every other team in the conference will be better this year?

Let's just look at the Pac-12 North. Furd lost a ton of seniors. What makes UW better this year? They lost a pretty good QB and RB and a tremendous TE. Sure, they traded up from Sark to Peterson, but it's not yet apparent whether they will be improved. What makes Oregon better this year?

Cal isn't the only unpredictable team in the college football. No one predicted Auburn would go on its run last year. No one predicted Florida would do as poorly as they did. Teams will surprise on both sides in the Pac-12 this year, just like every other year.

Cal Panda Bear;842340070 said:

---

... Also doesnt help that our recruiting is suffering as evidenced by how bad our recruiting class is shaping out to be. ...

---

I suspect that people often tell you that your opinions are like runny poopoo or that you have the demeanor and analytic skills of a banana slug.

jamonit;842340076 said:

---

LOL of course everyone else improved and we might have improved.

Washington lost their 3 year SR QB and stud RB who rushed for 1700+ yards and 20TDs not to mention their stud TE also.... Throw in that they are learning a new system and no them being better is very unlikely even with Chris Peterson.

AZ is replacing one of the best college RBs (a Cal killer) and their starting QB who was very good last year. They won't be as good most likely.

USC lost some of their better starters have very little depth. Most likely they won't win 10 games again this year.

Oregon State lost the best college player in the nation last year IMO and while they have a SR QB they probably won't be better

Stanford lost a ton of DEF and DEF leadership not to mention their starting RB... Oh and 4 of their starting OL... Chances are they won't be as good next year

Oregon loses 2700+ of their receiving yards out of the 3600+ they threw last year. They will probably be at least as good with their QB and running game, but that is a ton of production they need to replace.

You see other teams just don't get better every year. The best way to tell is returning talent, returning production, returning experience. Having upperclassmen and heavy SR starters help. Having a lot of return starters help. Having a returning QB helps. So no not all teams got better, but if you are so sure I am more than happy to take your bet?

---

Your analysis of other teams forgets to factor in that other teams have more talent than us and/or BETTER COACHING STAFFS. Also, if you want to talk about new systems, our defense is going to be different as well under a new DC. Offensively, the TFS has yet shown that it can work.

How about this - since you love pumping that sunshine, let's up the notch. Cal wins 5 games, I quit this board all together. Cal wins less than 5, you quit this board all together. Deal?

gobears725;842340056 said:

---

yea but we can easily compare ourselves to washington st who had a pretty miserable first year under Leach and then improved and made a bowl game. we run a similar system. id say we have more overall talent than they did last year.

---

True. But it is ironic that you point to an improved Wazzu as an example of how a team can drastically improve in one year, while I see Wazzu's improvement as supporting my belief that we have too difficult of a schedule to compare ourselves to Buffalo, Tulane, and UNLV.

One other difference that bears pointing out. Even though Wazzu had a miserable first year under Leach, it appeared to most observers that this was due to the fact that Wazzu did not have PAC 12-level players, not because of poor coaching. I think many observers believe that our struggles last year were attributable in large part to poor coaching.

SonOfCalVa;842340084 said:

---

I suspect that people often tell you that your opinions are like runny poopoo or that you have the demeanor and analytic skills of a banana slug.

---

Actually, it seems like I share the similar opinion with more realistic fans on TOS. Even if other teams have not improved greatly, you still can't point to any evidence that our team will be improved as well. Keep in mind we lost a ton of talent as well to transfers + early NFL. You are banking that last year was really just based off of injuries. I think injuries were only 50% of the cause for our horrible record and that the other 50% was our incompetent coaching staff. Other Pac-12 teams have better coaching staffs + more talent. We don't.

Unit2Sucks;842340080 said:

---

Sorry, way too early to tell. Even without getting into whatever injuries and other challenges other teams may face, what basis do you have for stating that every other team in the conference will be better this year?

Let's just look at the Pac-12 North. Furd lost a ton of seniors. What makes UW better this year? They lost a pretty good QB and RB and a tremendous TE. Sure, they traded up from Sark to Peterson, but it's not yet apparent whether they will be improved. What makes Oregon better this year?

Cal isn't the only unpredictable team in the college football. No one predicted Auburn would go on its run last year. No one predicted Florida would do as poorly as they did. Teams will surprise on both sides in the Pac-12 this year, just like every other year.

---

Exactly... Colorado lost their best by far player, ASU lost 9 Def starters (although I am high on ASU because I think Kelly will have a great year in that offense), UCLA will probably be better with a good returning QB, but lost some good players including Barr who was a beast.... Utah is a complete unknown to me.

jamonit;842340039 said:

---

I think we can realistically beat Northwestern, Sac State is a lock, WSU, Wash, AZ, and maybe an upset or two.

---

Washington. Okay, lol. How about this: If Cal wins more than 2, I'm out for the season but if they win less than 5, as you predict, then you are out for next season. We share the same risk (no 5 for 1 BS).

Cal Panda Bear;842340085 said:

---

Your analysis of other teams forgets to factor in that other teams have more talent than us and/or BETTER COACHING STAFFS. Also, if you want to talk about new systems, our defense is going to be different as well under a new DC. Offensively, the TFS has yet shown that it can work.

How about this - since you love pumping that sunshine, let's up the notch. Cal wins 5 games, I quit this board all together. Cal wins less than 5, you quit this board all together. Deal?

---

No I wouldn't do that deal. I am not pumping sunshine at all... How in the world to you see winning 4-5 games as pumping sunshine?.. I am not on here all the time pumping won't win 2 games on every thread. I am not blind to what happened last year and feel 4-5 wins is likely. We could win more and we could win less... What I feel for sure is we will win more than 2 and the people pumping we won't win more than 2 should step up. Do you believe we CAN'T win more than 2? If so lets bet. Our talent and coaching is so bad STEP UP

As for more talent than us... Says who? You?

jamonit;842340103 said:

---

no i wouldn't do that deal...... Step up

---

[u][/u]lol!!!!

We could win 4 more or less. Like 2 less? That would be 2 wins, putting you in the same group you are railing against. I have no idea what your rant is.

jamonit;842340035 said:

---

How is that realism? It is an unknown. While you can say signs point to a bad season because of how bad the previous year was... If you don't take into count the circumstances that we went through last year. The changes that have been made or improvements won't make a difference in the possibility for success of the team is not realism to me. To be realistic you can make an educated guess, but drawing conclusions of a low win total is not realism.... It is a guess that could be educated or not. Personally I see 4-5 wins this year and we could win less and we could win more. I go off of what makes success teams from year to year and look at last years young inexperienced roster that was slammed by an insane amount of injuries compared to people just looking at the 1-11 record trying to judge future success.

---

This.

If we avoid the catastrophic injury bug, I don't see anyway that we aren't around 4 wins. If Sonny is worth his paycheck, we should better than that even. The talent isn't great, but its certainly better than last in the PAC-12. Sonny's and staff may not be great, but I still feel they are better than last in the PAC-12 as well.

Is 2 wins or less possible? You'd have to have an awfully short memory to think it isn't. BUT, we ARE better than 2-10 . . dagnabbit!!!

I'll take a 4 win season.....if those wins came from Stanford, USC, UCLA and Oregon. A man can only dream.

Would expect at least a 5 win season the following year.

freshfunk;842339973 said:

---

Need I remind you that we had 1 win last season and that 2 wins would actually be an improvement over last year?

I think the real sad part is that a guess of 4 wins is somehow seen as talking positive compared to 2 wins as being negative. How far the bar has fallen. In any other year 4 wins would be an absolute insult and predicting a collapse of a season

---

Cal Panda Bear;842340091 said:

---

Actually, it seems like I share the similar opinion with more realistic fans on TOS. Even if other teams have not improved greatly, you still can't point to any evidence that our team will be improved as well. Keep in mind we lost a ton of talent as well to transfers + early NFL. You are banking that last year was really just based off of injuries. I think injuries were only 50% of the cause for our horrible record and that the other 50% was our incompetent coaching staff. Other Pac-12 teams have better coaching staffs + more talent. We don't.

---

You really feel that last year's O Line and 'Pac 12 level talent' belong in the same sentence? Last year was a disaster due primarily to a very poor O Line not being able to produce a running game and not forcing the opponent's defense to worry about a running game. Also not being able to protect the QB for a long enough period of time to find an open receiver from defensive non worries about a rushing game. Yards made on offense against 3rd string defense players after being behind by 21 points at by best halftime does not count in highlighting coaching shortcomings. If the O Line doesn't produce this season, It will be more of the same. Defense will collapse again if the Offense cannot produce sustained drives or avoid 3 and Outs.

jamonit;842339965 said:

---

I am so tired of the horrible negativity on this site. So many people I believe are just talking negative to just vent or cause trouble. If you truly believe we won't win more than 2 games lets make a bet. Put your negative posting where your fingers are.

If Cal wins 2 games or less I won't post for a month for every 5 takers, 2 months for every 10, 3 months for every 15, and so on.... (I am amending this to say if I can get 5 in I will do a minimum of 3 months which is needed to apparently make this not one-sided)

If Cal does win 3 or more games you can't post for the rest of the season. The second they hit their 3rd win that is it no more posting until the last game.

Here is the thing. Some of you act like you know we have no chance and last year is going to repeat itself. You don't want to see maybe why we had problems and if we have improved those. I am tired of all the people coming onto every thread and spewing this negative crap and I am willing to put my belief that we will win over 3 games on the line... So who here is so firm in their belief that we will win 2 or less games like they are claiming in every thread?

I am betting when put to the sword no one will take the bet.

GB54 is the first to take the bet... One in.

---

Who cares if he wins more than 2. If he can't make a cheap bowl game and win at least 5 or 6 he should be let go.
Teams like WSU, CO, NW, Sac state should also be regular W's for a Cal football coach..

Dduster;842340121 said:

---

You really feel that last year's O Line and 'Pac 12 level talent' belong in the same sentence? Last year was a disaster due primarily to a very poor O Line not being able to produce a running game and not forcing the opponent's defense to worry about a running game. Also not being able to protect the QB for a long enough period of time to find an open receiver from defensive non worries about a rushing game. Yards made on offense against 3rd string defense players after being behind by 21 points at by best halftime does not count in highlighting coaching shortcomings. If the O Line doesn't produce this season, It will be more of the same. Defense will collapse again if the Offense cannot produce sustained drives or avoid 3 and Outs.

---

So... you are basically agreeing with me? Our O-line was bad last year because a) we did face injuries, and b) our O-line was NOT opening up plays for our QB + RBs. I would argue that B was a result of bad coaching by Yenser (who while I like as a person and as a recruiter, he still has lots to learn as a coach). Either way, there is NO EVIDENCE that our o-line is going to be much improved to the point where it would allow us to win 4-5 games as Jamonit is predicting. While our o-line could get better, it still has a ton of room to make up considering how every other Pac-12 team was able to dominate our line last year and are only going to be better.

GoBears58;842340124 said:

---

Who cares if he wins more than 2. If he can't make a cheap bowl game and win at least 5 or 6 he should be let go.
Teams like WSU, CO, NW, Sac state should also be regular W's for a Cal football coach..

---

THIS. :bravo

Cal Panda Bear;842340091 said:

---

Actually, it seems like I share the similar opinion with more realistic fans on TOS. Even if other teams have not improved greatly, you still can't point to any evidence that our team will be improved as well. Keep in mind we lost a ton of talent as well to transfers + early NFL. You are banking that last year was really just based off of injuries. I think injuries were only 50% of the cause for our horrible record and that the other 50% was our incompetent coaching staff. Other Pac-12 teams have better coaching staffs + more talent. We don't.

---

We lost a ton of talent to the NFL and transfers???? What?? What talent that played last year did we lose... DeAndre Coleman, Moala, Kam Jackson, Richard Rodgers. 4! ASU lost 9 starters on Def alone. Stanford lost 4 starters on the OL alone... What other player that left was so irreplaceable? Please spare me Bigelow who was horrible last year. We are deeper than any other team in the conference at WR so Rodgers was great, but not irreplaceable. Coleman, Moala, and Kam Jack are tough losses, but we could also get back a Jalil who is a beast when healthy, a Scarlett, an Avery, an McClure, etc. Not to mention our young players have gotten a ton more experience, bigger, faster, and other players like Trevor Davis (going to be amazing) and Allensworth are now available.

We played last year with an Off that had SO, JR, FR, SO, FR, FR, FR, FR, SO, JR, FR ... 6 FR, 3 SO, and 2 JRs including the QB being a true FR. This year the projection is to be JR, SR, JR, SO, JR, SO, SO, SO, SR, SR, JR... 0 FR, 4 SO, 4 JRs, and 3 SRs... Now that can change with other players stepping up or some players stepping down not to mention injuries, but are you really saying that the loss of Richard Rodgers compared to returning so many more experienced players in a second year in this system won't make us a better Off? Returning experience is one of the biggest indicators on having a good year.

jamonit;842340127 said:

---

We lost a ton of talent to the NFL and transfers???? What?? What talent that played last year did we lose... DeAndre Coleman, Moala, Kam Jackson, Richard Rodgers. 4! ASU lost 9 starters on Def alone. Stanford lost 4 starters on the OL alone... What other player that left was so irreplaceable? Please spare me Bigelow who was horrible last year. We are deeper than any other team in the conference at WR so Rodgers was great, but not irreplaceable. Coleman, Moala, and Kam Jack are tough losses, but we could also get back a Jalil who is a beast when healthy, a Scarlett, an Avery, an McClure, etc. Not to mention our young players have gotten a ton more experience, bigger, faster, and other players like Trevor Davis (going to be amazing) and Allensworth are now available.

We played last year with an Off that had SO, JR, FR, SO, FR, FR, FR, FR, SO, JR, FR ... 6 FR, 3 SO, and 2 JRs including the QB being a true FR. This year the projection is to be JR, SR, JR, SO, JR, SO, SO, SO, SR, SR, JR... 0 FR, 4 SO, 4 JRs, and 3 SRs... Now that can change with other players stepping up or some players stepping down not to mention injuries, but are you really saying that the loss of Richard Rodgers compared to returning so many more experienced players in a second year in this system won't make us a better Off? Returning experience is one of the biggest indicators on having a good year.

---

Dude, if you think we'll really BE THAT MUCH BETTER because we return more talent than other teams (which I disagree), then put your money where your mouth's at. 5+ wins, Im gone. <5 wins, you're gone.

GoBears58;842340124 said:

---

Who cares if he wins more than 2. If he can't make a cheap bowl game and win at least 5 or 6 he should be let go.
Teams like WSU, CO, NW, Sac state should also be regular W's for a Cal football coach..

---

No, you dont understand. jamonit has been CLEAR in saying 3 wins will be a success. Negativity only comes if you think 2 wins is likely.

Bowl games are for people who dont use 3 games as the "success" mark.

freshfunk;842339973 said:

---

Need I remind you that we had 1 win last season and that 2 wins would actually be an improvement over last year?

I think the real sad part is that a guess of 4 wins is somehow seen as talking positive compared to 2 wins as being negative. How far the bar has fallen. In any other year 4 wins would be an absolute insult and predicting a collapse of a season

---

You miss the point.

We're going to win 10 games.

Of course, I say this every single year.

Cal Panda Bear;842340125 said:

---

So... you are basically agreeing with me? Our O-line was bad last year because a) we did face injuries, and b) our O-line was NOT opening up plays for our QB + RBs. I would argue that B was a result of bad coaching by Yenser (who while I like as a person and as a recruiter, he still has lots to learn as a coach). Either way, there is NO EVIDENCE that our o-line is going to be much improved to the point where it would allow us to win 4-5 games as Jamonit is predicting. While our o-line could get better, it still has a ton of room to make up considering how every other Pac-12 team was able to dominate our line last year and are only going to be better.

---

Our OL was so bad last year because we were staring a RS FR, a True FR, a RS SO, a RS JR, and RS FR... Our OL was bad??? NO kidding it was bad... Of course it was. We had no upperclassmen that were any good except Adcock who got hurt in the 5th game.... AND after he went down so did our Off. That was a huge loss to our team. If you don't think having a SO LT, a SO LG, a SR C, a SR RG, and JR RT will not improve compared to players that have no played before I don't know what to say. How about we keep this simple and go one at a time... Do you think having Adcock back will make our OL better or worse? Do you think that a RS SO Steven Moore will be better than a RS FR Steven Moore that never took a snap before? Do you think a SO Borrayo would be better or worse now that he has 5 starts and more experience?

Cal Panda Bear;842340091 said:

---

Actually, it seems like I share the similar opinion with more realistic fans on TOS. Even if other teams have not improved greatly, you still can't point to any evidence that our team will be improved as well. Keep in mind we lost a ton of talent as well to transfers + early NFL. You are banking that last year was really just based off of injuries. I think injuries were only 50% of the cause for our horrible record and that the other 50% was our incompetent coaching staff. Other Pac-12 teams have better coaching staffs + more talent. We don't.

---

My comments were directed to your absurd comments on recruiting.
Obviously you're not paying much attention to Cal THIS YEAR, just groveling in the past, poopie.

Cal Panda Bear;842340128 said:

---

Dude, if you think we'll really BE THAT MUCH BETTER because we return more talent than other teams (which I disagree), then put your money where your mouth's at. 5+ wins, Im gone. <5 wins, you're gone.

---

I think we are still way to young to make a bet like that. If this was 2015 I would jump all over that because we will have way more SR leadership and upperclassmen... Their is no guarantee they can get to 5 wins and I fully admit that. Are you saying by not taking my bet that you also believe their a decent chance they win over 2 games?

This would be like me saying more than 2 and you are gone for good. I don't do that because put to the sword I wouldn't get a single bet from anyone if I made that bet... Lord knows you wouldn't take it. Hell I can only get one bet as it is now. You of course won't take it. No way you would reach that close to the line of 2 wins or less which you are claiming right? You think less than 2 right? Less than 2 wins and I am gone for good and more than 2 you are gone for good. You won't take the simple bet no way you take that one... It is the same thing except I am willing to say my projection of 4-5 may be less or more. I am not screaming on every thread we will win 5 at the least kind of guy. You are a we won't win more than 2 kind of guy so back it up.

SonOfCalVa;842340136 said:

---

My comments were directed to your absurd comments on recruiting.
Obviously you're not paying much attention to Cal THIS YEAR, just groveling in the past, poopie.

---

Do you follow recruiting? LITERALLY every recruit we are losing out on is because of a 1-11 season. Kids dont see any hope for this coaching staff and therefore are going elsewhere. Maybe you should get a subscription to some recruiting sites because then you'll know we are practically not in it for any 4-star recruits anymore.

IF we have another bad season, you really think highly-recruited kids are going to commit to us? This is why we need to get rid of Dykes after a bad season this year. The longer we wait, the worse it's going to get.