heartofthebear;842364699 said:

---

I think I would agree with you BearsWin if Dykes was the same coach as he was last year. He may be the same man, but he is not the same coach. We are not giving him a mulligan for last year, we are recognizing that he has changed. For example, he runs practices differently to lessen injury risk.

Have you sought treatment for post traumatic stress disorder because you seem to be unable to be in the present without it triggering the past. You are not alone in comparing Dykes to Holmoe but personally I find it quite comical and I think so would players who have played for each one of them. For one thing, Holmoe was a good defensive coordinator but did not make sure to hire a good OC to handle that side of the ball. A similar mistake was made by Dykes last year if you flip the defense and offense. The difference is that Dykes realized his mistake almost immediately and improved his DC. As I recall, under Holmoe Cal was pretty dismal offensively for the entire duration.

I'm sorry that you feel so bad about your Holmoe mistake 20 years ago. Please get over it. I forgive you and I'm sure many others do as well.

---

Of course they are not the same, as Holmoe was a DC and Dykes has an offensive bent (and, if you recall, Holmoe tried repeatedly to improve his OCs, going from Cosbie to Hagan to Borges (and Borges was actually pretty good)). They are alike in that they are both misplaced as HCs, not up to the task of running the Football Program at Cal. I think your ability to psychoanalyze Dykes (He's changed because he fired the worsest DC in Cal football history and runs practices differently!) is about as good as your ability to psychoanalyze me, a fellow poster for whom you know only for my dissatisfaction with lousy coaches. That he brought the worsest DC in the history of Cal Football with him, and ran injury-inducing practices last year, only reinforces my opinion that he was a bad hire and doesn't know what he's doing in the driver's seat. Again, like Holmoe, but without so many wins to his credit.

BearsWiin;842364711 said:

---

Of course they are not the same, as Holmoe was a DC and Dykes has an offensive bent (and, if you recall, Holmoe tried repeatedly to improve his OCs, going from Cosbie to Hagan to Borges (and Borges was actually pretty good)). They are alike in that they are both misplaced as HCs, not up to the task of running the Football Program at Cal. I think your ability to psychoanalyze Dykes (He's changed because he fired the worsest DC in Cal football history and runs practices differently!) is about as good as your ability to psychoanalyze me, a fellow poster for whom you know only for my dissatisfaction with lousy coaches. That he brought the worsest DC in the history of Cal Football with him, and ran injury-inducing practices last year, only reinforces my opinion that he was a bad hire and doesn't know what he's doing in the driver's seat. Again, like Holmoe, but without so many wins to his credit.

---

He has changed a whole lot more than that.
BTW: He is creating a culture of continuous competiton in practice that gives freshmen a genuine shot to play. That is getting recruits quite interested in coming here. We landed Tre Watson because of that. There was no way that was going to happen under JT. JT continuously professed the need to give his starters the large majority of the reps so that starters were very hard to replace and replacements were not really ready for action.

heartofthebear;842364732 said:

---

He has changed a whole lot more than that.
BTW: He is creating a culture of continuous competiton in practice that gives freshmen a genuine shot to play. That is getting recruits quite interested in coming here. We landed Tre Watson because of that. There was no way that was going to happen under JT. JT continuously professed the need to give his starters the large majority of the reps so that starters were very hard to replace and replacements were not really ready for action.

---

i think that maybe one of the reasons we have NO safety depth now ...

tartbull was the first safety commit since jordan morgan who left the program .. nothing in between

im thinking we will prob see alot of craige and worstell (sp) coming up this game

BearsWiin;842364711 said:

---

Of course they are not the same, as Holmoe was a DC and Dykes has an offensive bent (and, if you recall, Holmoe tried repeatedly to improve his OCs, going from Cosbie to Hagan to Borges (and Borges was actually pretty good)). They are alike in that they are both misplaced as HCs, not up to the task of running the Football Program at Cal. I think your ability to psychoanalyze Dykes (He's changed because he fired the worsest DC in Cal football history and runs practices differently!) is about as good as your ability to psychoanalyze me, a fellow poster for whom you know only for my dissatisfaction with lousy coaches. That he brought the worsest DC in the history of Cal Football with him, and ran injury-inducing practices last year, only reinforces my opinion that he was a bad hire and doesn't know what he's doing in the driver's seat. Again, like Holmoe, but without so many wins to his credit.

---

In terms of wins to his credit, Dykes is not comparable to Holmoe. SD took a 4-8 program and turned it into a winning program in his second season (when LaTech won the WAC). I don't think Holmoe would have been close to getting a result like this as a head coach there.

Cal88;842364741 said:

---

In terms of wins to his credit, Dykes is not comparable to Holmoe. SD took a 4-8 program and turned it into a winning program in his second season (when LaTech won the WAC). I don't think Holmoe would have been close to getting a result like this as a head coach there.

---

Mon ami, you may have me confused with somebody who cares about LaTech.

In all seriousness, I wouldn't compare what Holmoe might have done at LaTech to what Dykes did at LaTech. I would only compare what they both have done at Cal.

BearsWiin;842364754 said:

---

Mon ami, you may have me confused with somebody who cares about LaTech.

In all seriousness, I wouldn't compare what Holmoe might have done at LaTech to what Dykes did at LaTech. I would only compare what they both have done at Cal.

---

Ok...so who should we have hired instead of dykes? Petersen? Lol. He sure looks like he's got uw on the right track.

Let's make a deal. If cal beats uw you'll shut up.

ducky23;842364756 said:

---

Ok...so who should we have hired instead of dykes? Petersen? Lol. He sure looks like he's got uw on the right track.

Let's make a deal. If cal beats uw you'll shut up.

---

I would love to have seen Cal lure Petersen to Berkeley. But if wasn't going to go to USC for $4m, he wasn't going to come here.

I don't do childish internet pissing-contest bets. If I'm moved to say something here, I will. You can always scroll past if it offends your delicate sensibilities.

Ha.

BearsWiin;842364759 said:

---

I would love to have seen Cal lure Petersen to Berkeley. But if wasn't going to go to USC for $4m, he wasn't going to come here.

I don't do childish internet pissing-contest bets. If I'm moved to say something here, I will. You can always scroll past if it offends your delicate sensibilities.

---

My point is (and it seems to escape you) is that uw has looked awful this season. Many would argue they've played much worse than cal has.

And while there's always a chance they could improve dramatically as the season progresses, I highly doubt it.

That doesn't mean Petersen is an awful coach. He inherited a bunch of thugs and once he gets his own players and begins to implement his own system, he will probably have some decent amount of success.

And I bet that would be exactly what you would say to justify a mediocre first season for Petersen at uw. But for some reason, you can't give dykes that same leeway.

My point being, if Petersen came to cal last year, how many games do you think he would have won? Maybe three tops considering our injury situation. But even with three wins, you would have given him the benefit of the doubt because he's the guy you wanted originally.

But with dykes, despite seeing vast vast improvement this year, you are still intent on bashing him since you already have this preconceived notion that he's an awful coach.

So I ask again. What will it take to say you're wrong about dykes. A win over Petersen? A bowl appearance? A rose bowl win?

ducky23;842364765 said:

---

My point is (and it seems to escape you) is that uw has looked awful this season. Many would argue they've played much worse than cal has.

And while there's always a chance they could improve dramatically as the season progresses, I highly doubt it.

That doesn't mean Petersen is an awful coach. He inherited a bunch of thugs and once he gets his own players and begins to implement his own system, he will probably have some decent amount of success.

And I bet that would be exactly what you would say to justify a mediocre first season for Petersen at uw. But for some reason, you can't give dykes that same leeway.

My point being, if Petersen came to cal last year, how many games do you think he would have won? Maybe three tops considering our injury situation. But even with three wins, you would have given him the benefit of the doubt because he's the guy you wanted originally.

But with dykes, despite seeing vast vast improvement this year, you are still intent on bashing him since you already have this preconceived notion that he's an awful coach.

So I ask again. What will it take to say you're wrong about dykes. A win over Petersen? A bowl appearance? A rose bowl win?

---

I disagree on Washington. Yes, they haven't looked like BSU worldbeaters, but they are 4-0 and have handled easily their last two opponents. Oregon in the first few games in 2009 didn't look that great in Chip Kelly's first year at the helm, either. But one thing that Corky the Huckster could do was recruit and sell a program, and he left UW with a full cupboard when he bolted for Smog Central. Now that talent has a real coach, and I predicted a 9-win season this year for them, right out of the gates. I see nothing to change that prediction, so I see no reason to rationalize a mediocre season for Petersen at UW.

Had Dykes merely had a mediocre season, I would have given him leeway (I'm sure he would have appreciated that). But he didn't have a mediocre season. He had the worst season in Cal history, and as I've noted that Oaktown has stated eloquently and patiently, it takes a special effort to be that bad.

You also seem to underestimate the effect that a coach has on a college program. I've already shown examples where Saban took an 0-11 MSU team to 6-5 the following year and Meyer took 2-9 Bowling Green to 8-3 the following year. Good coaches come in and change the culture immediately, they know exactly what they want to do and how to accomplish it. None of this feeling around trying to figure things out BS like we saw last year and hotb tellingly says Dykes worked to change in the offseason. A coach like Saban, Meyer, or Petersen would have said I don't care if these guys are injured, these other guys are going to step in and step up, and we're going to win ball games. Then they would put those players in a position to succeed, playing to strengths and masking deficiencies. They'd be flexible with schemes given available personnel, not try to jam the TFS down the throats of players who might not be suited to the system. You may disagree, but with any one of those three, with their track records and the way we know they operate, I would have expected a minor bowl appearance from the Bears last year.

My notion that Dykes is an awful coach is not based on a preconception. It is based on his abysmal performance in the role of HC last year, a year where the TV cameras caught him candidly asking Franklin why things weren't working, because we have the players. If HE thinks we had the players, why don't you? And yes, we're seeing improvement over last year, but, Christ, how could we not? This is a vast improvement only compared to last years abysmal performance, not any reasonable metric.

I don't know what it will take to say I'm wrong about Dykes. It's so out of the realm of possibility that it could happen, I haven't given that specific query any serious thought. I have said that I'd eat my hat if Cal went 6-6 this year. But 4-8 is much more likely the best-case scenario this year, assuming the staff doesn't find a way to lose the two more winnable games on the schedule. Then we're on to next year and a ready-made excuse in the tougher schedule. Oh, and we'll be young, again, I expect.

heartofthebear;842364732 said:

---

He has changed a whole lot more than that.
BTW: He is creating a culture of continuous competiton in practice that gives freshmen a genuine shot to play. That is getting recruits quite interested in coming here.


if you ignore things like the scouting services.. He is beating out the Wac and Big Sky competition however.

BearsWiin;842364772 said:

---

Oh, and we'll be young, again, I expect.

---

I don't know why it is, but other than Marvin Phillip we never seem to get any guys over 22 or 23 years old.

OaktownBear;842364776 said:

---

I don't know why it is, but other than Marvin Phillip we never seem to get any guys over 22 or 23 years old.

---

ARE YOU MOCKING ME!!! I WILL NOT BE MOCKED!!!one!!

BearsWiin;842364759 said:

---

You can always scroll past if it offends your delicate sensibilities.

---

Actually, you're tedious and boring, not offensive. IGNORE is much better than scrolling past your long screeds.

SonOfCalVa;842364811 said:

---

Actually, you're tedious and boring, not offensive. IGNORE is much better than scrolling past your long screeds.

---

That's an option too, for the weak-minded. Go for it.

BearsWiin;842364818 said:

---

That's an option too, for the weak-minded. Go for it.

---

Oh boy. Your mom gets you high speed internet in your basement "apartment" for your 45th birthday, and we all have to deal with this pointless b$#@$hit. I'm going to take a wild guess that you've never owned a business or been put in charge of anything of real complexity and value. Winning is quick and easy in Madden, but in real life, turning around something as big and complicated as a college football program takes time. Your simple mind only looks at the results, but there are so many signs that Sonny has steered the ship into a positive direction.

Also, if you have such a problem with him, pony up the money to fire him and bring in Nick Saban, big boy. Otherwise, STFU. It'd probably take 500 years to make that kind of money at your current salary, so we'll just keep waiting.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842364819 said:

---

Oh boy. Your mom gets you high speed internet in your basement "apartment" for your 45th birthday, and we all have to deal with this pointless b$#@$hit. I'm going to take a wild guess that you've never owned a business or been put in charge of anything of real complexity and value. Winning is quick and easy in Madden, but in real life, turning around something as big and complicated as a college football program takes time. Your simple mind only looks at the results, but there are so many signs that Sonny has steered the ship into a positive direction.

Also, if you have such a problem with him, pony up the money to fire him and bring in Nick Saban, big boy. Otherwise, STFU. It'd probably take 500 years to make that kind of money at your current salary, so we'll just keep waiting.

---

Ad hominem attacks impress me about as much as exhortations to shut up on an internet message board.

Are you capable of responding to anything without sarcasm? What a miserable personality you must have.

Yes, everything is the responsibility of the coaching staff, even weight training. Guess what, Dykes, the fellow you say doesn't have management skills or vision, had insight enough to get rid of the S&C people and replace them immediately after the 2013 season. In-game strategy is a joint effort of the offensive and defensive coordinators. Dykes has placed his faith in their ability to run the right plays and place players correctly in order to prevent the opposition from scoring. So I guess your real gripe is with Art Kaufman. On offense, we scored enough to defeat 95% of the teams in Div. 1.

6bear6;842364891 said:

---

Are you capable of responding to anything without sarcasm? What a miserable personality you must have.

Yes, everything is the responsibility of the coaching staff, even weight training. Guess what, Dykes, the fellow you say doesn't have management skills or vision, had insight enough to get rid of the S&C people and replace them immediately after the 2013 season. In-game strategy is a joint effort of the offensive and defensive coordinators. Dykes has placed his faith in their ability to run the right plays and place players correctly in order to prevent the opposition from scoring. So I guess your real gripe is with Art Kaufman. On offense, we scored enough to defeat 95% of the teams in Div. 1.

---

I generally respond to personal attacks with derision; they deserve little else. I recommend it.

It's nice to see somebody acknowledge, however circuitously, that Dykes is accountable for the abysmal performance of the team last year, and not just somebody buffeted around by the winds of some perfect storm. The HC sets the tone, and it all flows from him. As for your strategery comments, I prefer that people use confidence instead of faith; if he's using faith, I want him gone even more quickly than before. It's the guy at the top who is responsible for his underlings performing, and if his OC and DC can't get on the same page, it's on him. Shades of Holmoesque poor management, again. And I don't get why there's so much "faith" that the changes Dykes made in the offseason will be good or right changes, since it was his original decision to bring in Buh and run practices a certain way and have S&C a certain way, all of which were lousy decisions. Why the confidence that his more recent decisions will be any more competent? Actually I do think it's faith, since faith is something one believes in despite the absence of supporting evidence, or despite evidence to the contrary.

We can all argue what alleged "fact" as to any play, aspect thereof, or coaching decision has occurred, or what each of those means.

We can also argue on a scale of 1 to 10 how each one of those "facts" should be weighted, on a way to a conclusion. Fine.

Hindsight tends to either "support" or "contradict" the conclusion --fairly or unfairly. A result of any particular play or call that occurred was either probable, possible, or whatever (based on probabilities maybe a certain result might occur). Fine. Kids make mistakes. Coaches do too. They play hunches, etc., and need to.

In the pursuit of what it all means, we might be right, we might be wrong.

What IS hard to deny though, it seems to me, is that this year's team is vastly different from last. Shortcomings? Yes. Issues? Yes.

But, and here's the point, IMPROVEMENT? Yes. How much? Well, despite the latter halves of the NW'trn and crappy Ariz game, there is hope and optimism that we COULD win. With hope, there's LIFE.

And we have that this year. (Like it or not, haha.)

I say we are going to win some more games, based on the attitude, improvement, and life we have seen. Who wants to bet me, that that friggin arizona punch in the gut doesn't translate to anger grit and resolve, rather than lay over die and quit? Bring it on.

GO BEARS!! . .. ... :headbang

BearsWin: You've become progressively more articulate as time has gone on. Like I said, timing is important so maybe next time you should wait a few days after the game before posting to sober up or whatever you did since Sunday. Maybe you just needed to calm down as we all did.

In any case, I more clearly see your point, and, in behalf of you, I'm going to start a new thread:nono:

But a short response is in order.

I have a concern that Dykes gives Franklin too much power and that, because of that, the offense dominates the needs of the defense. I'm also concerned that Franklin may have a conflict of interest at times. I do like Dykes. My hope is that, with enough support, Dykes gains enough confidence to sever ties with Franklin. I know this is wishful thinking. But we also thought Dykes was never going to fire Buh either (he said as much). I'm banking on Dykes being smart enough and committed enough to eventually lose patience with some of Franklin's antics. That does not mean I am against having an OC capable of running a quick strike high octane offense.

Anyway, in that sense I am in potential ageement with you.

The thread I am starting will allow you to lay down the plan for how Cal can get a new and better coach asap. If you choose not to participate, I will do the best I can to represent your point of view. Once we get a good plan, I will submit it to the chancellor's office or wherever so that it can be voted on. Because, you're absolutley right. Cal deserves better and time's a wastin'.

Keep up the picayune differences between my expression of Dykes faith in his coordinators and your chosen word of confidence which amounts to the same thing in my mind. But if you want to play little games, I guess we have to put with it. I'm not about to "ignore" you as I haven't pressed that button on anyone.

With respect to Buh, I believe Dykes releasing him from his coordinator duties is acknowledgement that his original judgment was incorrect. Andy Buh was not qualified to run the defense. Have you ever erred in your business, if you have a business? Have you ever placed confidence in someone and they failed you? You had faith they would achieve the goal you set out for them, because you had confidence in their ability. Alas, it didn't come true. You must hate yourself for having confidence in Holmoe since you constantly refer to him. Don't worry, in 30 or 40 years you'll get over it.