As I've previously conjectured, if Cal joined the MWC, the Bears would be in this conference's
West Division.

With regards to the 2018 recruiting season so far, Cal is ranked a whopping #43!

As for the current MWC-West members, their rankings are as follows:

San Diego State #78
Nevada #83
Ha'wai'i #94
San Jose' State #95
Fresno State #98
UNLV #103

Boy oh boy, do I see abundant Cal potential for wins and conference championship play-off berths! I
mean, Cal could be the Alabama of the MWC-West!!!

I'm not sure if this is a serious post, but Cal wouldn't recruit nearly as well if it was in the MWC.

bross said:

---

I'm not sure if this is a serious post, but Cal wouldn't recruit nearly as well if it was in the MWC.

---

"I don't look serious?"

So, Cal might not recruit as well. So what?

I mean, let's say Cal drops over 20 ranking positions to say #65. Cal would still be at the top of the heap when
compared to the other MWC members.

What's Cal get for its #43 ranking? There are still seven Pac-12 members that have a higher ranking. They
are u$C at #4, UDub at #13, Oregon at #16, ucla at #18, Utah at #34, AsU at #36 and stanfurd at #39.
If Cal was a MWC member, I think Bay Area ambiance and new showers would have some meaningful
drawing power to keep Cal recruiting in the chips!

Blueblood said:

---

bross said:

---

I'm not sure if this is a serious post, but Cal wouldn't recruit nearly as well if it was in the MWC.

---

"I don't look serious?"

So, Cal might not recruit as well. So what?

I mean, let's say Cal drops over 20 ranking positions to say #65. Cal would still be at the top of the heap when
compared to the other MWC members.

What's Cal get for its #43 ranking? There are still seven Pac-12 members that have a higher ranking. They
are u$C at #4, UDub at #13, Oregon at #16, ucla at #18, Utah at #34, AsU at #36 and stanfurd at #39.
If Cal was a MWC member, I think Bay Area ambiance and new showers would have some meaningful
drawing power to keep Cal recruiting in the chips!

---

This makes absolutely no business sense. Being the 8th PAC-12 team brings in a hell of a lot more money than being the tops of MWC.

"This makes absolutely no business sense."

Consider the source...

Blueblood said:

---

bross said:

---

I'm not sure if this is a serious post, but Cal wouldn't recruit nearly as well if it was in the MWC.

---

"I don't look serious?"

So, Cal might not recruit as well. So what?

I mean, let's say Cal drops over 20 ranking positions to say #65. Cal would still be at the top of the heap when
compared to the other MWC members.

What's Cal get for its #43 ranking? There are still seven Pac-12 members that have a higher ranking. They
are u$C at #4, UDub at #13, Oregon at #16, ucla at #18, Utah at #34, AsU at #36 and stanfurd at #39.
If Cal was a MWC member, I think Bay Area ambiance and new showers would have some meaningful
drawing power to keep Cal recruiting in the chips!

---

Let's consider that if the 2016 Cal team had beaten the teams it bested in recruiting on the field (I know, not apples-apples), Cal would have had a 7-win season and a bowl. And given the general attitude of most alumni, including the people on this board (to say nothing of the cheap chickens with low expectations in the Admin and our very-very-low-expectations AD), that would be a roaring success.

So basically, #43 recruiting is a-ok for Cal. In fact it's extension-worthy. Now all the Bears need to do is keep scheduling poor OOC opponents and "coach players to their potential" and you'll have a "successful" 7-win program.

Sure, Cal won't win the Axe very often, and SC will continue to beat Cal 95% of the time. And Cal can forget about ever winning the P12 North, much less a Rose Bowl, but the administration has made it abundantly clear that any season above .500 is a huge success. And if it's just barely above .500, all the better. Tall poppies and all that.

Because we are Cal. And at Cal, our real fight song when it comes to revenue sports is "C is for Cookie, that's good enough for me." And if you think anything has changed, you're deluding yourself. (Not you, BB, the general "you.")

Yeah, BB is persistent in his MWC love affair. But I will say it again - zero chance it happens because if it did, Cal Athletics would have to cut even more non-revenue sports that it does presently. P5 football makes money. And Cal Athletics is desperate for that money to support its huge non-revenue sports roster. Which IMO is the big problem, because Cal Athletics needs to be run like a business. And that means reinvesting in your one product that makes money. Not siphoning cash from it to prop up dead products.

This stuff again? Ugh. I guess it is time to go find the Ignore posts button...

I haven't been following Utah recruiting but haven't their classes upgraded since leaving the Mountain West and joining the Pac?

Those of you who believe the recruiting rankings are very gullible. They're fun, but ask any coach and their answer is unanimous.

barabbas said:

---

Those of you who believe the recruiting rankings are very gullible. They're fun, but ask any coach and their answer is unanimous.

---

I'm sure those coaches aren't from Alabama, Clemson, Or any school in the top 10.

Damn

ayetee11 said:

---

barabbas said:

---

Those of you who believe the recruiting rankings are very gullible. They're fun, but ask any coach and their answer is unanimous.

---

I'm sure those coaches aren't from Alabama, Clemson, Or any school in the top 10.

---

You'd be wrong , in fact, Nick Saban was interviewed last year about Alabama's recruiting ranking and he said to the effect that they're great for the fans, but mean nothing!

barabbas said:

---

ayetee11 said:

---

barabbas said:

---

Those of you who believe the recruiting rankings are very gullible. They're fun, but ask any coach and their answer is unanimous.

---

I'm sure those coaches aren't from Alabama, Clemson, Or any school in the top 10.

---

You'd be wrong , in fact, Nick Saban was interviewed last year about Alabama's recruiting ranking and he said to the effect that they're great for the fans, but mean nothing!

---

But does he mean it? If Cal had the #1 class nationally, Wilcox and staff would be selling it to alumni for donations, future recruiting classes, and during media session on signing day.

barabbas said:

---

ayetee11 said:

---

barabbas said:

---

Those of you who believe the recruiting rankings are very gullible. They're fun, but ask any coach and their answer is unanimous.

---

I'm sure those coaches aren't from Alabama, Clemson, Or any school in the top 10.

---

You'd be wrong , in fact, Nick Saban was interviewed last year about Alabama's recruiting ranking and he said to the effect that they're great for the fans, but mean nothing!

---

Are you seriously arguing that the player recruiting rankings have no predictive value versus a random sampling of D1 players? Huh, really? Did you really go to Cal? Gullible, my ass. You're the one who is gullible.

Blueblood said:

---

As I've previously conjectured, if Cal joined the MWC, the Bears would be in this conference's
West Division.

With regards to the 2018 recruiting season so far, Cal is ranked a whopping #43!

As for the current MWC-West members, their rankings are as follows:

San Diego State #78
Nevada #83
Ha'wai'i #94
San Jose' State #95
Fresno State #98
UNLV #103

Boy oh boy, do I see abundant Cal potential for wins and conference championship play-off berths! I
mean, Cal could be the Alabama of the MWC-West!!!

---

Why be the Alabama of the MWC when we could be the Harlem Globetrotters of the Big Sky?!?

Cal88 said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

"Gosh, that sounds like one
hell of an idea!"

---

Why be the Alabama of the MWC when we could be the Harlem Globetrotters of the Big Sky?!?

---

Sounds a hell of a lot better than being the Washington Generals of the Pac-12!

tequila4kapp said:

---

This stuff again? Ugh. I guess it is time to go find the Ignore posts button...

---

Well, before you push that button, please let me know where you find it because I
would like to use it too?

Blueblood said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

This stuff again? Ugh. I guess it is time to go find the Ignore posts button...

---

Well, before you push that button, please let me know where you find it because I
would like to use it too?

---

Or you could could choose to not post drivel like this. Go outside take a walk and smell the roses and for God's sake find a sense of proportion.

bonsallbear said:

---

Or you could could choose to not post drivel like this. Go outside take a walk and smell the roses and for God's sake find a sense of proportion.

---

So, you're a control freak? Maybe you should take your own advice?

Oh, by the way, what are those "roses" that yer a'talkin' 'bout anyway? I haven't seen any around here in 58 years?

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Anyone who advocates leaving the conference because he thinks Cal can't compete is a f***** pu*** and should have his digital ass kicked by the members of this board. Aiming for anything other than #1 is not what The University of California is all about.

I used to like Blueblood. He is harming his rep with this tired repetitive nonsense.

---

You apparently like Cal football. So I'm confused. I therefore thought you liked "tired repetitive nonsense?"

Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah.

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah.

---

"Echo back at yeah, sport."

"Blah..Blah, blah, blah.....blaah.......blaaaa"

Blueblood said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah.

---

"Echo back at yeah, sport."

"Blah..Blah, blah, blah.....blaah.......blaaaa"

---

Lol

Over the last 4-5 years, we've been like the 10-11th best Pac-12 team (conference wins). This span of time, one's high school years, is how many of these young men know Cal football, unfortunately.

Having recruiting classes near the middle of the Pac-12 is pretty decent, and with above average coaching, will keep us going in the right direction, IMO.

Blueblood said:

---

bonsallbear said:

---

Or you could could choose to not post drivel like this. Go outside take a walk and smell the roses and for God's sake find a sense of proportion.

---

So, you're a control freak? Maybe you should take your own advice?

Oh, by the way, what are those "roses" that yer a'talkin' 'bout anyway? I haven't seen any around here in 58 years?

---

You need to calm down.

bonsallbear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

bonsallbear said:

---

Or you could could choose to not post drivel like this. Go outside take a walk and smell the roses and for God's sake find a sense of proportion.

---

So, you're a control freak? Maybe you should take your own advice?

Oh, by the way, what are those "roses" that yer a'talkin' 'bout anyway? I haven't seen any around here in 58 years?

---

You need to calm down.

---

I will if you and your friends can managed to do likewise?
You seem to be one whose feathers were ruffled!
Man, you really are a control freak.....take your wingtips off....

Cocka dooddle doo

"Ack! blueblood ruffled my feathers!"

Cal89 said:

---

Over the last 4-5 years, we've been like the 10-11th best Pac-12 team (conference wins). This span of time, one's high school years, is how many of these young men know Cal football, unfortunately.

Having recruiting classes near the middle of the Pac-12 is pretty decent, and with above average coaching, will keep us going in the right direction, IMO.

---

I don't have your faith. I don't see Cal coaches overcoming the known experienced talent that Cal has
already suffered from and will be augment to by better recruiting than Cal. All that I can say is that Cal
had better win all of their OOC games because if the Bears don't I don't think any of us will like the
direction Cal will be going.....but....we can hope....that's Cal's forte'.

I am not as enamored with "stars" as are most other folks. Absolutely many 4-5 star players do perform well & some can be difference makers in a program. Given the sheer number of high school football players (1,000,000+) it is folly to assume ESPN or Rivals can actually track & objectively rate anywhere near even 20%-30% of them.

Additionally, the pool of the 4-5 star players is much smaller for Cal than most other Pac-12 schools to draw from when Cal takes academics seriously. When a coach "goes south" (Tedford in his later years) or misses entirely (Dykes) it really sends recruiting down the shooter.

Assume Wilcox is an B, B+, A or A+ coach. What would be a reasonable number of recruiting class cycles to get Cal's football classes into the upper half of the conference? Two? Three? Don't forget this is a genuine bootstrap situation.

This is Wilcox's first real class. I think it is a good one based on where Cal is coming from.

I never thought we could get a higher ranked class at this point - it is just unreasonable to have expected that. The key is: Can these players form the foundation to get Cal over .500 in the conference? We won't know that for 2-3 years.

We do know there are several outstanding players in the class, and all of them fit the profile Wilcox aimed for. We also know that Wilcox made long overdue progress in Northern California (which Dykes singlehandedly destroyed). The class is top heavy with linemen - that will help us in the O & D line depth areas, a long time real weakness.

I think a 5-4 conference record this Fall would be a huge step forward. I expect at least a 3-6 or at most a 4-5 conference record given the number of returning players & coaching staff continuity.

I do know that keeping expectations realistic is the only sane way to approach Cal football.

Quote:

---

Bb must be in a bad mood. He goes off using sarcasm about Cal being in the MW when he's feeling things are not going well for the Bears.

---

He doesn't even want things to go well for the Bears, does he? If we had to have accurate screen names here, his would probably be "Cardinalblood", or maybe "Trueblueblood".

BearSD said:

---

Quote:

---

Bb must be in a bad mood. He goes off using sarcasm about Cal being in the MW when he's feeling things are not going well for the Bears.

---

He doesn't even want things to go well for the Bears, does he? If we had to have accurate screen names here, his would probably be "Cardinalblood", or maybe "Trueblueblood".

---

I don't know BB personally, but having read his posts here for some time, he does want Cal to do well in football. The frustration can get the better of him at times; I'm not one to criticize regarding that as I've also allowed the same thing to happen.

I think discussion boards like this lend themselves to venting since we're posting anonymously.

In recruiting Cal can sell the academics, as the number one public university, for those recruits that value that. But it can also work against them if the recruits are afraid of the competition. But really, especially given the recent non-success of the program, which schools should Cal have an advantage over? Oregon St. for sure, WSU and Colorado probably, Utah maybe, possibly the Arizonas. All of those mentioned can't touch Cal academically. Cal will never out-recruit USC, Washington and Oregon are a cut below them but still well above Cal, Stanford has established itself nationally as the destination for academic achievers, and UCLA can also sell top academics with athletic success and the LA location. It'll be a tough road for Cal to get into the top level of the conference, but it's possible. This year's class doesn't seem all that exciting but hopefully it will bge the base for future success.

Cal89 said:

---

Over the last 4-5 years, we've been like the 10-11th best Pac-12 team (conference wins). This span of time, one's high school years, is how many of these young men know Cal football, unfortunately.

Having recruiting classes near the middle of the Pac-12 is pretty decent, and with above average coaching, will keep us going in the right direction, IMO.

---

Cal had fewer conference wins in 2017 (2) than 2014, 15 and 16 (3, 4 and 3). Things seem to be going the wrong direction.