Sonny Dykes on his stint at Cal

OzoneTheCat
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
packawana
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Other than the fact that the ticket sales lagged partly due to his poor performance, most of what's written here is pretty accurate.
mbBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
I think that Wilcox, who worked at Cal previously and had seen whatever it is that Sonny describes as "complicated," and then was willing to come back, well, that speaks volumes to me.
OneKeg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
packawana said:

Other than the fact that the ticket sales lagged partly due to his poor performance, most of what's written here is pretty accurate.


I think reasonable people can disagree with his statement that he didn't do that bad a job, even if they agree that there were some extenuating circumstances.

But whatever. Time to move on. Go Bears!
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Sonny's staff did fix "the academics".

There were "lagging ticket sales" due to his staff's underperformance and his constant trolling for other jobs.

There were "fractured relationships" due in large part to his constant trolling for other jobs.

He "didn't do that bad a job" ... with the offense.
GoBears635
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V
packawana said:

Other than the fact that the ticket sales lagged partly due to his poor performance, most of what's written here is pretty accurate.
Except for the "fake news" that Goff was the first overall pick in the history of the program.
Marty
How long do you want to ignore this user?
R
One other mistake by the author: Jared Goof was not the first Cal player picked #1 in the NFL draft, nor even the first QB. That would have been the great Steve Bartkowski, who went number one to the Falcons is 1975. After Joe Roth, the greatest QB I've seen play at Cal, starting with Penhall in the late 60s.
Go!Bears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
packawana said:

Other than the fact that the ticket sales lagged partly due to his poor performance, most of what's written here is pretty accurate.

"... they want to win from the administration down. Asked how this compares to what he had at Cal and Dykes said: "It's completely different."

I actually felt good reading this. I'm glad it is completely different. At TCU and SMU football carries the University. At Cal, the University carries football. That is how it should be. Not to say that our administration can't do a better job of supporting football, but we should never get the two reversed.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V
The man is wearing RED...nuff said. NEXT!!!

Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
Say what you will, but Sonny Dykes still coached one of the most exciting finishes I've ever been privileged to witness to a Cal football game (and that's not even talking about that WSU nutiness or the double OT win against Oregon that ended at 3:00 am EDT). It wasn't all roses (God knows), but wish him well.

burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
Under his tenure, he swept Texas. I don't care if they sucked, it was a sweep.

Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V
Yeah okay, great finish against WSU and swept Texas...but decided defense didn't matter, and thus had a crappy W/L record. If those two are the shining moments of Cal FB under Sonny...then I'm glad he left.
Bear19
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Dykes is just trying to rewrite the facts of his failure at Cal. He didn't even recruit Goff, Tedford did. Worst defences in Cal's history. Donors abandoning the program. Attendence collapsing. Blowout losses to almost all of the Pac-12. Buh. Too stupid to get Cal's NFL draft history right. What an embarrassment.
joe amos yaks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Where's his beef?
Coach Dykes was always looking for a higher burger option.
Berkeley is short on burger options.
Chapman_is_Gone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Sebastabear said:

Say what you will, but Sonny Dykes still coached one of the most exciting finishes I've ever been privileged to witness to a Cal football game (and that's not even talking about that WSU nutiness or the double OT win against Oregon that ended at 3:00 am EDT). It wasn't all roses (God knows), but wish him well.




I don't find 4+ hour games to be exciting.
I don't find games that end after 11:15pm to be exciting.
I don't find unimportant wins, when Cal has already shown itself to be uncompetitive against the league's better teams, to be exciting.
I hated Sonny Dykes football.
TheSouseFamily
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
Interesting to note that Dykes hasn't brought a single person from the staff he once had at Cal to SMU. His ability to attract and hire capable staff was one of his biggest weaknesses imo. Peeler, Buh and Spavital are in roughly the same positions now as then but with the rest of the positional assistants, every other staff member he had at Cal is now on a lower rung of the coaching ladder.
BearBoarBlarney
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Chad Morris just left SMU after 3 seasons, where he ran a fast-paced spread system, and improved every year from 2-10 to 5-7 to 7-5. By all accounts, Sonny is not bemoaning the culture or administration at SMU, nor is he lamenting the talent or the offensive system that he inherited from his predecessor.

I look forward to hearing Sonny's revisionist history when SMU falls back to 5-7 / 4-8 / 3-9 this season, playing the Mustang Sieve Defense (patent pending), complete with Sad Sack Sonny's perpetual sideline m.o. of scratching his head and yelling at the referees in a feeble attempt to mask his own coaching incompetence.

Sonny's key strengths were working the media and making up excuses in real time.

SMU is soon going to be an acronym for Sonny's Mustangs Underperform.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
My takeaways:
1. Not sure I read anything that excuses the fact Cal's opponents averaged more than 40 points a game (if memory serves) during the Dykes' Era; and
2. Had Sonny's father, Spike Dykes, been a fan of the comedy Flesh Gordon, Sonny could very well have gone through life with the name Yikes Dykes.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
OaktownBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
Short Version:

Sonny: Oh, did I say Cal was my dream job? I meant SMU was my dream job. Some day Paris Texas Community College will be my dream job.

I was awesome. Cal sucked.

Journalist: No, this isn't actually a crappy hire. He's awesome. Cal sucks.



I don't care if you think what he said is true. Anyone with decency answers the questions by saying "I'm not coach at Cal anymore. Let's talk about SMU" Instead he gives a long list of excuses for his own failings and an overall conclusion that he actually didn't do that bad a job.

This is basically like the Big Game week interview. "Hey, Sonny! What's it like to play in the Big Game?" "Okay, look. I know we suck but it isn't my fault. The players suck. The schedule sucks. The school sucks. What was the question again?"

Winners become winners by taking personal responsibility for their performance and raising the bar. Losers make excuses.
packawana
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
OaktownBear said:

OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
Short Version:

Sonny: Oh, did I say Cal was my dream job? I meant SMU was my dream job. Some day Paris Texas Community College will be my dream job.

I was awesome. Cal sucked.

Journalist: No, this isn't actually a crappy hire. He's awesome. Cal sucks.



I don't care if you think what he said is true. Anyone with decency answers the questions by saying "I'm not coach at Cal anymore. Let's talk about SMU" Instead he gives a long list of excuses for his own failings and an overall conclusion that he actually didn't do that bad a job.

Look, we're Cal alums and we have a predilection to protect our school. Sonny did poorly at Cal. But there's a lot of different circumstances that go into that, the most important of which probably was fit. And he didn't fit.

I'm okay with him saying that there were issues with how our university has bungled football and it's important to acknowledge that. There's a reason why we're not taken seriously on the college football main stage other than the height of Jeff Tedford. Since our last Rose Bowl in 58, we've had 22 winning seasons. That's 36% over the course of 60 years. We clearly have structural problems when it comes to investing in football and we need to own that.

Also if coaches were decent, they wouldn't be blocking grad transfers from going to other schools within their conference even if they've earned their degree and are no longer tied to it. Nick Saban does it all the time and guess who wins all the time. The top are at the top because they're not decent, they're just focused on one thing: winning. Now, I'd like us to win the right way but let's be frank -- coaches are hired to win, not to be decent.
OaktownBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
packawana said:

OaktownBear said:

OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
Short Version:

Sonny: Oh, did I say Cal was my dream job? I meant SMU was my dream job. Some day Paris Texas Community College will be my dream job.

I was awesome. Cal sucked.

Journalist: No, this isn't actually a crappy hire. He's awesome. Cal sucks.



I don't care if you think what he said is true. Anyone with decency answers the questions by saying "I'm not coach at Cal anymore. Let's talk about SMU" Instead he gives a long list of excuses for his own failings and an overall conclusion that he actually didn't do that bad a job.

Look, we're Cal alums and we have a predilection to protect our school. Sonny did poorly at Cal. But there's a lot of different circumstances that go into that, the most important of which probably was fit. And he didn't fit.

I'm okay with him saying that there were issues with how our university has bungled football and it's important to acknowledge that. There's a reason why we're not taken seriously on the college football main stage other than the height of Jeff Tedford. Since our last Rose Bowl in 58, we've had 22 winning seasons. That's 36% over the course of 60 years. We clearly have structural problems when it comes to investing in football and we need to own that.

Also if coaches were decent, they wouldn't be blocking grad transfers from going to other schools within their conference even if they've earned their degree and are no longer tied to it. Nick Saban does it all the time and guess who wins all the time. The top are at the top because they're not decent, they're just focused on one thing: winning. Now, I'd like us to win the right way but let's be frank -- coaches are hired to win, not to be decent.
And how about the fact that he didn't say there were any issues with the coaching. See it is one thing if say Wilner, who has no stake in anything talks about structural issues at Cal. A coach who fails at Cal and can't find one thing to say he did to contribute to the failure and talks about the structural issues at Cal is not providing a critical analysis. He is making excuses for his own failure. Which should be obvious to everyone which is why most coaches don't answer the question.

But I'm fine with his answer also because as long as he blames the refs, the athletic director, the players, the school, the schedule, injuries, etc. he will be a loser.

Top coaches don't make excuses. Blocking grad transfers is a competitive issue. Talking about issues at your former employer doesn't help you win. I would be absolutely fine if Wilcox blocked a grad transfer. (I encourage it) I would not be fine with him behaving like a whiny loser. A point I made first in about 2013.
packawana
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
OaktownBear said:

packawana said:

OaktownBear said:

OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
Short Version:

Sonny: Oh, did I say Cal was my dream job? I meant SMU was my dream job. Some day Paris Texas Community College will be my dream job.

I was awesome. Cal sucked.

Journalist: No, this isn't actually a crappy hire. He's awesome. Cal sucks.



I don't care if you think what he said is true. Anyone with decency answers the questions by saying "I'm not coach at Cal anymore. Let's talk about SMU" Instead he gives a long list of excuses for his own failings and an overall conclusion that he actually didn't do that bad a job.

Look, we're Cal alums and we have a predilection to protect our school. Sonny did poorly at Cal. But there's a lot of different circumstances that go into that, the most important of which probably was fit. And he didn't fit.

I'm okay with him saying that there were issues with how our university has bungled football and it's important to acknowledge that. There's a reason why we're not taken seriously on the college football main stage other than the height of Jeff Tedford. Since our last Rose Bowl in 58, we've had 22 winning seasons. That's 36% over the course of 60 years. We clearly have structural problems when it comes to investing in football and we need to own that.

Also if coaches were decent, they wouldn't be blocking grad transfers from going to other schools within their conference even if they've earned their degree and are no longer tied to it. Nick Saban does it all the time and guess who wins all the time. The top are at the top because they're not decent, they're just focused on one thing: winning. Now, I'd like us to win the right way but let's be frank -- coaches are hired to win, not to be decent.
And how about the fact that he didn't say there were any issues with the coaching. See it is one thing if say Wilner, who has no stake in anything talks about structural issues at Cal. A coach who fails at Cal and can't find one thing to say he did to contribute to the failure and talks about the structural issues at Cal is not providing a critical analysis. He is making excuses for his own failure. Which should be obvious to everyone which is why most coaches don't answer the question.

But I'm fine with his answer also because as long as he blames the refs, the athletic director, the players, the school, the schedule, injuries, etc. he will be a loser.

Top coaches don't make excuses. Blocking grad transfers is a competitive issue. Talking about issues at your former employer doesn't help you win. I would be absolutely fine if Wilcox blocked a grad transfer. (I encourage it) I would not be fine with him behaving like a whiny loser. A point I made first in about 2013.
Fair, if you want to call him a loser due to his record, then that's fine. But you can't use a moral criterion like 'decency' to judge his tact toward us and then turn around and say that for competitive reasons 'decency' doesn't matter. The first hurts the feelings of some fans, the second hurts the career/livelihood of a student athlete. The latter clearly has greater magnitude.

hanky1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
I think he'll be very succesful at SMU. He certainly will win a few conference championships and will be in contention for the national championship after a few undefeated seasons. His failure at Cal was more due to Cal and Mike Williams' general incompetence.
Uthaithani
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
The money quote:

Quote:

The vision for the Mustangs is clear they want to win from the administration down. Asked how this compares to what he had at Cal and Dykes said: "It's completely different."

"There's a lot of communication that takes place here. Everybody is on the same page. I think it's pretty clear they believe football is important, and that's where it starts."
This confirms my impression of Cal, backed by about 60 years of mostly lousy football and MBB. It is a school that, at its core. is OK with being a loser program. It doesn't matter how good the coach is, the cancer it at the top and it's not going to change.

If the university hadn't sold its soul and abandoned teaching undergrads to focus on grant money, the entire university would be in the garbage heap, just like athletics. The administration and donor coterie have their heads so far up their arses they view their tonsils from the back..

I really can't imagine any good athlete coming here. There are plenty of good academic schools that actually believe in winning. And that actually care about an undergraduate education. Cal doesn't care about either of those things.
OaktownBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
packawana said:

OaktownBear said:

packawana said:

OaktownBear said:

OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
Short Version:

Sonny: Oh, did I say Cal was my dream job? I meant SMU was my dream job. Some day Paris Texas Community College will be my dream job.

I was awesome. Cal sucked.

Journalist: No, this isn't actually a crappy hire. He's awesome. Cal sucks.



I don't care if you think what he said is true. Anyone with decency answers the questions by saying "I'm not coach at Cal anymore. Let's talk about SMU" Instead he gives a long list of excuses for his own failings and an overall conclusion that he actually didn't do that bad a job.

Look, we're Cal alums and we have a predilection to protect our school. Sonny did poorly at Cal. But there's a lot of different circumstances that go into that, the most important of which probably was fit. And he didn't fit.

I'm okay with him saying that there were issues with how our university has bungled football and it's important to acknowledge that. There's a reason why we're not taken seriously on the college football main stage other than the height of Jeff Tedford. Since our last Rose Bowl in 58, we've had 22 winning seasons. That's 36% over the course of 60 years. We clearly have structural problems when it comes to investing in football and we need to own that.

Also if coaches were decent, they wouldn't be blocking grad transfers from going to other schools within their conference even if they've earned their degree and are no longer tied to it. Nick Saban does it all the time and guess who wins all the time. The top are at the top because they're not decent, they're just focused on one thing: winning. Now, I'd like us to win the right way but let's be frank -- coaches are hired to win, not to be decent.
And how about the fact that he didn't say there were any issues with the coaching. See it is one thing if say Wilner, who has no stake in anything talks about structural issues at Cal. A coach who fails at Cal and can't find one thing to say he did to contribute to the failure and talks about the structural issues at Cal is not providing a critical analysis. He is making excuses for his own failure. Which should be obvious to everyone which is why most coaches don't answer the question.

But I'm fine with his answer also because as long as he blames the refs, the athletic director, the players, the school, the schedule, injuries, etc. he will be a loser.

Top coaches don't make excuses. Blocking grad transfers is a competitive issue. Talking about issues at your former employer doesn't help you win. I would be absolutely fine if Wilcox blocked a grad transfer. (I encourage it) I would not be fine with him behaving like a whiny loser. A point I made first in about 2013.
Fair, if you want to call him a loser due to his record, then that's fine. But you can't use a moral criterion like 'decency' to judge his tact toward us and then turn around and say that for competitive reasons 'decency' doesn't matter. The first hurts the feelings of some fans, the second hurts the career/livelihood of a student athlete. The latter clearly has greater magnitude.




Let me be clear. If the rule states that a potential transfer needs to gain a release from their existing school and that school says "sure, I'll give you the release to go to 100+ schools, but you can't go to the 12 on my schedule next year" I see nothing ethically wrong with making that a condition. That type of arrangement is not uncommon in business. You have a commitment to me. You need my release. I have a condition. And frankly it's not an unreasonable one. You may not agree with the rule. I'm fine if they don't need a release. But if you think that under that set of rules, that is an indecent act, we just disagree. To me, it is competitive, not in any way indecent.

OaktownBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
Uthaithani said:

The money quote:

Quote:

The vision for the Mustangs is clear they want to win from the administration down. Asked how this compares to what he had at Cal and Dykes said: "It's completely different."

"There's a lot of communication that takes place here. Everybody is on the same page. I think it's pretty clear they believe football is important, and that's where it starts."
This confirms my impression of Cal, backed by about 60 years of mostly lousy football and MBB. It is a school that, at its core. is OK with being a loser program. It doesn't matter how good the coach is, the cancer it at the top and it's not going to change.

If the university hadn't sold its soul and abandoned teaching undergrads to focus on grant money, the entire university would be in the garbage heap, just like athletics. The administration and donor coterie have their heads so far up their arses they view their tonsils from the back..

I really can't imagine any good athlete coming here. There are plenty of good academic schools that actually believe in winning. And that actually care about an undergraduate education. Cal doesn't care about either of those things.


Okay so now we are a crappy school in addition to being a crappy football and basketball program. You offer nothing of value. Just hatred toward our school. Your criticism isn't even well thought out. Just dumb insults.

If you don't like anything about the university, why are you here? Just leave already.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
I guess we can call this the "whatever makes you feel better " thread lol

Move on and Support JW
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
GoBears635 said:

packawana said:

Other than the fact that the ticket sales lagged partly due to his poor performance, most of what's written here is pretty accurate.
Except for the "fake news" that Goff was the first overall pick in the history of the program.

I know you are just joking but I personally hate the over use of the term "fake news" to refer to simple mistakes in reporting.
Fake news to me means news items created out of whole cloth to provide a fraudulent narrative that supports a private agenda.

Like the recent narrative that Papadopolis was a CIA plant intended to mislead the entire Trump election campaign.

The sonny Dykes narrative was wrong on only one major fact. How many Cal players have been the first draft pick.

The overuse of the term fake news tends to diminish its importance. Yes the Russians did hack the US elections. The Russian counter narrative is FakeNews.
CalBarn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V
packawana said:

OaktownBear said:

OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
Short Version:

Sonny: Oh, did I say Cal was my dream job? I meant SMU was my dream job. Some day Paris Texas Community College will be my dream job.

I was awesome. Cal sucked.

Journalist: No, this isn't actually a crappy hire. He's awesome. Cal sucks.



I don't care if you think what he said is true. Anyone with decency answers the questions by saying "I'm not coach at Cal anymore. Let's talk about SMU" Instead he gives a long list of excuses for his own failings and an overall conclusion that he actually didn't do that bad a job.

Look, we're Cal alums and we have a predilection to protect our school. Sonny did poorly at Cal. But there's a lot of different circumstances that go into that, the most important of which probably was fit. And he didn't fit.

I'm okay with him saying that there were issues with how our university has bungled football and it's important to acknowledge that. There's a reason why we're not taken seriously on the college football main stage other than the height of Jeff Tedford. Since our last Rose Bowl in 58, we've had 22 winning seasons. That's 36% over the course of 60 years. We clearly have structural problems when it comes to investing in football and we need to own that.

Also if coaches were decent, they wouldn't be blocking grad transfers from going to other schools within their conference even if they've earned their degree and are no longer tied to it. Nick Saban does it all the time and guess who wins all the time. The top are at the top because they're not decent, they're just focused on one thing: winning. Now, I'd like us to win the right way but let's be frank -- coaches are hired to win, not to be decent.
"Didn't fit"??? There might be some merit to all your points, but funny, for all these discussion topics, Dykes could have indeed been successful at Cal if he simply realized that there are 2 sides to the ball. If he ignores defense elsewhere like he did here, he will always be minimally successful wherever he goes. Hopefully he learns from his mistakes.
packawana
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
CalBarn said:

packawana said:

OaktownBear said:

OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079
Short Version:

Sonny: Oh, did I say Cal was my dream job? I meant SMU was my dream job. Some day Paris Texas Community College will be my dream job.

I was awesome. Cal sucked.

Journalist: No, this isn't actually a crappy hire. He's awesome. Cal sucks.



I don't care if you think what he said is true. Anyone with decency answers the questions by saying "I'm not coach at Cal anymore. Let's talk about SMU" Instead he gives a long list of excuses for his own failings and an overall conclusion that he actually didn't do that bad a job.

Look, we're Cal alums and we have a predilection to protect our school. Sonny did poorly at Cal. But there's a lot of different circumstances that go into that, the most important of which probably was fit. And he didn't fit.

I'm okay with him saying that there were issues with how our university has bungled football and it's important to acknowledge that. There's a reason why we're not taken seriously on the college football main stage other than the height of Jeff Tedford. Since our last Rose Bowl in 58, we've had 22 winning seasons. That's 36% over the course of 60 years. We clearly have structural problems when it comes to investing in football and we need to own that.

Also if coaches were decent, they wouldn't be blocking grad transfers from going to other schools within their conference even if they've earned their degree and are no longer tied to it. Nick Saban does it all the time and guess who wins all the time. The top are at the top because they're not decent, they're just focused on one thing: winning. Now, I'd like us to win the right way but let's be frank -- coaches are hired to win, not to be decent.
"Didn't fit"??? There might be some merit to all your points, but funny, for all these discussion topics, Dykes could have indeed been successful at Cal if he simply realized that there are 2 sides to the ball. If he ignores defense elsewhere like he did here, he will always be minimally successful wherever he goes. Hopefully he learns from his mistakes.
I think Sonny could have been more successful at Cal if he paid more attention to the defense and/or got a better DC to begin with. However, I don't think he would have been here for the long term either way, not unless he got his way with the admin and new AD. Inevitably, JW is a better fit for the uni. Hell, I think even Spav would've been a good fit too.
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
Sonny's brand of football was . . . uh . . . "unusual." But I do honestly believe he wanted us to have a defense - he just had no idea how to make that happen. I think he would have been thrilled if we had magically transformed into the '76 Steelers.

He fixed the APR, helped heal the team culture (again, that wasn't perfect but you have to compare it to where things were at the end of JT's reign) and put up a lot of points.

But no, Sonny Dykes only unforgivable sin was making it painfully obvious (after being given a contract extension mind you) that he didn't want to be here. When he started interviewing for OC jobs that was the final straw. At the end of the day, this is a proud program with a lot of tradition. I don't care if you are Vince Lombardi.. If you don't want to be here then go, but you don't flaunt your desire to leave and you don't let your agent do it on your behalf.

Best of luck to him in the new gig. I hope it's a better fit.

Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V
OaktownBear said:

Uthaithani said:

The money quote:

Quote:

The vision for the Mustangs is clear they want to win from the administration down. Asked how this compares to what he had at Cal and Dykes said: "It's completely different."

"There's a lot of communication that takes place here. Everybody is on the same page. I think it's pretty clear they believe football is important, and that's where it starts."
This confirms my impression of Cal, backed by about 60 years of mostly lousy football and MBB. It is a school that, at its core. is OK with being a loser program. It doesn't matter how good the coach is, the cancer it at the top and it's not going to change.

If the university hadn't sold its soul and abandoned teaching undergrads to focus on grant money, the entire university would be in the garbage heap, just like athletics. The administration and donor coterie have their heads so far up their arses they view their tonsils from the back..

I really can't imagine any good athlete coming here. There are plenty of good academic schools that actually believe in winning. And that actually care about an undergraduate education. Cal doesn't care about either of those things.


Okay so now we are a crappy school in addition to being a crappy football and basketball program. You offer nothing of value. Just hatred toward our school. Your criticism isn't even well thought out. Just dumb insults.

If you don't like anything about the university, why are you here? Just leave already.
+1

I can't recall the last time Uthaithani said anything positive about Cal. I must be an idiot. I thought Jared Goff, Marshawn Lynch, Aaron Rodgers, Jaylen Brown and Ivan Rabb were good athletes.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
Bear19 said:

Dykes is just trying to rewrite the facts of his failure at Cal. He didn't even recruit Goff, Tedford did. Worst defences in Cal's history. Donors abandoning the program. Attendence collapsing. Blowout losses to almost all of the Pac-12. Buh. Too stupid to get Cal's NFL draft history right. What an embarrassment.


Yet he signed his LOI with Dykes, right? Really, Goff is like Jabari Bird, His dad played for Cal and was raised in the Bay Area as a Cal fan--he signed with tge school. Dykes does get credit for starting him as a true freshman (something Tedford would bever have done) over board favorites like Kline, Bridgford, Hinder and Boehm--and then developing him into the #1 pick. In 11 years of bringing in high school QB recruits, Tedford was not able to develop a single one into a draft pick, let alone the #1 pick.

Dykes was not "bad" but he was not "good" either. He was mediocre--did some things well and other things poorly but never seemed to be a good fit and certainly did not have the fans excited about him or the program. It was good that we moved on, because in order to get to where we want to be we need to generate excitement around the program and have the fans all-in.

GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
OzoneTheCat said:

Have at it....

https://247sports.com/Article/SMU-football-Sonny-Dykes-has-clear-vision-for-program-after-post-Cal-TCU-refresh-118237079

I don't have a problem with most of what he said. The team's academic performance was atrocious. He is correct that one of his primary directives was to improve the academics. He did that and Cal FB basically went from worst to first academically.
Now it's up to Wilcox to make that happen on the football field.
Cal Strong!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V
Buh pretty decent defensive coordinator. He just WEAK at Cal under Dykes.

Hiring Buh not terrible decision by Sonny. But Buh working under Dykes a terrible decision by Buh.
Page 1 of 3
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.