Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

We have addressed the needs. Now the only question is are the recruited players good enough to challenge for the pac12 championship

edg64 said:

---

Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

---

I do too. To anyone who's all "we suck and can't recruit", I humbly suggest you consider that it's not 2009 anymore. Cal is coming off of a long stretch of mediocrity. What kind of overnight recruiting miracle did you realistically expect? Yeah, we needed to have a way better class to close the gap with furd, Oregon, UW, USC, etc. RIGHT NOW, but again, is it being realistic to say JW & co should have made that happen?

All you can ask for at this point is for us to have a shot at 9-3 or 10-2 next year, and we've got one with this group and a HC who seems adept at getting guys to play over their heads.

Note: my optimism is based more on the newcomers on O making an impact right away rather than existing guys somehow turning things around. I'm hoping we'll hear "Modster to Clark for the TD!" a bunch next fall, especially against UCLA.

But isn't it frustrating to see Bama with the #1 class - yet again??? (I figured I better actually look this up, so I found Bama has been the number one recruiter 2013-2017, on average. So there you go.)

I just posted in the other thread that I don't understand why we don't encourage parity through a draft system based on rank with worst teams picking highest. Until then, I don't expect the top ten classes to go to any teams other than numbers 1-10 in the rankings, plus or minus.

TandemBear said:

---

But isn't it frustrating to see Bama with the #1 class - yet again??? (I figured I better actually look this up, so I found Bama has been the number one recruiter 2013-2017, on average. So there you go.)

I just posted in the other thread that I don't understand why we don't encourage parity through a draft system based on rank with worst teams picking highest. Until then, I don't expect the top ten classes to go to any teams other than numbers 1-10 in the rankings, plus or minus.

---

What a horrible idea. They're students, and like other high school kids, should be allowed to decide for themselves where they want to study/play football.

I'm sure San Jose State would love to "draft" a student body more like Berkeley's, but every parent on this board would scream bloody murder at the thought of a nationwide "draft" of high schoolers with the best mix of GPA and SAT score.

You gotta give Wilcox credit for trying to bring attention to the program by signing Shia LaBeouf's little brother.


[url=https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0479471/][/url]

edg64 said:

---

Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

---

He took over a 5-7 team and turned it into a 5-7 team that became a 7-5 team.

That said, if Dykes had coached 2017, I believe he would have done worse than Wilcox did. His years of poor recruiting were about to catch up with him and he knew it.

I would be more impressed with the dramatic 5-7 to 7-5 turnaround if Baldwin's offense hadn't devolved into the worst offense in the conference and one of the worst in the country. And, it's not looking like 2019 will be much different. The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

Yes, Dykes' teams couldn't field a defense, that's no reason to give Wilcox a pass on the offense. You were so burned by your ex-GFs gambling problem, you're willing to give your current GF a pass on her cocaine addiction.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

---

I would be more impressed with the dramatic 5-7 to 7-5 turnaround if Baldwin's offense hadn't devolved into the worst offense in the conference and one of the worst in the country. And, it's not looking like 2019 will be much different. The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

Yes, Dykes' teams couldn't field a defense, that's no reason to give Wilcox a pass on the offense. You were so burned by your ex-GFs gambling problem, you're willing to give your current GF a pass on her cocaine addiction.

---

I think there exists a bias among dedicated Cal fans (who do tend to skew a certain demographic) about what kind of style of football they'd like to see the team play and a stifling defense with a medicore offense fits this bias more than the opposite.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

---

I would be more impressed with the dramatic 5-7 to 7-5 turnaround if Baldwin's offense hadn't devolved into the worst offense in the conference and one of the worst in the country. And, it's not looking like 2019 will be much different. The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

Yes, Dykes' teams couldn't field a defense, that's no reason to give Wilcox a pass on the offense. You were so burned by your ex-GFs gambling problem, you're willing to give your current GF a pass on her cocaine addiction.

---

Both sound like fun gals!

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

---

I would be more impressed with the dramatic 5-7 to 7-5 turnaround if Baldwin's offense hadn't devolved into the worst offense in the conference and one of the worst in the country. And, it's not looking like 2019 will be much different. The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

Yes, Dykes' teams couldn't field a defense, that's no reason to give Wilcox a pass on the offense. You were so burned by your ex-GFs gambling problem, you're willing to give your current GF a pass on her cocaine addiction.

---

2014 5-7
2015 7-5
2016 5-7
2017 5-7
2018 7-5

Sagarin
2014 58
2015 26
2016 62
2017 50
2018 53

So far, we have traded great offense and horrible defense for great defense and horrible offense and achieved similar results (in a weakened conference).

The good news is the guy at the top is a good fit culturally and is well supported by the fans and the administration. The good news is we have TONS of room for improvement on offense, which I truly believe is easier to achieve than on defense, whether through a more intelligent scheme or an exceptional player.

Getting good JC players has always been a great model for Cal. I am sure it was our Plan B but it may be better in both the short and long term.

The problem is I have far less confidence in Baldwin than I had in Buh and that is saying something.

Yogi Bear said:

---

edg64 said:

---

Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

---

He took over a 5-7 team and turned it into a 5-7 team that became a 7-5 team.

That said,, if Dykes had coached 2017, I believe he would have done worse than Wilcox did. His years of poor recruiting were about to catch up with him and he knew it.

---

Correction: Wilcox turned us into a 5-7 team that was seven points away from being 8-4. But that's the past. We're 7-5 with a chance to win our 8th game in a bowl game against a well-regarded opponent.

Getting ahead of UW Furd ORE and SC? We beat 2 of the 4 one on the road this year. I think we are not as far away as people keep saying. Its team sport,...not a track team kind of team sport.

edg64 said:

---

Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

---

Not sure why people have to overstate their case or shape the narrative...

2015: 7-5
2016: 5-7

2017: 5-7
2018: 7-5

Compared to his predecessor, who didn't succeed, Wilcox seems to have things headed in the right direction, but we ain't there yet. Can't we just leave it at that?

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

---

The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

---

Because turn-arounds aren't instant, players aren't controlled by joystick controllers, perfect plays on the whiteboard often don't work on the field because of just one, very subtle, yet critical mistake of a player you're not looking at during the play.

The issues regarding the offense this year, have at their core, factors invisible to you, that you would not acknowledge even if you could perceive them, and are complex beyond your willingness and/or capability to understand.

In short, because football with real people in reality has nothing to do with Madden football. That's just reality.

Bear19 said:

---

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

---

The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

---

Because turn-arounds aren't instant, players aren't controlled by joystick controllers, perfect plays on the whiteboard often don't work on the field because of just one, very subtle, yet critical mistake of a player you're not looking at during the play.

The issues regarding the offense this year, have at their core, factors invisible to you, that you would not acknowledge even if you could perceive them, and are complex beyond your willingness and/or capability to understand.

In short, because football with real people in reality has nothing to do with Madden football. That's just reality.

---

"Turn-arounds"?? That was the defense. The offense was #1 in the PAC-12 and #10 in the country "with a young OL" a "discarded transfer QB" and a "walk-on WR" as the star the year before, and loaded with young 4 and 5 star talent coming in at the skill positions.

In one year the offense went from #1 to #11 in the PAC-12 and #10 in the country to #90. A year later we dropped all the way to #12 in the PAC-12 and #111 in the country.

Cal was one of the best offenses in the country with most of the young OL returning and 4 or 5 star players at every skill position including the #1 recruit in the country. Our prospects on offense in 2017 were great. If a turnaround is now needed, it is from the depths it has now sunk.

Now you defend the offensive coaches by blaming the players? Really? Then insult the fans by saying It is all too complicated for mere Berkeley grads to understand? The pedestrian looking play call was actually a brilliant play and would have worked if only the players "executed"? When we repeatedly only get one yard running up the middle on first down from a spread offense when the defense has loaded the box not fearing our depleted WR corps it is the players fault for missing one of the two defenders they will need to block? And even if it was "player error" every time calling the same play over and over, with the same players, with the same result is "brilliant" in some way that is "beyond our comprehension"?

When it is obvious to everyone McMorris is our best blocker and short yardage receiver, producing a highlight play every time he is in, but he is only in for a few plays any game, that is "beyond our comprehension"?


.

Bear19 said:

---

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

---

The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

---

Because turn-arounds aren't instant, players aren't controlled by joystick controllers, perfect plays on the whiteboard often don't work on the field because of just one, very subtle, yet critical mistake of a player you're not looking at during the play.

The issues regarding the offense this year, have at their core, factors invisible to you, that you would not acknowledge even if you could perceive them, and are complex beyond your willingness and/or capability to understand.

In short, because football with real people in reality has nothing to do with Madden football. That's just reality.

---

LOL. Peddle that insider bull**** somewhere else pal.

calumnus said:

---

"Turn-arounds"?? That was the defense. The offense was #1 in the PAC-12 and #10 in the country "with a young OL" a "discarded transfer QB" and a "walk-on WR" as the star the year before, and loaded with young 4 and 5 star talent coming in at the skill positions.

---

It's well past time to start dismantling some of these myths.

In 2016, Cal's offense was:

• 3rd in points per game
• 1st in yardage per game, but only 6th per play
• 5th in passer efficiency

Dump that #1 offense myth. Yards per game don't mean you are the best, it just means your offense is on the field a lot. Mostly because your defense can't stop anyone. If we'd had that kind of offensive production this year, obviously we'd have done a lot better, but let's not pretend it was something it wasn't.

Furthermore, the loss of the grad transfer QB meant we were going to do a nosedive offensively the next year because Dykes hadn't recruited a single good QB while at Cal (and don't sell me that four star Max Gilliam bull**** - here's his actual numbers.)

The "young talented oline" you are touting wasn't good and never was. We were in the bottom half of the conference in yards per rush and our pass blocking was nothing to write home about either. But most of those guys were still here and getting competent coaching from our new o-line coach. If they were that great, we'd have seen it.

Quote:

---

4 or 5 star players at every skill position

---

Were you expecting Garbers to start last year? I've already shown you that Gilliam sucks.

Robertson and Stovall got hurt, so they had no chance to be productive last year. Same with Watson. Healthy this year, he ran for 600 yards at 4.2 ypc. Meh.

So now that we've eliminated all the guys that were hurt, who are these remaining 4 and 5 star players you were expecting to be so productive?

I am perfectly happy with this class. Frankly we need to keep recruiting 3*s and a few 4s. We proved we can win 7 games with them. As this team matures and is full of upper class men we will start to bring in 5*s and more 4*s. The best part? Unlike tedfords teams, we will have depth with a ton of solid 3*s that can prevent dissapointmebt after the inevitable injuries.

Yogi Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

"Turn-arounds"?? That was the defense. The offense was #1 in the PAC-12 and #10 in the country "with a young OL" a "discarded transfer QB" and a "walk-on WR" as the star the year before, and loaded with young 4 and 5 star talent coming in at the skill positions.

---

It's well past time to start dismantling some of these myths.

In 2016, Cal's offense was:

• 3rd in points per game
• 1st in yardage per game, but only 6th per play
• 5th in passer efficiency

Dump that #1 offense myth. Yards per game don't mean you are the best, it just means your offense is on the field a lot. Mostly because your defense can't stop anyone. If we'd had that kind of offensive production this year, obviously we'd have done a lot better, but let's not pretend it was something it wasn't.

Furthermore, the loss of the grad transfer QB meant we were going to do a nosedive offensively the next year because Dykes hadn't recruited a single good QB while at Cal (and don't sell me that four star Max Gilliam bull**** - here's his actual numbers.)

The "young talented oline" you are touting wasn't good and never was. We were in the bottom half of the conference in yards per rush and our pass blocking was nothing to write home about either. But most of those guys were still here and getting competent coaching from our new o-line coach. If they were that great, we'd have seen it.

Quote:

---

4 or 5 star players at every skill position

---

Were you expecting Garbers to start last year? I've already shown you that Gilliam sucks.

Robertson and Stovall got hurt, so they had no chance to be productive last year. Same with Watson. Healthy this year, he ran for 600 yards at 4.2 ypc. Meh.

So now that we've eliminated all the guys that were hurt, who are these remaining 4 and 5 star players you were expecting to be so productive?

---

Good post. The #1 offense thing drives me crazy.

Yogi Bear said:

---

LOL. Peddle that insider bull**** somewhere else pal.

---

I'm as far away as possible with respect to being an "insider." Instead of refuting my comments with arguments that evidence a good understanding of football, you just resort to a foul language accusation. Since you're a Cal grad, I think you should be better than that.

Yogi Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

"Turn-arounds"?? That was the defense. The offense was #1 in the PAC-12 and #10 in the country "with a young OL" a "discarded transfer QB" and a "walk-on WR" as the star the year before, and loaded with young 4 and 5 star talent coming in at the skill positions.

---

It's well past time to start dismantling some of these myths.

In 2016, Cal's offense was:

• 3rd in points per game
• 1st in yardage per game, but only 6th per play
• 5th in passer efficiency

Dump that #1 offense myth. Yards per game don't mean you are the best, it just means your offense is on the field a lot. Mostly because your defense can't stop anyone. If we'd had that kind of offensive production this year, obviously we'd have done a lot better, but let's not pretend it was something it wasn't.

Furthermore, the loss of the grad transfer QB meant we were going to do a nosedive offensively the next year because Dykes hadn't recruited a single good QB while at Cal (and don't sell me that four star Max Gilliam bull**** - here's his actual numbers.)

The "young talented oline" you are touting wasn't good and never was. We were in the bottom half of the conference in yards per rush and our pass blocking was nothing to write home about either. But most of those guys were still here and getting competent coaching from our new o-line coach. If they were that great, we'd have seen it.

Quote:

---

4 or 5 star players at every skill position

---

Were you expecting Garbers to start last year? I've already shown you that Gilliam sucks.

Robertson and Stovall got hurt, so they had no chance to be productive last year. Same with Watson. Healthy this year, he ran for 600 yards at 4.2 ypc. Meh.

So now that we've eliminated all the guys that were hurt, who are these remaining 4 and 5 star players you were expecting to be so productive?

---

Yogi, you are coming to the defense of a guy who is blaming the players for an offense that is not only the worst in the PAC-12 but one of the worst in the entire country.

The offense had lots of talent in 2015 but the offensive scheme and playcalling also got guys open and moved the ball. When we had Robertson and Stovall, a former walkon, Hansen, was our leading receiver and not because Robertson and Stoval were not great. Guys like Wharton and Noa always seemed to be open. Last year, Laird, McMorris and Davis, all former walkons proved to be exceptional players. I really do think Garbers is a good QB, but our OC does him no favors.

Tedford's defense was #90 in the country his last year. Then the best DBs left for the NFL, the top-rated Tosh recruits left, then 16 of the 22 on the 2-deep sustained injuries. Did we give Buh and Dykes a break for the resulting horrible defense? Especially not two years later (Buh was fired after the first year).

Fine, forget yards, we went from 3rd in the PAC-12 in scoring to last. We went from 22nd in the nation in scoring to 112th, and if you take away defensive scores, our offense is probably last or close to last in the country scoring. The Holmoe offenses were ranked higher. The J Torchio offense, the Justin Vedder offenses, were never last in the country.

The argument that it is all the players' fault, or that we just didn't have the horses to be better than OSU on offense is hogwash. The offensive playcalling was abysmal. Laird up the middle on first down out the spread was predictable and well defended. Even if we instead tried to throw, there was no play fake, the excellent CBs in our league could defend our WRs in single coverage. Rather than change scheme to deal with that we just continued with more of the same. Or switched QBs. Perhaps our best offensive weapon, FB McMorris, was only used a few plays per game. After all the turnovers he had previously, who really thought starting McIlwain and having him sit in the pocket under constant pressure and throw 43 times to our depleted WR Corps (and only run a couple of times) was a good idea? Sure, but Baldwin's defenders can just blame the players for "not executing" write off the year and try the same thing with another transfer QB next year. If that doesn't work, it will be the players' fault again....

All, I ask on offense is that we utilize the best players we have in the best way possible to put them in a position to succeed. I know we would not have a top offense, but I know we could have at least been mediocre, below average. Maybe around 8th in the PAC-12 and 70th in the nation? Do you really think that was too much to ask?

tigertim said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

But isn't it frustrating to see Bama with the #1 class - yet again??? (I figured I better actually look this up, so I found Bama has been the number one recruiter 2013-2017, on average. So there you go.)

I just posted in the other thread that I don't understand why we don't encourage parity through a draft system based on rank with worst teams picking highest. Until then, I don't expect the top ten classes to go to any teams other than numbers 1-10 in the rankings, plus or minus.

---

What a horrible idea. They're students, and like other high school kids, should be allowed to decide for themselves where they want to study/play football.

I'm sure San Jose State would love to "draft" a student body more like Berkeley's, but every parent on this board would scream bloody murder at the thought of a nationwide "draft" of high schoolers with the best mix of GPA and SAT score.

---

What would be interesting is if the draft only granted the rights to a player to a BDW, but the player could choose any school that they wanted to attend or a school that wanted them. Schools who ended up with any player would have to buy the rights from the school who drafted the rights to the player. It would address the uneven distribution of wealth involved in amateur sports. The problem with almost anything in life is money - college sports is no different.

So why don't you enlighten us all, smart guy? What are these invisible core factors that can only be perceived by football gods like you?

Madden sucks

So is the "direction" language the 2018 version of the old TH "man of integrity" BS? And what are the exact performance measures that signal heading in the right "direction"?

Activating the BS filter for a moment, are Cal fans really saying they prefer a reserved, square-jawed head coach over a semi-hysterical fat one, irrespective results and recruiting momentum? (hey, there are two possible performance measures right there)

SD dimensionally sucked, but he seemed to be doing more or less the same thing 2-3 years in with a different inflection. He also had to deal with a pack of admin and faculty hyenas and tons of bad press in the wake of his predecessor's academic failings.
Wasn't that his #1 priority, per your AD at the time? Quite a distraction, I'd imagine, changing program culture while trying to recruit competitively and win. Does Cal's current golden boy have that anchor around his neck?

https://goo.gl/images/fU85Uy

Northside91 said:

---

So is the "direction" language the 2018 version of the old TH "man of integrity" BS? And what are the exact performance measures that signal heading in the right "direction"?

Activating the BS filter for a moment, are Cal fans really saying they prefer a reserved, square-jawed head coach over a semi-hysterical fat one, irrespective results and recruiting momentum? (hey, there are two possible performance measures right there)

SD dimensionally sucked, but he seemed to be doing more or less the same thing 2-3 years in with a different inflection. He also had to deal with a pack of admin and faculty hyenas and tons of bad press in the wake of his predecessor's academic failings.
Wasn't that his #1 priority, per your AD at the time? Quite a distraction, I'd imagine, changing program culture while trying to recruit competitively and win. Does Cal's current golden boy have that anchor around his neck?

---

Right direction - beating Washington and USC in the same year.

Look, our offense irritated me to no end but it was OBVIOUS that most of this was NOT on the coaches. So you can get it in your noggin let me explain in small words.

WE HAD NO SPEED. NOT ALL SEASON. And then our possession receivers started getting hurt (in part because they were running crossing routes and getting crushed).

What this allowed people to do is play one on one on ALL our WR and then put one safety deep. EVERYONE ELSE was in the box. If you look at the tape I would say we saw zone only about 20% of the time. And what this meant is that we could not run and since we never got seperation we couldn't pass.

Now guys like Noa can beat some of the Pac-12 DBs one on one for POSSESSION routes through technic.. But they can't outrun them on posts or flies. Just can't.

We tried everything including throwing the kitchen sink at it.

I think the key question about this class is not stars but speed - are we getting quicker on the offensive side of the rock. If so, then we are in good shape because it is clear on the defensive side we have great teachers who can coach up guys.

TandemBear said:

---

But isn't it frustrating to see Bama with the #1 class - yet again??? (I figured I better actually look this up, so I found Bama has been the number one recruiter 2013-2017, on average. So there you go.)

I just posted in the other thread that I don't understand why we don't encourage parity through a draft system based on rank with worst teams picking highest. Until then, I don't expect the top ten classes to go to any teams other than numbers 1-10 in the rankings, plus or minus.

---

This is great, then we could give everyone a participation trophy at the end. I do not recall, did Oregon finish in the top 10 this year? Top 25 even?

510 Bear said:

---

edg64 said:

---

Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

---

I do too. To anyone who's all "we suck and can't recruit", I humbly suggest you consider that it's not 2009 anymore. Cal is coming off of a long stretch of mediocrity. What kind of overnight recruiting miracle did you realistically expect? Yeah, we needed to have a way better class to close the gap with furd, Oregon, UW, USC, etc. RIGHT NOW, but again, is it being realistic to say JW & co should have made that happen?

All you can ask for at this point is for us to have a shot at 9-3 or 10-2 next year, and we've got one with this group and a HC who seems adept at getting guys to play over their heads.

Note: my optimism is based more on the newcomers on O making an impact right away rather than existing guys somehow turning things around. I'm hoping we'll hear "Modster to Clark for the TD!" a bunch next fall, especially against UCLA.

---

I am not sure 10 wins is a reasonable expectation or something that I would need to see to show solid progress.

7 wins would be enough to show progress, (back to back bowl seasons). 8 with an offense would be an insane improvement and put us on track to be a solid 8 win team year in and out going forward.

And without a lot more money for coaches, I think an 8 win program with some great seasons mixed in is about where Cal belongs.

Bear19 said:

---

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

---

The offensive side of the ball is a dumpster fire. Why can't some of you guys see it?

---

Because turn-arounds aren't instant, players aren't controlled by joystick controllers, perfect plays on the whiteboard often don't work on the field because of just one, very subtle, yet critical mistake of a player you're not looking at during the play.

The issues regarding the offense this year, have at their core, factors invisible to you, that you would not acknowledge even if you could perceive them, and are complex beyond your willingness and/or capability to understand.

In short, because football with real people in reality has nothing to do with Madden football. That's just reality.

---

LOL. Aren't you the guy who said no one can comment unless they played Pac12 football?

Yogi Bear said:

---

edg64 said:

---

Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

---

He took over a 5-7 team and turned it into a 5-7 team that became a 7-5 team.

That said, if Dykes had coached 2017, I believe he would have done worse than Wilcox did. His years of poor recruiting were about to catch up with him and he knew it.

---

Not sure how to respond to your post. Your first comment that JW inherited a 5-7 team and turned it into a 5-7 team is entirely misleading then you walk your statement back. As other posters have already pointed out JW's 5-7 team is not SOnny's 5-7 team. He had a Pro-caliber senior+ QB and a number of great receivers who were no longer on the field for JW's first year.
I don't know about you but IMO when Sonny finished his 5-7 season in 2016 I was positive that Cal would be lucky to win 3 games in 2017 and maybe fewer if Sonny stayed.
So while a 5-7 season equals a 5-7 season. That does NOT mean that JW inherited a 5-7 team. With all the expected departures, He inherited at best a 3-8 team.

TandemBear said:

---

But isn't it frustrating to see Bama with the #1 class - yet again??? (I figured I better actually look this up, so I found Bama has been the number one recruiter 2013-2017, on average. So there you go.)

I just posted in the other thread that I don't understand why we don't encourage parity through a draft system based on rank with worst teams picking highest. Until then, I don't expect the top ten classes to go to any teams other than numbers 1-10 in the rankings, plus or minus.

---

college football doesn't need parity.

Also, I don't agree at all with dictating where a 17 year old has to live for 4 years in the name of sports parity. That sounds like a dystopian movie.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

Yogi Bear said:

---

edg64 said:

---

Many fans expressing disappointment in the initial LOI signings.


Let us not forget - Wilcox took over a no-name, smelly, stinky, embarrassing dumpster fire

AND

and in only 2 years, turned it into a 7-5, bowl eligible, competitive group of no-names. I like the direction

---

He took over a 5-7 team and turned it into a 5-7 team that became a 7-5 team.

That said, if Dykes had coached 2017, I believe he would have done worse than Wilcox did. His years of poor recruiting were about to catch up with him and he knew it.

---

Not sure how to respond to your post. Your first comment that JW inherited a 5-7 team and turned it into a 5-7 team is entirely misleading then you walk your statement back. As other posters have already pointed out JW's 5-7 team is not SOnny's 5-7 team. He had a Pro-caliber senior+ QB and a number of great receivers who were no longer on the field for JW's first year.
I don't know about you but IMO when Sonny finished his 5-7 season in 2016 I was positive that Cal would be lucky to win 3 games in 2017 and maybe fewer if Sonny stayed.
So while a 5-7 season equals a 5-7 season. That does NOT mean that JW inherited a 5-7 team. With all the expected departures, He inherited at best a 3-8 team.

---

Excellent points. One of the things that sold me on Wilcox right from the first game in 2017 was the huge decrease in missed tackles. It's such a clear example of coaching having an impact. And then it got even better in 2018! Now we need to see the same type of improvement on offense.