LMAO
was hoping he'd stay there. talked his way into fsu and now it's their prob.LateHit said:
Eugene not seeming so bad right about now.
Relationships with media? Give me a break. These media guys wannabe real reporters are, as Bobby Knight said, one step above prostitution. The audacity to say of the 4 things you have to nail or your toast is relationships with the media.okaydo said:
Yeah, seriously. "Nail all four, including impressing us media, or you're screwed"...I LOL'd. The media are important, but they're not the kingmakers this guy seems to think of himself as. Someone get him the proverbial ladder so he can get over himself.GBear4Life said:Relationships with media? Give me a break. These media guys wannabe real reporters are, as Bobby Knight said, one step above prostitution. The audacity to say of the 4 things you have to nail or your toast is relationships with the media.okaydo said:
Arguably none of those 4 things are make or break issues in the first 90 days. All can be overcome, and often are.
That's right. The only thing in Wolken's #3 and 4 that a head coach actually has to do in the first 90 days is to not burn every bridge with fans and media. It's not necessary to make everyone love you.calumnus said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Has he really? Maybe Taggart is more like Sonny Dykes and just belongs in a G5 conference.ducktilldeath said:
He's been a good coach everywhere else.
BearSD said:Has he really? Maybe Taggart is more like Sonny Dykes and just belongs in a G5 conference.ducktilldeath said:
He's been a good coach everywhere else.
He came in with less than stellar credentials. They thought he would command the Florida recruit market, but they failed to look closely at what he did at USF.calumnus said:BearSD said:Has he really? Maybe Taggart is more like Sonny Dykes and just belongs in a G5 conference.ducktilldeath said:
He's been a good coach everywhere else.
As a HC at any level, the hires you make are key. Dykes at Cal made a bad hire at DC. Taggert made a couple of bad hires. Wilcox made a bad hire at OC. If Wilcox hires a good OC suddenly he is a good P5 coach. Dykes wasn't fitting in at Cal, but I could easily see him doing well at a P5 school like Baylor, Kansas or Texas Tech.
Taggart was the first African American head coach in Tallahassee. He wasn't getting a lot of slack if he didn't win big from the get go.
ducktilldeath said:
He's been a good coach everywhere else.
Wow, Dan Wolken is one arrogant, stupid, self-important little twit.okaydo said:
Can someone name me a Cal HC who did NOT look good in his first 90 days?calumnus said:okaydo said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Uthaithani said:Wow, Dan Wolken is one arrogant, stupid, self-important little twit.okaydo said:
Probably the last to get picked for dodgeball in HS gym class, too. Either that or hospitalized for getting the clarinet mouthpiece stuck in his nose.
Taggart was a bad hire, but it wasn't like the dorks in the media were going to have anything to do with that one way or the other.
Dykes had a pretty good first 90 days here. A lot of people were skeptical of the hire, initially, but he did a reasonably good job of convincing people that he actually WAS a good fit. Franklin seemed like a good hire and happily settled in Berkeley (and SD stayed nearby). Buh wasn't exactly a home run, but nobody knew how bad he'd really be. His other Assistants didn't have much west coast experience, but people figured he needed to bring in his own guys to run his system. Most important of all, at the end of the 90 days, he still had a .500 record!Uthaithani said:Can someone name me a Cal HC who did NOT look good in his first 90 days?calumnus said:okaydo said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Okay, Dykes. Yes.
Though that exception actually proves the rule, since he ended up getting an extension and only got himself fired because he was actively looking for a job years later.
Other than that, pretty much every Cal coach has looked great in those months before the first season started. And with but one exception (maybe two), they have not turned out to be good coaches.
So basically that I-don't-actually-play-sports-I-just-write-about-them reporter's list of four things a new coach needs to do is absolute garbage and has nothing to do with why Taggart failed.
You can be a good G5 coach and fail at the P5 level....ducktilldeath said:
He's been a good coach everywhere else.
The Big Miss Right (and we're not talking about Leach's overweight fiancee).BearSD said:
When Leach ran the ball up the middle twice before his kicker missed a 20-yard FG attempt on the last play in Cal's 60-59 win a few years ago, what was the name of that play?
Heh.
Thanks for clearing that up.ColoradoBear said:You can be a good G5 coach and fail at the P5 level....ducktilldeath said:
He's been a good coach everywhere else.
Uthaithani said:Can someone name me a Cal HC who did NOT look good in his first 90 days?calumnus said:okaydo said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Okay, Dykes. Yes.
Though that exception actually proves the rule, since he ended up getting an extension and only got himself fired because he was actively looking for a job years later.
Other than that, pretty much every Cal coach has looked great in those months before the first season started. And with but one exception (maybe two), they have not turned out to be good coaches.
So basically that I-don't-actually-play-sports-I-just-write-about-them reporter's list of four things a new coach needs to do is absolute garbage and has nothing to do with why Taggart failed.
Big C said:Dykes had a pretty good first 90 days here. A lot of people were skeptical of the hire, initially, but he did a reasonably good job of convincing people that he actually WAS a good fit. Franklin seemed like a good hire and happily settled in Berkeley (and SD stayed nearby). Buh wasn't exactly a home run, but nobody knew how bad he'd really be. His other Assistants didn't have much west coast experience, but people figured he needed to bring in his own guys to run his system. Most important of all, at the end of the 90 days, he still had a .500 record!Uthaithani said:Can someone name me a Cal HC who did NOT look good in his first 90 days?calumnus said:okaydo said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Okay, Dykes. Yes.
Though that exception actually proves the rule, since he ended up getting an extension and only got himself fired because he was actively looking for a job years later.
Other than that, pretty much every Cal coach has looked great in those months before the first season started. And with but one exception (maybe two), they have not turned out to be good coaches.
So basically that I-don't-actually-play-sports-I-just-write-about-them reporter's list of four things a new coach needs to do is absolute garbage and has nothing to do with why Taggart failed.
I'd say, 90 days in, he was at the peak of his popularity.
Northside91 said:Uthaithani said:Can someone name me a Cal HC who did NOT look good in his first 90 days?calumnus said:okaydo said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Okay, Dykes. Yes.
Though that exception actually proves the rule, since he ended up getting an extension and only got himself fired because he was actively looking for a job years later.
Other than that, pretty much every Cal coach has looked great in those months before the first season started. And with but one exception (maybe two), they have not turned out to be good coaches.
So basically that I-don't-actually-play-sports-I-just-write-about-them reporter's list of four things a new coach needs to do is absolute garbage and has nothing to do with why Taggart failed.
As far as I'm concerned, from the very beginning, Tom Holmoe, Keith Gilbertson, Cuonzo Martin and Wyking Jones did not inspire any confidence at all. Holmoe and Jones looked atrocious on paper and neither one presented like a leader. Cuonzo was uninspiring and had an unimpressive pedigree, and Gilbertson looked and sounded like a moron. If someone would like to push back on the Gilbertson comment, try listening to him on Seattle area sports talk radio first. He's an embarrassment to the coaching profession, and with WJ ranks in my mind as the most unpardonable hire in the history of Cal revenue sports.
calumnus said:Northside91 said:Uthaithani said:Can someone name me a Cal HC who did NOT look good in his first 90 days?calumnus said:okaydo said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Okay, Dykes. Yes.
Though that exception actually proves the rule, since he ended up getting an extension and only got himself fired because he was actively looking for a job years later.
Other than that, pretty much every Cal coach has looked great in those months before the first season started. And with but one exception (maybe two), they have not turned out to be good coaches.
So basically that I-don't-actually-play-sports-I-just-write-about-them reporter's list of four things a new coach needs to do is absolute garbage and has nothing to do with why Taggart failed.
As far as I'm concerned, from the very beginning, Tom Holmoe, Keith Gilbertson, Cuonzo Martin and Wyking Jones did not inspire any confidence at all. Holmoe and Jones looked atrocious on paper and neither one presented like a leader. Cuonzo was uninspiring and had an unimpressive pedigree, and Gilbertson looked and sounded like a moron. If someone would like to push back on the Gilbertson comment, try listening to him on Seattle area sports talk radio first. He's an embarrassment to the coaching profession, and with WJ ranks in my mind as the most unpardonable hire in the history of Cal revenue sports.
Agree with all except Cuonzo, Former NBA player, cancer survivor, protege of Gene Keady (6 Big Ten Championships at Purdue, perennial trips to the Tournament) with a great presence who had JUST Two weeks earlier taken Tennessee to the Sweet 16!!! Not a mid-major coach, an SEC coach who just made a long tournament run. Unprecedented for Cal.
Northside91 said:calumnus said:Northside91 said:Uthaithani said:Can someone name me a Cal HC who did NOT look good in his first 90 days?calumnus said:okaydo said:
First 90 days:
1. Hiring a staff
2. Winning over the existing players and commits.
Everything else (recruits, fans, media..) will he more dependent on your level success the first year than what you do in the first 90 days (or 6 months).
Okay, Dykes. Yes.
Though that exception actually proves the rule, since he ended up getting an extension and only got himself fired because he was actively looking for a job years later.
Other than that, pretty much every Cal coach has looked great in those months before the first season started. And with but one exception (maybe two), they have not turned out to be good coaches.
So basically that I-don't-actually-play-sports-I-just-write-about-them reporter's list of four things a new coach needs to do is absolute garbage and has nothing to do with why Taggart failed.
As far as I'm concerned, from the very beginning, Tom Holmoe, Keith Gilbertson, Cuonzo Martin and Wyking Jones did not inspire any confidence at all. Holmoe and Jones looked atrocious on paper and neither one presented like a leader. Cuonzo was uninspiring and had an unimpressive pedigree, and Gilbertson looked and sounded like a moron. If someone would like to push back on the Gilbertson comment, try listening to him on Seattle area sports talk radio first. He's an embarrassment to the coaching profession, and with WJ ranks in my mind as the most unpardonable hire in the history of Cal revenue sports.
Agree with all except Cuonzo, Former NBA player, cancer survivor, protege of Gene Keady (6 Big Ten Championships at Purdue, perennial trips to the Tournament) with a great presence who had JUST Two weeks earlier taken Tennessee to the Sweet 16!!! Not a mid-major coach, an SEC coach who just made a long tournament run. Unprecedented for Cal.
We'll disagree on Cuonzo. He made a lot of money as a result of the Mercer miracle (the year T finished fourth in the SEC behind Mark Fox's UGA team, btw). If not for that eye candy, he's not turning many heads. His last season at Mizz State was probably more impressive. I like my coaches with a little personality, not Bo Pelini and Ty Willingham types. Yes, I know, Pats fans would chuckle. Call me shallow.