Per Calmbb IG:

https://instagr.am/p/CLr0k-gB0XS

No word on anyone else.

Great news!

Less worried we will have enough shooting next season

Great to have an experienced stretch forward. He is one of the keys to next year.

Also good to have a long range sniper. Foreman needs to work on his drive game, teardrop floater, passing and defense. He should workout with Mr. Jerome Randle

Saw another note that Bentley is still deciding

Grant is the key returnee. You can't have too many perimeter shooters; so, I hope Betley returns

Not sure them returning will change our record.

My hope is that with a year playing tougher competition than where they came from (Foreman and Betley) we might see growth like from freshman to Sophomore year.

NathanAllen said:

---

This is pretty significant.

---

I hope it's significant for the players, in that they can start or continue grad programs. If it turns out to be significant for the team I'd be disappointed.

I'm hoping Grant can have a great off-season, in terms of workouts, and achieve a new level of consistency in his final year!

I'm a little surprised that Foreman's coming back. Where will we be at in terms of scholarships? If the staff finds an international "big" this spring, will we have room? (still wouldn't be surprised if we have a bit of attrition)

Edit: Just remembered we can -- one time thing -- go over the limit on scholarships next season, correct?

NathanAllen said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

This is pretty significant.

---

Yes, and for more reasons than one. At least two players like playing for this coach, apparently. If this coach was as bad as so many on this board seem to think, I would not have expected this.

---

Yeah, that's a good point.

Also, coaches are rarely as bad as anonymous posters on internet message boards make them out to be. But good to have a data point to support that theory.

---

And posters on message boards are usually not as negative as it seems, because the negative ones always "yell" louder and post more frequently, so somehow, the negative opinions feel like they are more prevalent than they really are. Very often, negative opinions aren't the feeling of "so many on this board," but rather, "a select few on this board who, on close examination, aren't really in the majority."

One exception was towards the end of the Wyking Jones era, where those who supported the termination of Jones were in such a large minority and felt the case was so obvious that saying anything in support of termination felt like saying "the sky is blue," while those who made noise in favor of retaining Jones seemed like they were more prevalent than they really were.

If you could really take the temperature of the BI community about Fox, I don't think that the community in general feels Fox is bad in terms of a) how players feel about him, or b) x's and o's.

On the other hand, the feelings about the ability of Fox to get the players to make Cal regularly at least compete for an NCAA tourney slot in the BI community are mostly either a) the jury is still out, or b) nope, he can't do it.

If Fox is as bad as "so many on this board seem to think," it is really in his recruiting ability, and not in his coaching ability otherwise. Sure, there are some who don't like the slower tempo and how the offense works, but I think most in the BI community recognize this is more about talent level than it is about Fox's x's and o's ability.

I think a lot of people in the BI basketball community are just sitting on the sidelines right now. Between not getting to attend games because of COVID and the team being 3-15 in conference, a lot of fans are just plain apathetic right now.

Well, I'm glad you guys are excited about this. I like all these guys, but with another year, is Betley going to suddenly get more athletic? Is Makale going to suddenly become a lockdown defender and distributor? Is Grant going to suddenly be able to shoot off the dribble? What magic will occur to cause these changes? I understand the argument that a player earns playing time by how they do in practice, but the return of these three will certainly eat into the playing time and development of younger guys like Bowser, Kuany, and Hyser and I think that's unfortunate.

Here's what this announcement (whether one or all three return) means to me: that Fox and staff couldn't come up with better replacements for three players on a team that's 4-14 in an admittedly weak Pac-12.

HearstMining said:

---

Well, I'm glad you guys are excited about this. I like all these guys, but with another year, is Betley going to suddenly get more athletic? Is Makale going to suddenly become a lockdown defender and distributor? Is Grant going to suddenly be able to shoot off the dribble? What magic will occur to cause these changes? I understand the argument that a player earns playing time by how they do in practice, but the return of these three will certainly eat into the playing time and development of younger guys like Bowser, Kuany, and Hyser and I think that's unfortunate.

Here's what this announcement (whether one or all three return) means to me: that Fox and staff couldn't come up with better replacements for three players on a team that's 4-14 in an admittedly weak Pac-12.

---

This is one of the reasons why I was a little surprised that Foreman's coming back. Maybe he will have a defined role as a designated shooter.

I wonder if there had been earlier talk as to whether Betley and Foreman would be able to return for a second year. I know the "pandemic rule" has only been known for a few months. Would it be correct to say that both parties (player and coach) would have to be on board?

3-15

Some transfer outs must be in the works. Cant imagine carrying all these players.

HearstMining said:

---

Well, I'm glad you guys are excited about this. I like all these guys, but with another year, is Betley going to suddenly get more athletic? Is Makale going to suddenly become a lockdown defender and distributor? Is Grant going to suddenly be able to shoot off the dribble? What magic will occur to cause these changes? I understand the argument that a player earns playing time by how they do in practice, but the return of these three will certainly eat into the playing time and development of younger guys like Bowser, Kuany, and Hyser and I think that's unfortunate.

Here's what this announcement (whether one or all three return) means to me: that Fox and staff couldn't come up with better replacements for three players on a team that's 4-14 in an admittedly weak Pac-12.

---

No, but hopefully they become solid role players rather than starters that need to contribute significantly otherwise we lose.

Wyking Jones set a program record that will last for decades, and very well may never be broken. You really have to respect that, and at least we will always have that.

NathanAllen said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

Well, I'm glad you guys are excited about this. I like all these guys, but with another year, is Betley going to suddenly get more athletic? Is Makale going to suddenly become a lockdown defender and distributor? Is Grant going to suddenly be able to shoot off the dribble? What magic will occur to cause these changes? I understand the argument that a player earns playing time by how they do in practice, but the return of these three will certainly eat into the playing time and development of younger guys like Bowser, Kuany, and Hyser and I think that's unfortunate.

Here's what this announcement (whether one or all three return) means to me: that Fox and staff couldn't come up with better replacements for three players on a team that's 4-14 in an admittedly weak Pac-12.

---

While this is a bit too negative/cynical for my taste, I think your underlying point is correct that Fox and the rest of the staff feel Foreman/Anticevich/Betley will make the team better and contribute next season. It isn't like those three forced themselves into another year. The school and Fox have to also want them back for another season.

That said, this will create a logjam for minutes. There are already not enough minutes in a 40-minute game for 13 scholarship players. Cal could be carrying 16 next season. I'm guessing there could be some redshirts. It's also kind of incredible that Cal could have 16 scholarship players next season and I'll still feel nervous about the thinness of the frontcourt options. There's gonna be a serious abundance of guards/wings. I guess the hope is Kelly/Thiemann/Thorpe all take steps forward and Anyanwu can play a bit at the four, even if he's a bit undersized.

---

Agree, though to "thinness of front court options" I would add "thinness of options at PG."

bearister said:

---

Wyking Jones set a program record that will last for decades, and very well may never be broken. You really have to respect that, and at least we will always have that.

---

We could tie or break some of Jones' records this year.

In his first year Jones lost a Cal record 16 PAC-12 games. We have already lost 15 with two more to be played this week.

Cal8285 said:

---

If you could really take the temperature of the BI community about Fox, I don't think that the community in general feels Fox is bad in terms of a) how players feel about him, or b) x's and o's.

On the other hand, the feelings about the ability of Fox to get the players to make Cal regularly at least compete for an NCAA tourney slot in the BI community are mostly either a) the jury is still out, or b) nope, he can't do it.

---

My individual temperature is about what you describe in the first paragraph above. Regarding the second I'm waiting to see how the three 2021 recruits look and who commits for 2022. I consider 2019 to be Fox's year zero with a new staff, no connections, and no track record. Then 2020 is year one, still with no track record. For those two classes I'll give Fox a pass but not for 2021 onwards.

I'll add a connection: I think the players we have feel fine about Fox but our recruiting issues might be related to players we want but don't have not feeling all that fine about Fox.

I wouldn't count on Betley returning. If he's still 'undecided" after all this time, he's probably a no. Too bad--unless you have a dominant big man, the game today revolves around perimeter shooters. You cant'have too many perimeter shooters. BTW, when brown starts, we are at a disadvantage offensively. ( 50% 0f the game). ). teams slack off him and so we are 4 on five offensively. ideally, he comes off thge pine to spell the starters. .t

helltopay1 said:

---

I wouldn't count on Betley returning. If he's still 'undecided" after all this time, he's probably a no. Too bad--unless you have a dominant big man, the game today revolves around perimeter shooters. You cant'have too many perimeter shooters. BTW, when brown starts, we are at a disadvantage offensively. ( 50% 0f the game). ). teams slack off him and so we are 4 on five offensively. ideally, he comes off thge pine to spell the starters. .t

---

Betley is shooting .275 from 3 in conference (7th on the team) while leading the team in attempts, putting up 50% more attempts than Bradley.

Brown needs to be encouraged to shoot if left open because he has hit .381 on 3s when he does shoot.

calumnus said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

Well, I'm glad you guys are excited about this. I like all these guys, but with another year, is Betley going to suddenly get more athletic? Is Makale going to suddenly become a lockdown defender and distributor? Is Grant going to suddenly be able to shoot off the dribble? What magic will occur to cause these changes? I understand the argument that a player earns playing time by how they do in practice, but the return of these three will certainly eat into the playing time and development of younger guys like Bowser, Kuany, and Hyser and I think that's unfortunate.

Here's what this announcement (whether one or all three return) means to me: that Fox and staff couldn't come up with better replacements for three players on a team that's 4-14 in an admittedly weak Pac-12.

---

While this is a bit too negative/cynical for my taste, I think your underlying point is correct that Fox and the rest of the staff feel Foreman/Anticevich/Betley will make the team better and contribute next season. It isn't like those three forced themselves into another year. The school and Fox have to also want them back for another season.

That said, this will create a logjam for minutes. There are already not enough minutes in a 40-minute game for 13 scholarship players. Cal could be carrying 16 next season. I'm guessing there could be some redshirts. It's also kind of incredible that Cal could have 16 scholarship players next season and I'll still feel nervous about the thinness of the frontcourt options. There's gonna be a serious abundance of guards/wings. I guess the hope is Kelly/Thiemann/Thorpe all take steps forward and Anyanwu can play a bit at the four, even if he's a bit undersized.

---

Agree, though to "thinness of front court options" I would add "thinness of options at PG."

---

Lack of depth everywhere, really.

Cal8285 said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

This is pretty significant.

---

Yes, and for more reasons than one. At least two players like playing for this coach, apparently. If this coach was as bad as so many on this board seem to think, I would not have expected this.

---

Yeah, that's a good point.

Also, coaches are rarely as bad as anonymous posters on internet message boards make them out to be. But good to have a data point to support that theory.

---

And posters on message boards are usually not as negative as it seems, because the negative ones always "yell" louder and post more frequently, so somehow, the negative opinions feel like they are more prevalent than they really are. Very often, negative opinions aren't the feeling of "so many on this board," but rather, "a select few on this board who, on close examination, aren't really in the majority."

One exception was towards the end of the Wyking Jones era, where those who supported the termination of Jones were in such a large minority and felt the case was so obvious that saying anything in support of termination felt like saying "the sky is blue," while those who made noise in favor of retaining Jones seemed like they were more prevalent than they really were.

If you could really take the temperature of the BI community about Fox, I don't think that the community in general feels Fox is bad in terms of a) how players feel about him, or b) x's and o's.

On the other hand, the feelings about the ability of Fox to get the players to make Cal regularly at least compete for an NCAA tourney slot in the BI community are mostly either a) the jury is still out, or b) nope, he can't do it.

If Fox is as bad as "so many on this board seem to think," it is really in his recruiting ability, and not in his coaching ability otherwise. Sure, there are some who don't like the slower tempo and how the offense works, but I think most in the BI community recognize this is more about talent level than it is about Fox's x's and o's ability.

I think a lot of people in the BI basketball community are just sitting on the sidelines right now. Between not getting to attend games because of COVID and the team being 3-15 in conference, a lot of fans are just plain apathetic right now.

---

You make good points. As to the recruiting, most fans often expect too much from incoming recruits. Very few recruits are capable or ready to start, to play major minutes and be solid contributors as freshmen. It really takes two plus years before you start to see how good a recruit can be. There are a few, like Matt Bradley, who can come in as a freshman and be a star right away. But most recruits are not that good, and the few who are, are mostly well known to all coaches and the competition is very heavy to land these players, not to mention the fact that there are more schools in the chase to land these players. Cal fans seem to demand even more of our recruits and our coach's recruiting, because we are so impatient to see the team turn things around.

Fox has had one full season of recruiting prior to Covid, and now the Covid lockdowns have really made recruiting that much more difficult, as coach to player in person contact is probably greatly limited. Very few coaches land star recruits in their first season, because he will be hired in late March or early April, and nearly all the good recruits have signed by then for the coming season. In his first season, Montgomery was fortunate to find a diamond in the rough in Jorge, but Seely was a big disappointment. Cuonzo got unranked Okoroh and Chauca. Jones got McNeill, Winston, and McCullough, plus some players who Cuonzo had recruited. Fox got Thiemann, Thorpe, Brown, Kuany, and Klonaras, all of whom are projects, and if they are going to contribute to turning this team around, it won't happen until their 3rd or 4th season. Fox admittedly did not land much for this season. Celestine will be a player, IMO, because he has court sense, along with some tools. Bowser and Hyder, maybe after a couple of seasons. But my point is that to judge a coach's recruiting on only one Cal season is pretty much worthless, and that is all we have to really look at. The first season was a new coach trying to pick up the best of what all the other coaches left for him, and next season, signing what he can without being able to scout and have person visits, may not bring fans the star players they are looking for.

Big C said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

Well, I'm glad you guys are excited about this. I like all these guys, but with another year, is Betley going to suddenly get more athletic? Is Makale going to suddenly become a lockdown defender and distributor? Is Grant going to suddenly be able to shoot off the dribble? What magic will occur to cause these changes? I understand the argument that a player earns playing time by how they do in practice, but the return of these three will certainly eat into the playing time and development of younger guys like Bowser, Kuany, and Hyser and I think that's unfortunate.

Here's what this announcement (whether one or all three return) means to me: that Fox and staff couldn't come up with better replacements for three players on a team that's 4-14 in an admittedly weak Pac-12.

---

This is one of the reasons why I was a little surprised that Foreman's coming back. Maybe he will have a defined role as a designated shooter.

I wonder if there had been earlier talk as to whether Betley and Foreman would be able to return for a second year. I know the "pandemic rule" has only been known for a few months. Would it be correct to say that both parties (player and coach) would have to be on board?

---

I don't know what grad program he is in, but getting basketball to pay for a two year grad degree from Cal is smart.

Grant and Foreman have both h been starters this year so getting them back is a good thing, even if we hope a freshman beats them out for playing time.

Cal8285 said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

This is pretty significant.

---

Yes, and for more reasons than one. At least two players like playing for this coach, apparently. If this coach was as bad as so many on this board seem to think, I would not have expected this.

---

Yeah, that's a good point.

Also, coaches are rarely as bad as anonymous posters on internet message boards make them out to be. But good to have a data point to support that theory.

---

And posters on message boards are usually not as negative as it seems, because the negative ones always "yell" louder and post more frequently, so somehow, the negative opinions feel like they are more prevalent than they really are. Very often, negative opinions aren't the feeling of "so many on this board," but rather, "a select few on this board who, on close examination, aren't really in the majority."

One exception was towards the end of the Wyking Jones era, where those who supported the termination of Jones were in such a large minority and felt the case was so obvious that saying anything in support of termination felt like saying "the sky is blue," while those who made noise in favor of retaining Jones seemed like they were more prevalent than they really were.

If you could really take the temperature of the BI community about Fox, I don't think that the community in general feels Fox is bad in terms of a) how players feel about him, or b) x's and o's.

On the other hand, the feelings about the ability of Fox to get the players to make Cal regularly at least compete for an NCAA tourney slot in the BI community are mostly either a) the jury is still out, or b) nope, he can't do it.

If Fox is as bad as "so many on this board seem to think," it is really in his recruiting ability, and not in his coaching ability otherwise. Sure, there are some who don't like the slower tempo and how the offense works, but I think most in the BI community recognize this is more about talent level than it is about Fox's x's and o's ability.

I think a lot of people in the BI basketball community are just sitting on the sidelines right now. Between not getting to attend games because of COVID and the team being 3-15 in conference, a lot of fans are just plain apathetic right now.

---

Well said! Since the bolded section relates to the OP, possibly managing 16 scholarships next season, next year may have an interesting coaching twist. I don't think the special eligibility rules allow a program to recruit over a returning 'senior' and inflate the roster (i.e. add more freshman recruits if they don't leave). So my take on Grant, Makale & Ryan returning has more to do with them not having better options and Cal not saying get lost.

For all three, I can see getting a grad degree at Cal (next year) more attractive than other opportunities. Now, that does speak to our talent level, but . . .

The negativity on this board is an enigma. Maybe the failures are "success in progress". Several of the players and many of the fans would benefit from a medium dose of confidence building and a large dose of PMT (positive mental attitude).

Go Bears!

Fox does not strike me as an ace recruiter (I think that's safe to say!)

He's not the young, dynamic personality, he doesn't have the top shelf college coaching resume, nor the NBA connection, and he's kinda got an old-school tough love approach

Monty doesn't either, but he had the college track record behind him (and NBA experience, although I was shocked an NBA hired him ... such a poor fit)

That's why I think this staff needs an ace recruiter who has playing experience. The coaching staff needs to complement each other, so as a group are that ace (ok, at least King) recruiter

But we also need to get TOP social media talent who will maximize our reach, message, brand and even swagger

Hire a professional firm if you have to. We do a solid job with social media, but we should be a leader and break new ground on everything to the common platforms (instra, twitter, YT) and newer ones like Snap, TikTok, etc. Even increase FB to market to fans.

Setup selfie stations to increase fans/students to send to their network (the new platform on east side of stadium is great example)

That costs money, but not the $10-15M for a practice facility

Social media is an under utilized powerhouse, and one or two internal staff isn't enough in this era where people are snapping 100 videos/day on their phone

NathanAllen said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

Cal8285 said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

This is pretty significant.

---

Yes, and for more reasons than one. At least two players like playing for this coach, apparently. If this coach was as bad as so many on this board seem to think, I would not have expected this.

---

Yeah, that's a good point.

Also, coaches are rarely as bad as anonymous posters on internet message boards make them out to be. But good to have a data point to support that theory.

---

And posters on message boards are usually not as negative as it seems, because the negative ones always "yell" louder and post more frequently, so somehow, the negative opinions feel like they are more prevalent than they really are. Very often, negative opinions aren't the feeling of "so many on this board," but rather, "a select few on this board who, on close examination, aren't really in the majority."

One exception was towards the end of the Wyking Jones era, where those who supported the termination of Jones were in such a large minority and felt the case was so obvious that saying anything in support of termination felt like saying "the sky is blue," while those who made noise in favor of retaining Jones seemed like they were more prevalent than they really were.

If you could really take the temperature of the BI community about Fox, I don't think that the community in general feels Fox is bad in terms of a) how players feel about him, or b) x's and o's.

On the other hand, the feelings about the ability of Fox to get the players to make Cal regularly at least compete for an NCAA tourney slot in the BI community are mostly either a) the jury is still out, or b) nope, he can't do it.

If Fox is as bad as "so many on this board seem to think," it is really in his recruiting ability, and not in his coaching ability otherwise. Sure, there are some who don't like the slower tempo and how the offense works, but I think most in the BI community recognize this is more about talent level than it is about Fox's x's and o's ability.

I think a lot of people in the BI basketball community are just sitting on the sidelines right now. Between not getting to attend games because of COVID and the team being 3-15 in conference, a lot of fans are just plain apathetic right now.

---

You make good points. As to the recruiting, most fans often expect too much from incoming recruits. Very few recruits are capable or ready to start, to play major minutes and be solid contributors as freshmen. It really takes two plus years before you start to see how good a recruit can be. There are a few, like Matt Bradley, who can come in as a freshman and be a star right away. But most recruits are not that good, and the few who are, are mostly well known to all coaches and the competition is very heavy to land these players, not to mention the fact that there are more schools in the chase to land these players. Cal fans seem to demand even more of our recruits and our coach's recruiting, because we are so impatient to see the team turn things around.

Fox has had one full season of recruiting prior to Covid, and now the Covid lockdowns have really made recruiting that much more difficult, as coach to player in person contact is probably greatly limited. Very few coaches land star recruits in their first season, because he will be hired in late March or early April, and nearly all the good recruits have signed by then for the coming season. In his first season, Montgomery was fortunate to find a diamond in the rough in Jorge, but Seely was a big disappointment. Cuonzo got unranked Okoroh and Chauca. Jones got McNeill, Winston, and McCullough, plus some players who Cuonzo had recruited. Fox got Thiemann, Thorpe, Brown, Kuany, and Klonaras, all of whom are projects, and if they are going to contribute to turning this team around, it won't happen until their 3rd or 4th season. Fox admittedly did not land much for this season. Celestine will be a player, IMO, because he has court sense, along with some tools. Bowser and Hyder, maybe after a couple of seasons. But my point is that to judge a coach's recruiting on only one Cal season is pretty much worthless, and that is all we have to really look at. The first season was a new coach trying to pick up the best of what all the other coaches left for him, and next season, signing what he can without being able to scout and have person visits, may not bring fans the star players they are looking for.

---

I agree a coach needs time. And I think recruiting to Cal right now is harder than most programs (perception, lack of facilities, etc.). But I think most (myself included) are judging Fox's recruiting abilities based on what he did at UGA. Perhaps it's not fair because UGA and Cal are totally different programs, universities, and in different parts of the country, but he had nine recruiting cycles there, so there's a lot of data to go off of.

Also, Brown and Thorpe were already signed when Fox took the job. He obviously had to re-recruit them, but I wouldn't include them as Fox's recruits.

---

NathanAllen said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

Cal8285 said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

NathanAllen said:

---

This is pretty significant.

---

Yes, and for more reasons than one. At least two players like playing for this coach, apparently. If this coach was as bad as so many on this board seem to think, I would not have expected this.

---

Yeah, that's a good point.

Also, coaches are rarely as bad as anonymous posters on internet message boards make them out to be. But good to have a data point to support that theory.

---

And posters on message boards are usually not as negative as it seems, because the negative ones always "yell" louder and post more frequently, so somehow, the negative opinions feel like they are more prevalent than they really are. Very often, negative opinions aren't the feeling of "so many on this board," but rather, "a select few on this board who, on close examination, aren't really in the majority."

One exception was towards the end of the Wyking Jones era, where those who supported the termination of Jones were in such a large minority and felt the case was so obvious that saying anything in support of termination felt like saying "the sky is blue," while those who made noise in favor of retaining Jones seemed like they were more prevalent than they really were.

If you could really take the temperature of the BI community about Fox, I don't think that the community in general feels Fox is bad in terms of a) how players feel about him, or b) x's and o's.

On the other hand, the feelings about the ability of Fox to get the players to make Cal regularly at least compete for an NCAA tourney slot in the BI community are mostly either a) the jury is still out, or b) nope, he can't do it.

If Fox is as bad as "so many on this board seem to think," it is really in his recruiting ability, and not in his coaching ability otherwise. Sure, there are some who don't like the slower tempo and how the offense works, but I think most in the BI community recognize this is more about talent level than it is about Fox's x's and o's ability.

I think a lot of people in the BI basketball community are just sitting on the sidelines right now. Between not getting to attend games because of COVID and the team being 3-15 in conference, a lot of fans are just plain apathetic right now.

---

You make good points. As to the recruiting, most fans often expect too much from incoming recruits. Very few recruits are capable or ready to start, to play major minutes and be solid contributors as freshmen. It really takes two plus years before you start to see how good a recruit can be. There are a few, like Matt Bradley, who can come in as a freshman and be a star right away. But most recruits are not that good, and the few who are, are mostly well known to all coaches and the competition is very heavy to land these players, not to mention the fact that there are more schools in the chase to land these players. Cal fans seem to demand even more of our recruits and our coach's recruiting, because we are so impatient to see the team turn things around.

Fox has had one full season of recruiting prior to Covid, and now the Covid lockdowns have really made recruiting that much more difficult, as coach to player in person contact is probably greatly limited. Very few coaches land star recruits in their first season, because he will be hired in late March or early April, and nearly all the good recruits have signed by then for the coming season. In his first season, Montgomery was fortunate to find a diamond in the rough in Jorge, but Seely was a big disappointment. Cuonzo got unranked Okoroh and Chauca. Jones got McNeill, Winston, and McCullough, plus some players who Cuonzo had recruited. Fox got Thiemann, Thorpe, Brown, Kuany, and Klonaras, all of whom are projects, and if they are going to contribute to turning this team around, it won't happen until their 3rd or 4th season. Fox admittedly did not land much for this season. Celestine will be a player, IMO, because he has court sense, along with some tools. Bowser and Hyder, maybe after a couple of seasons. But my point is that to judge a coach's recruiting on only one Cal season is pretty much worthless, and that is all we have to really look at. The first season was a new coach trying to pick up the best of what all the other coaches left for him, and next season, signing what he can without being able to scout and have person visits, may not bring fans the star players they are looking for.

---

I agree a coach needs time. And I think recruiting to Cal right now is harder than most programs (perception, lack of facilities, etc.). But I think most (myself included) are judging Fox's recruiting abilities based on what he did at UGA. Perhaps it's not fair because UGA and Cal are totally different programs, universities, and in different parts of the country, but he had nine recruiting cycles there, so there's a lot of data to go off of.

Also, Brown and Thorpe were already signed when Fox took the job. He obviously had to re-recruit them, but I wouldn't include them as Fox's recruits.

---

You're right about Brown and Thorpe. Thanks for the correction. I'd forgotten about that. I guess that if a new coach gets blamed when a player signed by the previous coach decomitts, then he should get some credit for the previously signed recruits that he holds on to, even if he can't claim them as his recruits.