OaktownBear said:
HoopDreams said:
it doesn't look any better for the huskies going forward ...
https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/uw-husky-basketball/how-bright-is-the-future-for-the-husky-men-lets-just-say-you-wont-need-shades-when-gazing-in-crystal-ball/?utm_email=4441C516F471C589E4B10523B0&g2i_eui=wwv3%2ba39%2b0QP73BsfC%2b%2fvg%3d%3d&g2i_source=newsletter&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=https%3a%2f%2fwww.seattletimes.com%2fsports%2fuw-husky-basketball%2fhow-bright-is-the-future-for-the-husky-men-lets-just-say-you-wont-need-shades-when-gazing-in-crystal-ball%2f&utm_campaign=bang-mult-nl-pac-12-hotline-nl
The differences between the UW meltdown and the Cal meltdown:
1. There is an actual reporter in Seattle willing to point out the meltdown.
2. People at UW that matter might actually recognize the meltdown
3. People at UW that matter might actually care about the meltdown
4. No one at UW has the lack of self awareness to point at the Cal meltdown and not realize that they have a very similar problem.
I see zero problems in that article that don't apply at least equally here, nor do I see any thing that indicates that our situation looks any better going forward.
There are other meaningful differences in the meltdowns.
In 2019, UW finishes alone in 1st in the Pac-12 by two games. With the same coach and a couple of top 10 recruits (albeit some players lost to graduation/NBA), the Huskies finish alone in 12th. The next season, the Huskies finish alone in 11th place just ahead of Cal. That is a weird, unexpected plunge. How does that happen? It is kind of inexplicable.
Cal's drop, on the other hand, is far more explicable. Cal was only a 5 seed in the tourney in 2017, #1 seed in the NIT, and then the coach left, some recruits don't stay and some players leave, and a coach with no discernable qualifications to be a P5 head coach gets hired to coach a team where the cupboard is pretty bare. It then is no big surprise that the team finishes in last place two years in a row.
Then to replace the coach with no discernable qualifications to be a P5 head coach who finished last two years in a row, the AD hires a coach proven to be mediocre as a P5 HC, because the AD thinks that the ability of the MBB HC to relate to the AD is more important than the ability of the MBB HC to relate to players and recruits and to win. He doesn't have a lot of talent left to him, key players transfer before he starts, and he doesn't acquire much talent. Are we shocked? No. He has one good player. We are somewhat shocked when he gets a better than expected 7-11 season, tied for 8th through 10th, less shocked when it is followed by a last place season.
The writer of the article thinks that there is hope for UW because basketball is one of those sports where a couple of stars are able to turn programs around, but you need a microscope to see that hope.
At Cal, we wish we could see hope in a microscope, and that is a HUGE difference in the meltdowns.
Don't let any of that, however, keep us from taking some pleasure in UW's plunge. Yeah, yeah, the UW fans don't care about basketball the way they care about football, so it isn't nearly as satisfying when they sink towards the bottom in basketball as it is in football, but still, watching the Huskies go from first to last (and if not for Cal's return to the bottom they would have stayed there) is somewhat satisfying.
Pointing out UW's meltdown doesn't mean a lack of awareness of Cal's meltdown. It may, in fact, mean an awareness that Cal's meltdown is so complete that the most satisfaction we can hope for is to get to point to someone else's meltdown, even if it is not as complete as ours.
Since I can't even see hope in a microscope for Cal, I may as well take pleasure in the UW meltdown.
