Beginning of the end for Mark Fox.

Big C said:

---

Maybe he is transferring. For now, only "portaling". (New verb for 2021!)

---

We need to port Fox somewhere.

As of this morning, I think there are something like 2000 names in the portal and growing. Possibly to hit 3000. Wait - how can that be - isn't there only something like 4000 D1 schollies? Not sure about the details yet, but I caution over-reacting today, since the total number of D1 starters is around 1700 players. I also believe there are teams that were recently in the tourney that have 2 or 3 starters in the portal. I still need more data to make sense of these numbers - since it seems like EVERY season could see complete turnover.

Some quick thoughts:

1. The recent ruling that there will NOT be a one year sit out makes transfer more appealing.
2. The special pandemic allowance of not counting last season against scholarship limits means rosters are going to be even goofier next season.
3. The pandemic season was weird and rough on the players - with NO audiences and travel/school restrictions. I can see how MANY of them may be looking at OTHER personal reasons to consider where they play next season.
4. There is limited risk to enter the portal (I guess the possibility that your scholarship is given away - but not likely for Bradley). For someone like Bradley - I'd be surprised if he DIDN'T enter the portal.


5. I mentioned earlier that I need FOX to really make strides next season. I actually would LIKE to see how he deals with Bradley possibly/probably/actually transferring. It would give us better data points to see how FOX deals with this modern aspect of D1 BBall. This type of transfer issue for top players is likely to be the NORM for the foreseeable future, not the exception. If that prevents FOX from moving us out of BDW - I want to know that NEXT season. ASAP - Not after Bradley graduates. IF this lowers FOX ceiling (which is probably sort of low, already) - then I think it imperative that he be replaced at end of next season. If he adapts better than others in this regard - then it may be more reason to consider retaining him a bit longer.


Personal opinion. At this point in time, FOX is leaning more on HOPE than EVIDENCE. And the Bradley transfer issue makes it even more so IMHO. I would be OK to have this blow up and move on, versus stretching out HOPE for two or three seasons. However, I would prefer that he produce EVIDENCE of success. I am happy to wait until the end of next season (I'll likely renew my season tix to see if it happens), but I don't have a high degree of confidence.

The losing is bad.

The lack of transparency from MBB (lack of interviews etc) is not acceptable.

What's the plan man?!?

BeachedBear said:

---

As of this morning, I think there are something like 2000 names in the portal and growing. Possibly to hit 3000. Wait - how can that be - isn't there only something like 4000 D1 schollies? Not sure about the details yet, but I caution over-reacting today, since the total number of D1 starters is around 1700 players. I also believe there are teams that were recently in the tourney that have 2 or 3 starters in the portal. I still need more data to make sense of these numbers - since it seems like EVERY season could see complete turnover.

Some quick thoughts:

1. The recent ruling that there will NOT be a one year sit out makes transfer more appealing.
2. The special pandemic allowance of not counting last season against scholarship limits means rosters are going to be even goofier next season.
3. The pandemic season was weird and rough on the players - with NO audiences and travel/school restrictions. I can see how MANY of them may be looking at OTHER personal reasons to consider where they play next season.
4. There is limited risk to enter the portal (I guess the possibility that your scholarship is given away - but not likely for Bradley). For someone like Bradley - I'd be surprised if he DIDN'T enter the portal.


5. I mentioned earlier that I need FOX to really make strides next season. I actually would LIKE to see how he deals with Bradley possibly/probably/actually transferring. It would give us better data points to see how FOX deals with this modern aspect of D1 BBall. This type of transfer issue for top players is likely to be the NORM for the foreseeable future, not the exception. If that prevents FOX from moving us out of BDW - I want to know that NEXT season. ASAP - Not after Bradley graduates. IF this lowers FOX ceiling (which is probably sort of low, already) - then I think it imperative that he be replaced at end of next season. If he adapts better than others in this regard - then it may be more reason to consider retaining him a bit longer.


Personal opinion. At this point in time, FOX is leaning more on HOPE than EVIDENCE. And the Bradley transfer issue makes it even more so IMHO. I would be OK to have this blow up and move on, versus stretching out HOPE for two or three seasons. However, I would prefer that he produce EVIDENCE of success. I am happy to wait until the end of next season (I'll likely renew my season tix to see if it happens), but I don't have a high degree of confidence.

---

I like you Beached but you are very much reaching here.

1. Bradley is a very good player. He is going to have great options. I don't know what his decision process is, but one would think that the only reason to go into the portal is to explore your options and the only reason to remove yourself is the options aren't good. I think we can say it is unlikely Bradley is going to be back.

2. Bradley not being here is a massive disaster. He is one of only two guys on the roster that are PAC-12 level starters and is by far the better one.

3. You actually want to see what Fox does without Bradley? What you want to see how he deals with abject failure?

4. At what point do you look at the odds against anything positive happening and say, okay. That is too steep. I have asked people who support Fox to answer a couple basic questions. No one seems to want to do it because they know doing so will either demonstrate they have no grasp of reality or they are okay with losing badly, or they need to accept Fox needs to go. I ask this of you.

1. What would a merely acceptable result for a Cal coach in his third season be?

2. If Bradley goes, what are the chances of attaining that result

I'll go first. Acceptable result is a .500 conference record. Chances are a decimal point a lot of zeros and a 1. That is only accounting for the odds of 11 plane crashes happening to hit 11 pac-12 teams.

Give me your analysis of what the odds are of being acceptable and why if they aren't 50%, 40%, 30%, 10%, 5%, 1%, we should play out the string.

BeachedBear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

As of this morning, I think there are something like 2000 names in the portal and growing. Possibly to hit 3000. Wait - how can that be - isn't there only something like 4000 D1 schollies? Not sure about the details yet, but I caution over-reacting today, since the total number of D1 starters is around 1700 players. I also believe there are teams that were recently in the tourney that have 2 or 3 starters in the portal. I still need more data to make sense of these numbers - since it seems like EVERY season could see complete turnover.

Some quick thoughts:

1. The recent ruling that there will NOT be a one year sit out makes transfer more appealing.
2. The special pandemic allowance of not counting last season against scholarship limits means rosters are going to be even goofier next season.
3. The pandemic season was weird and rough on the players - with NO audiences and travel/school restrictions. I can see how MANY of them may be looking at OTHER personal reasons to consider where they play next season.
4. There is limited risk to enter the portal (I guess the possibility that your scholarship is given away - but not likely for Bradley). For someone like Bradley - I'd be surprised if he DIDN'T enter the portal.


5. I mentioned earlier that I need FOX to really make strides next season. I actually would LIKE to see how he deals with Bradley possibly/probably/actually transferring. It would give us better data points to see how FOX deals with this modern aspect of D1 BBall. This type of transfer issue for top players is likely to be the NORM for the foreseeable future, not the exception. If that prevents FOX from moving us out of BDW - I want to know that NEXT season. ASAP - Not after Bradley graduates. IF this lowers FOX ceiling (which is probably sort of low, already) - then I think it imperative that he be replaced at end of next season. If he adapts better than others in this regard - then it may be more reason to consider retaining him a bit longer.


Personal opinion. At this point in time, FOX is leaning more on HOPE than EVIDENCE. And the Bradley transfer issue makes it even more so IMHO. I would be OK to have this blow up and move on, versus stretching out HOPE for two or three seasons. However, I would prefer that he produce EVIDENCE of success. I am happy to wait until the end of next season (I'll likely renew my season tix to see if it happens), but I don't have a high degree of confidence.

---

I like you Beached but you are very much reaching here.

1. Bradley is a very good player. He is going to have great options. I don't know what his decision process is, but one would think that the only reason to go into the portal is to explore your options and the only reason to remove yourself is the options aren't good. I think we can say it is unlikely Bradley is going to be back.

Agreed. I didn't intend to suggest otherwise. In fact, players far less capable than Bradley are and should be entering the portal (that was my intended point with all the numbers). Cal is not a strong program, so I expect it to result in an overall talent drop.

2. Bradley not being here is a massive disaster. He is one of only two guys on the roster that are PAC-12 level starters and is by far the better one.

Agreed. Again, not sure where I suggested anything to the contrary. But at this point in time, I'm not convinced that joining the portal with literally THOUSANDS of others is an indictment of FOX alone and cause for immediate termination.

3. You actually want to see what Fox does without Bradley? What you want to see how he deals with abject failure?

Yes. That was my point. We can call this my 'Making Lemonade' gambit. I don't think Fox is the right guy for Cal long term (barring a massive turnaround). I don't want that massive turnaround to take more than next season. As I've said before, next year for me is his last chance - but he deserves that chance.

Overall, I'd rather have Bradley stay. But whether he stays or not, I don't want one player being an excuse to retain a coach that may be at his ceiling.

4. At what point do you look at the odds against anything positive happening and say, okay. That is too steep. I have asked people who support Fox to answer a couple basic questions. No one seems to want to do it because they know doing so will either demonstrate they have no grasp of reality or they are okay with losing badly, or they need to accept Fox needs to go. I ask this of you.

1. What would a merely acceptable result for a Cal coach in his third season be?

I'll restrict my response to NEXT season under Fox (not any Cal coach in any Third Season). To sum it up, I would basically need to say "Wow, I didn't expect that" at the end of next season. As for numbers (besides eye test stuff), Top half of conference finish and at least bubble talk at the end of the season. While I don't think the odds are miniscule, I would say roughly less than 25%

2. If Bradley goes, what are the chances of attaining that result.

Depends on what happens as a result of Bradley leaving. If that causes Ante & Kelly to go and a couple froshies to part ways its very low. If a transfer replaces him that is good - it could be negligible.

I'll go first. Acceptable result is a .500 conference record. Chances are a decimal point a lot of zeros and a 1. That is only accounting for the odds of 11 plane crashes happening to hit 11 pac-12 teams.

Give me your analysis of what the odds are of being acceptable and why if they aren't 50%, 40%, 30%, 10%, 5%, 1%, we should play out the string.

By play out the string, I'm assuming you mean why we shouldn't fire FOX now and replace him now. I've discussed (but I think Nathan has done a better job articulating it) that, pending bad behavior, firing Fox now, based on his W/L record would limit Cal's hiring options. Having said that, I've challenged others to come up with a name or two of better candidates - that would come to Cal - and the best so far seems to be Joe P.

If I were AD, I would not fire Fox today for Joe P. If by some miracle, we could get Scott Drew - then I'm all in (but I don't think Cal is at that level yet). My string plays out through next season. If I were AD, I'd be using my time and energy to get a short list of Good candidates if my 25% prediction plays out.

---

Look OTB, I like you, but sometimes you are simply too argumentative for arguments sake. I think we are in general agreement about Fox and Calm Bball.

---

That was not argumentative. That was being nice. A lot nicer than the morons that make up this athletic administration deserve. If I'm going to be accused of being argumentative, I might as well live it. This will be argumentative.

1. I'll sum this up. You know full well right now this thing is going to crash and burn and you think we should just let that play out because you have bought into 60 years of what the Cal athletic department excuse machine tells you is seemly even though absolutely no other sports program or employer of any kind lives by these Cal only cliche's.

2. We are in zero ways in general agreement about Fox and Cal mens basketball. I do not stare at Cal basketball and say "yes sir. please keep embarrassing my school by being absolutely brain dead stupid year after year after year times 50. Please keep paying millions of dollars more to do it. Please keep begging me for money to do it. Please look at a failed coach who has absolutely zero chance of turning this program around and say that your duty is to give him what he "deserves", not what 13 players deserve, not what 30K students deserve, not what 100's of thousands of alums deserve. The only one that matters in this equation is the one person who never went to the school and never paid the school one damn dime. Because his feewings are all that are important even when he will have millions of dollars to come to terms with those feewings.

3. Challenging fans to "come up with a name or two" of candidates who are better and would come to Cal is a ridiculous challenge to shut people up. That is not possible. The only way to know is to undergo a search, identify candidates you like and communicate with them. You cannot do that until you fire the guy because if you do word will get out that you are shopping his job, it will be embarrassing for you and him and you might as well have fired him because now you have undercut him to the point that he is useless. Funnily enough, every coaching vacancy gets filled. The vast majority of times any employer fires an employee they don't know who they are going to hire. Had you heard of Lou Campanelli when Kuchen was fired? Had you heard of Ben Braun? Did you know Monty would take the job? Did you have any idea that Cuonzo would take a job at Cal? Would you have named Fox as a candidate? Did you know Wilcox would for sure take the job? Dykes? Tedford? Gilbertson? Had you even heard of Snyder? C'mon. The challenge is ridiculous. If Knowlton has no confidence that he can hire better than 12th place, he should hand in his paycheck and GTFO.

4. Yes, another Cal only cliche that Cal fans think everyone lives by when no one else does. We can't fire a coach after two years or coaches won't take the job. That is not our problem. I spent years pointing to teams that have done this. (and frankly CAL JUST DID IT). And then falls into my lap that our main rival who we think is as academic and ethical as can be, just across the Bay fires their loser football coach after two seasons and hires Jim Harbaugh and completely changes the fortunes of their football program and I get "Blink...blink...blink, blink, blink...ERROR! ERROR! Cannot be true! Does not compute! Wipe memory banks! REBOOT! REBOOT! - Repeat primary instructions. We cannot fire coach after two seasons" "But Stanford and Jim Harbaugh" "ERROR! ERROR! Wipe memory banks! Repeat primary instructions"

5. I used to get so ticked off when periodically people would say Cal should drop down to Division II because they can't compete in Division I. I was wrong. Not because somebody in the exact same circumstances as Cal can't compete. Not because Cal can't get lucky for a few seasons before getting in its own way. If Cal weren't Cal, it could compete. There is nothing inherent in its situation that prevents Cal from being a respectable or even winning program. Elite program would be very tough. But respectable is easily doable. But it would take Cal not being Cal. And it would take Cal's enabling alums not being Cal's enabling alums.

80% of Cal fans have zero clue how any other program works and they keep buying into principles that an athletic department that has been incompetent for 60 years tells them because they won't listen to anything else. The same old tired chestnuts decade after decade. You know what Cal should do to fix things. ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THEY HAVE DONE FOR 60 YEARS! They can start with doing the Costanza - if every instinct you have is wrong, the opposite must be right. It couldn't be worse.

I would be absolutely fine if Cal decided to deemphasize sports. It would end the public embarrassment. I'm not talking about the losing. Sometimes you try your hardest, you do things basically right, and you just lose. No shame in that. I'm talking the absolute stupidity of how this program is run. You know when you listen to the radio and someone is on there saying something so stupid, that you are embarrassed for them and you have to change the channel because you are cringing so hard for them. That is this board every day. That is every single word or deed of this athletic department. It is not the losing I can't handle. It is that. It is the criminally negligent way a public university is managing money with no hope of gain. It is the constantly getting jobbed by coach's agents and search firms. It is three separate major NCAA sanctions in my lifetime and your program still stinks. It is academic fraud due to incompetence. It is a coach paying players due to lack of oversight. It is a player dying on our watch because our conditioning coach was a troglodyte. And it is fans making excuses for all of it time after time after time. No. It is fans making the same, completely proven wrong, dumbass excuses for it time after time after time.

For the fans that just like to see the kids play, hey. I get that. I love to watch my kid play and youth sports and how hard they work and sometimes they win and sometimes they lose. AND NO ONE GETS PAID A MILLION DOLLARS. You do not get to just see the kids play win or lose while spending millions of dollars. Millions of dollars means expectations.

So THIS IS WHAT ARGUMENTATIVE LOOKS LIKE. The way the Cal athletic department is run is a public embarrassment to the university from which I hold two degrees and a huge waste of cash. That is why the bulk of alums have, to use my metaphor from above, turned off the radio to stop being exposed to the cringeworthy stupidity. It is extremely hard to watch one small, but unfortunately extremely public department within a university that otherwise brings pride and honor, be such a giant symbol of incompetence, mismanagement and braindead stupidity. And it is massively unfortunate to watch a group of fans that are fortunately so much smarter and talented at all the other things they do be so far out of their depth on the realities of this one subject and just blindly follow the stupidity of this one department that frankly has zero business being within 3000 miles of the rest of that campus.

I'm still all in for Matt and I wish him nothing but success. He paid his dues as a Bear.

OaktownBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

As of this morning, I think there are something like 2000 names in the portal and growing. Possibly to hit 3000. Wait - how can that be - isn't there only something like 4000 D1 schollies? Not sure about the details yet, but I caution over-reacting today, since the total number of D1 starters is around 1700 players. I also believe there are teams that were recently in the tourney that have 2 or 3 starters in the portal. I still need more data to make sense of these numbers - since it seems like EVERY season could see complete turnover.

Some quick thoughts:

1. The recent ruling that there will NOT be a one year sit out makes transfer more appealing.
2. The special pandemic allowance of not counting last season against scholarship limits means rosters are going to be even goofier next season.
3. The pandemic season was weird and rough on the players - with NO audiences and travel/school restrictions. I can see how MANY of them may be looking at OTHER personal reasons to consider where they play next season.
4. There is limited risk to enter the portal (I guess the possibility that your scholarship is given away - but not likely for Bradley). For someone like Bradley - I'd be surprised if he DIDN'T enter the portal.


5. I mentioned earlier that I need FOX to really make strides next season. I actually would LIKE to see how he deals with Bradley possibly/probably/actually transferring. It would give us better data points to see how FOX deals with this modern aspect of D1 BBall. This type of transfer issue for top players is likely to be the NORM for the foreseeable future, not the exception. If that prevents FOX from moving us out of BDW - I want to know that NEXT season. ASAP - Not after Bradley graduates. IF this lowers FOX ceiling (which is probably sort of low, already) - then I think it imperative that he be replaced at end of next season. If he adapts better than others in this regard - then it may be more reason to consider retaining him a bit longer.


Personal opinion. At this point in time, FOX is leaning more on HOPE than EVIDENCE. And the Bradley transfer issue makes it even more so IMHO. I would be OK to have this blow up and move on, versus stretching out HOPE for two or three seasons. However, I would prefer that he produce EVIDENCE of success. I am happy to wait until the end of next season (I'll likely renew my season tix to see if it happens), but I don't have a high degree of confidence.

---

I like you Beached but you are very much reaching here.

1. Bradley is a very good player. He is going to have great options. I don't know what his decision process is, but one would think that the only reason to go into the portal is to explore your options and the only reason to remove yourself is the options aren't good. I think we can say it is unlikely Bradley is going to be back.

Agreed. I didn't intend to suggest otherwise. In fact, players far less capable than Bradley are and should be entering the portal (that was my intended point with all the numbers). Cal is not a strong program, so I expect it to result in an overall talent drop.

2. Bradley not being here is a massive disaster. He is one of only two guys on the roster that are PAC-12 level starters and is by far the better one.

Agreed. Again, not sure where I suggested anything to the contrary. But at this point in time, I'm not convinced that joining the portal with literally THOUSANDS of others is an indictment of FOX alone and cause for immediate termination.

3. You actually want to see what Fox does without Bradley? What you want to see how he deals with abject failure?

Yes. That was my point. We can call this my 'Making Lemonade' gambit. I don't think Fox is the right guy for Cal long term (barring a massive turnaround). I don't want that massive turnaround to take more than next season. As I've said before, next year for me is his last chance - but he deserves that chance.

Overall, I'd rather have Bradley stay. But whether he stays or not, I don't want one player being an excuse to retain a coach that may be at his ceiling.

4. At what point do you look at the odds against anything positive happening and say, okay. That is too steep. I have asked people who support Fox to answer a couple basic questions. No one seems to want to do it because they know doing so will either demonstrate they have no grasp of reality or they are okay with losing badly, or they need to accept Fox needs to go. I ask this of you.

1. What would a merely acceptable result for a Cal coach in his third season be?

I'll restrict my response to NEXT season under Fox (not any Cal coach in any Third Season). To sum it up, I would basically need to say "Wow, I didn't expect that" at the end of next season. As for numbers (besides eye test stuff), Top half of conference finish and at least bubble talk at the end of the season. While I don't think the odds are miniscule, I would say roughly less than 25%

2. If Bradley goes, what are the chances of attaining that result.

Depends on what happens as a result of Bradley leaving. If that causes Ante & Kelly to go and a couple froshies to part ways its very low. If a transfer replaces him that is good - it could be negligible.

I'll go first. Acceptable result is a .500 conference record. Chances are a decimal point a lot of zeros and a 1. That is only accounting for the odds of 11 plane crashes happening to hit 11 pac-12 teams.

Give me your analysis of what the odds are of being acceptable and why if they aren't 50%, 40%, 30%, 10%, 5%, 1%, we should play out the string.

By play out the string, I'm assuming you mean why we shouldn't fire FOX now and replace him now. I've discussed (but I think Nathan has done a better job articulating it) that, pending bad behavior, firing Fox now, based on his W/L record would limit Cal's hiring options. Having said that, I've challenged others to come up with a name or two of better candidates - that would come to Cal - and the best so far seems to be Joe P.

If I were AD, I would not fire Fox today for Joe P. If by some miracle, we could get Scott Drew - then I'm all in (but I don't think Cal is at that level yet). My string plays out through next season. If I were AD, I'd be using my time and energy to get a short list of Good candidates if my 25% prediction plays out.

---

Look OTB, I like you, but sometimes you are simply too argumentative for arguments sake. I think we are in general agreement about Fox and Calm Bball.

---

That was not argumentative. That was being nice. A lot nicer than the morons that make up this athletic administration deserve. If I'm going to be accused of being argumentative, I might as well live it. This will be argumentative.

1. I'll sum this up. You know full well right now this thing is going to crash and burn and you think we should just let that play out because you have bought into 60 years of what the Cal athletic department excuse machine tells you is seemly even though absolutely no other sports program or employer of any kind lives by these Cal only cliche's.

2. We are in zero ways in general agreement about Fox and Cal mens basketball. I do not stare at Cal basketball and say "yes sir. please keep embarrassing my school by being absolutely brain dead stupid year after year after year times 50. Please keep paying millions of dollars more to do it. Please keep begging me for money to do it. Please look at a failed coach who has absolutely zero chance of turning this program around and say that your duty is to give him what he "deserves", not what 13 players deserve, not what 30K students deserve, not what 100's of thousands of alums deserve. The only one that matters in this equation is the one person who never went to the school and never paid the school one damn dime. Because his feewings are all that are important even when he will have millions of dollars to come to terms with those feewings.

3. Challenging fans to "come up with a name or two" of candidates who are better and would come to Cal is a ridiculous challenge to shut people up. That is not possible. The only way to know is to undergo a search, identify candidates you like and communicate with them. You cannot do that until you fire the guy because if you do word will get out that you are shopping his job, it will be embarrassing for you and him and you might as well have fired him because now you have undercut him to the point that he is useless. Funnily enough, every coaching vacancy gets filled. The vast majority of times any employer fires an employee they don't know who they are going to hire. Had you heard of Lou Campanelli when Kuchen was fired? Had you heard of Ben Braun? Did you know Monty would take the job? Did you have any idea that Cuonzo would take a job at Cal? Would you have named Fox as a candidate? Did you know Wilcox would for sure take the job? Dykes? Tedford? Gilbertson? Had you even heard of Snyder? C'mon. The challenge is ridiculous. If Knowlton has no confidence that he can hire better than 12th place, he should hand in his paycheck and GTFO.

4. Yes, another Cal only cliche that Cal fans think everyone lives by when no one else does. We can't fire a coach after two years or coaches won't take the job. That is not our problem. I spent years pointing to teams that have done this. (and frankly CAL JUST DID IT). And then falls into my lap that our main rival who we think is as academic and ethical as can be, just across the Bay fires their loser football coach after two seasons and hires Jim Harbaugh and completely changes the fortunes of their football program and I get "Blink...blink...blink, blink, blink...ERROR! ERROR! Cannot be true! Does not compute! Wipe memory banks! REBOOT! REBOOT! - Repeat primary instructions. We cannot fire coach after two seasons" "But Stanford and Jim Harbaugh" "ERROR! ERROR! Wipe memory banks! Repeat primary instructions"

5. I used to get so ticked off when periodically people would say Cal should drop down to Division II because they can't compete in Division I. I was wrong. Not because somebody in the exact same circumstances as Cal can't compete. Not because Cal can't get lucky for a few seasons before getting in its own way. If Cal weren't Cal, it could compete. There is nothing inherent in its situation that prevents Cal from being a respectable or even winning program. Elite program would be very tough. But respectable is easily doable. But it would take Cal not being Cal. And it would take Cal's enabling alums not being Cal's enabling alums.

80% of Cal fans have zero clue how any other program works and they keep buying into principles that an athletic department that has been incompetent for 60 years tells them because they won't listen to anything else. The same old tired chestnuts decade after decade. You know what Cal should do to fix things. ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THEY HAVE DONE FOR 60 YEARS! They can start with doing the Costanza - if every instinct you have is wrong, the opposite must be right. It couldn't be worse.

I would be absolutely fine if Cal decided to deemphasize sports. It would end the public embarrassment. I'm not talking about the losing. Sometimes you try your hardest, you do things basically right, and you just lose. No shame in that. I'm talking the absolute stupidity of how this program is run. You know when you listen to the radio and someone is on there saying something so stupid, that you are embarrassed for them and you have to change the channel because you are cringing so hard for them. That is this board every day. That is every single word or deed of this athletic department. It is not the losing I can't handle. It is that. It is the criminally negligent way a public university is managing money with no hope of gain. It is the constantly getting jobbed by coach's agents and search firms. It is three separate major NCAA sanctions in my lifetime and your program still stinks. It is academic fraud due to incompetence. It is a coach paying players due to lack of oversight. It is a player dying on our watch because our conditioning coach was a troglodyte. And it is fans making excuses for all of it time after time after time. No. It is fans making the same, completely proven wrong, dumbass excuses for it time after time after time.

For the fans that just like to see the kids play, hey. I get that. I love to watch my kid play and youth sports and how hard they work and sometimes they win and sometimes they lose. AND NO ONE GETS PAID A MILLION DOLLARS. You do not get to just see the kids play win or lose while spending millions of dollars. Millions of dollars means expectations.

So THIS IS WHAT ARGUMENTATIVE LOOKS LIKE. The way the Cal athletic department is run is a public embarrassment to the university from which I hold two degrees and a huge waste of cash. That is why the bulk of alums have, to use my metaphor from above, turned off the radio to stop being exposed to the cringeworthy stupidity. It is extremely hard to watch one small, but unfortunately extremely public department within a university that otherwise brings pride and honor, be such a giant symbol of incompetence, mismanagement and braindead stupidity. And it is massively unfortunate to watch a group of fans that are fortunately so much smarter and talented at all the other things they do be so far out of their depth on the realities of this one subject and just blindly follow the stupidity of this one department that frankly has zero business being within 3000 miles of the rest of that campus.

---

In the late 80's and early 90s, when more talented Cal teams would lose the Big Game and (others) in bizarre and heartbreaking fashion, I always said that the only thing worse than losing was losing because Cal was outcoached or played stupid. It is downright embarrassing. As you point out, Cal's management of basketball and until recently, football is that.

Sadly, I doubt there will be any impetus for change for another year. I think the budget will be the driving factor, unless Joe P is the hire and he brings family money to the table. Even then I think Cal rides another year, brings in the current recruiting class, and sees if they can add a portal player or two.

In terms of Bradley, I wish him the best. I don't see how staying at Cal helps him if his goal is to win and/or play professionally. As long as he doesn't pull a Scarlett, I'll root for him next year and beyond.

bearister said:

---

I'm still all in for Matt and I wish him nothing but success. He paid his dues as a Bear.

---

I wish him well and I understand where he's coming from, but to be honest, my very favorite Cal players (the direction he was heading) don't transfer from Cal prior to their senior years. Who knows, maybe he won't either, although that looks pretty unlikely.

BeastBear69 said:

---

We need guys who want to play here and play team basketball like Oregon state.

---

That is a recipe for continuing frustration. Basketball games are won by the teams with the best players who are coached and led well enough to play together.

It starts with recruiting, and for Cal, as far as I can tell, step one would be a massive investment in facilities so that talented players would want to play basketball in Berkeley. The academic aspect is pretty meaningless to an elite 17-year-old athlete who knows he can make a lot of money playing overseas even if he isn't good enough for the NBA, and envisions a post-playing career in some aspect of sports.

OaktownBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

As of this morning, I think there are something like 2000 names in the portal and growing. Possibly to hit 3000. Wait - how can that be - isn't there only something like 4000 D1 schollies? Not sure about the details yet, but I caution over-reacting today, since the total number of D1 starters is around 1700 players. I also believe there are teams that were recently in the tourney that have 2 or 3 starters in the portal. I still need more data to make sense of these numbers - since it seems like EVERY season could see complete turnover.

Some quick thoughts:

1. The recent ruling that there will NOT be a one year sit out makes transfer more appealing.
2. The special pandemic allowance of not counting last season against scholarship limits means rosters are going to be even goofier next season.
3. The pandemic season was weird and rough on the players - with NO audiences and travel/school restrictions. I can see how MANY of them may be looking at OTHER personal reasons to consider where they play next season.
4. There is limited risk to enter the portal (I guess the possibility that your scholarship is given away - but not likely for Bradley). For someone like Bradley - I'd be surprised if he DIDN'T enter the portal.


5. I mentioned earlier that I need FOX to really make strides next season. I actually would LIKE to see how he deals with Bradley possibly/probably/actually transferring. It would give us better data points to see how FOX deals with this modern aspect of D1 BBall. This type of transfer issue for top players is likely to be the NORM for the foreseeable future, not the exception. If that prevents FOX from moving us out of BDW - I want to know that NEXT season. ASAP - Not after Bradley graduates. IF this lowers FOX ceiling (which is probably sort of low, already) - then I think it imperative that he be replaced at end of next season. If he adapts better than others in this regard - then it may be more reason to consider retaining him a bit longer.


Personal opinion. At this point in time, FOX is leaning more on HOPE than EVIDENCE. And the Bradley transfer issue makes it even more so IMHO. I would be OK to have this blow up and move on, versus stretching out HOPE for two or three seasons. However, I would prefer that he produce EVIDENCE of success. I am happy to wait until the end of next season (I'll likely renew my season tix to see if it happens), but I don't have a high degree of confidence.

---

I like you Beached but you are very much reaching here.

1. Bradley is a very good player. He is going to have great options. I don't know what his decision process is, but one would think that the only reason to go into the portal is to explore your options and the only reason to remove yourself is the options aren't good. I think we can say it is unlikely Bradley is going to be back.

Agreed. I didn't intend to suggest otherwise. In fact, players far less capable than Bradley are and should be entering the portal (that was my intended point with all the numbers). Cal is not a strong program, so I expect it to result in an overall talent drop.

2. Bradley not being here is a massive disaster. He is one of only two guys on the roster that are PAC-12 level starters and is by far the better one.

Agreed. Again, not sure where I suggested anything to the contrary. But at this point in time, I'm not convinced that joining the portal with literally THOUSANDS of others is an indictment of FOX alone and cause for immediate termination.

3. You actually want to see what Fox does without Bradley? What you want to see how he deals with abject failure?

Yes. That was my point. We can call this my 'Making Lemonade' gambit. I don't think Fox is the right guy for Cal long term (barring a massive turnaround). I don't want that massive turnaround to take more than next season. As I've said before, next year for me is his last chance - but he deserves that chance.

Overall, I'd rather have Bradley stay. But whether he stays or not, I don't want one player being an excuse to retain a coach that may be at his ceiling.

4. At what point do you look at the odds against anything positive happening and say, okay. That is too steep. I have asked people who support Fox to answer a couple basic questions. No one seems to want to do it because they know doing so will either demonstrate they have no grasp of reality or they are okay with losing badly, or they need to accept Fox needs to go. I ask this of you.

1. What would a merely acceptable result for a Cal coach in his third season be?

I'll restrict my response to NEXT season under Fox (not any Cal coach in any Third Season). To sum it up, I would basically need to say "Wow, I didn't expect that" at the end of next season. As for numbers (besides eye test stuff), Top half of conference finish and at least bubble talk at the end of the season. While I don't think the odds are miniscule, I would say roughly less than 25%

2. If Bradley goes, what are the chances of attaining that result.

Depends on what happens as a result of Bradley leaving. If that causes Ante & Kelly to go and a couple froshies to part ways its very low. If a transfer replaces him that is good - it could be negligible.

I'll go first. Acceptable result is a .500 conference record. Chances are a decimal point a lot of zeros and a 1. That is only accounting for the odds of 11 plane crashes happening to hit 11 pac-12 teams.

Give me your analysis of what the odds are of being acceptable and why if they aren't 50%, 40%, 30%, 10%, 5%, 1%, we should play out the string.

By play out the string, I'm assuming you mean why we shouldn't fire FOX now and replace him now. I've discussed (but I think Nathan has done a better job articulating it) that, pending bad behavior, firing Fox now, based on his W/L record would limit Cal's hiring options. Having said that, I've challenged others to come up with a name or two of better candidates - that would come to Cal - and the best so far seems to be Joe P.

If I were AD, I would not fire Fox today for Joe P. If by some miracle, we could get Scott Drew - then I'm all in (but I don't think Cal is at that level yet). My string plays out through next season. If I were AD, I'd be using my time and energy to get a short list of Good candidates if my 25% prediction plays out.

---

Look OTB, I like you, but sometimes you are simply too argumentative for arguments sake. I think we are in general agreement about Fox and Calm Bball.

---

That was not argumentative. That was being nice. A lot nicer than the morons that make up this athletic administration deserve. If I'm going to be accused of being argumentative, I might as well live it. This will be argumentative.

1. I'll sum this up. You know full well right now this thing is going to crash and burn and you think we should just let that play out because you have bought into 60 years of what the Cal athletic department excuse machine tells you is seemly even though absolutely no other sports program or employer of any kind lives by these Cal only cliche's.

2. We are in zero ways in general agreement about Fox and Cal mens basketball. I do not stare at Cal basketball and say "yes sir. please keep embarrassing my school by being absolutely brain dead stupid year after year after year times 50. Please keep paying millions of dollars more to do it. Please keep begging me for money to do it. Please look at a failed coach who has absolutely zero chance of turning this program around and say that your duty is to give him what he "deserves", not what 13 players deserve, not what 30K students deserve, not what 100's of thousands of alums deserve. The only one that matters in this equation is the one person who never went to the school and never paid the school one damn dime. Because his feewings are all that are important even when he will have millions of dollars to come to terms with those feewings.

3. Challenging fans to "come up with a name or two" of candidates who are better and would come to Cal is a ridiculous challenge to shut people up. That is not possible. The only way to know is to undergo a search, identify candidates you like and communicate with them. You cannot do that until you fire the guy because if you do word will get out that you are shopping his job, it will be embarrassing for you and him and you might as well have fired him because now you have undercut him to the point that he is useless. Funnily enough, every coaching vacancy gets filled. The vast majority of times any employer fires an employee they don't know who they are going to hire. Had you heard of Lou Campanelli when Kuchen was fired? Had you heard of Ben Braun? Did you know Monty would take the job? Did you have any idea that Cuonzo would take a job at Cal? Would you have named Fox as a candidate? Did you know Wilcox would for sure take the job? Dykes? Tedford? Gilbertson? Had you even heard of Snyder? C'mon. The challenge is ridiculous. If Knowlton has no confidence that he can hire better than 12th place, he should hand in his paycheck and GTFO.

4. Yes, another Cal only cliche that Cal fans think everyone lives by when no one else does. We can't fire a coach after two years or coaches won't take the job. That is not our problem. I spent years pointing to teams that have done this. (and frankly CAL JUST DID IT). And then falls into my lap that our main rival who we think is as academic and ethical as can be, just across the Bay fires their loser football coach after two seasons and hires Jim Harbaugh and completely changes the fortunes of their football program and I get "Blink...blink...blink, blink, blink...ERROR! ERROR! Cannot be true! Does not compute! Wipe memory banks! REBOOT! REBOOT! - Repeat primary instructions. We cannot fire coach after two seasons" "But Stanford and Jim Harbaugh" "ERROR! ERROR! Wipe memory banks! Repeat primary instructions"

5. I used to get so ticked off when periodically people would say Cal should drop down to Division II because they can't compete in Division I. I was wrong. Not because somebody in the exact same circumstances as Cal can't compete. Not because Cal can't get lucky for a few seasons before getting in its own way. If Cal weren't Cal, it could compete. There is nothing inherent in its situation that prevents Cal from being a respectable or even winning program. Elite program would be very tough. But respectable is easily doable. But it would take Cal not being Cal. And it would take Cal's enabling alums not being Cal's enabling alums.

80% of Cal fans have zero clue how any other program works and they keep buying into principles that an athletic department that has been incompetent for 60 years tells them because they won't listen to anything else. The same old tired chestnuts decade after decade. You know what Cal should do to fix things. ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THEY HAVE DONE FOR 60 YEARS! They can start with doing the Costanza - if every instinct you have is wrong, the opposite must be right. It couldn't be worse.

I would be absolutely fine if Cal decided to deemphasize sports. It would end the public embarrassment. I'm not talking about the losing. Sometimes you try your hardest, you do things basically right, and you just lose. No shame in that. I'm talking the absolute stupidity of how this program is run. You know when you listen to the radio and someone is on there saying something so stupid, that you are embarrassed for them and you have to change the channel because you are cringing so hard for them. That is this board every day. That is every single word or deed of this athletic department. It is not the losing I can't handle. It is that. It is the criminally negligent way a public university is managing money with no hope of gain. It is the constantly getting jobbed by coach's agents and search firms. It is three separate major NCAA sanctions in my lifetime and your program still stinks. It is academic fraud due to incompetence. It is a coach paying players due to lack of oversight. It is a player dying on our watch because our conditioning coach was a troglodyte. And it is fans making excuses for all of it time after time after time. No. It is fans making the same, completely proven wrong, dumbass excuses for it time after time after time.

For the fans that just like to see the kids play, hey. I get that. I love to watch my kid play and youth sports and how hard they work and sometimes they win and sometimes they lose. AND NO ONE GETS PAID A MILLION DOLLARS. You do not get to just see the kids play win or lose while spending millions of dollars. Millions of dollars means expectations.

So THIS IS WHAT ARGUMENTATIVE LOOKS LIKE. The way the Cal athletic department is run is a public embarrassment to the university from which I hold two degrees and a huge waste of cash. That is why the bulk of alums have, to use my metaphor from above, turned off the radio to stop being exposed to the cringeworthy stupidity. It is extremely hard to watch one small, but unfortunately extremely public department within a university that otherwise brings pride and honor, be such a giant symbol of incompetence, mismanagement and braindead stupidity. And it is massively unfortunate to watch a group of fans that are fortunately so much smarter and talented at all the other things they do be so far out of their depth on the realities of this one subject and just blindly follow the stupidity of this one department that frankly has zero business being within 3000 miles of the rest of that campus.

---

OTB - I hope you enjoyed yourself. You attributed lots of stuff to me -that might reflect many Cal fans you know - But doesn't apply to me. You even use the term Cal cliche aimed at me. Maybe because I responded, I don't know. If that makes you feew better - great!

Your counter above about naming a few names. Really?!?! This is a fan board, NOT the athletic department. Everything you described is ridiculous and you know it. Even the stuff about firing an employee. You should know damn well, that any boss worth their salt is considering succession plans before they fire someone. They don't need to share that with you, to prove that it is happening.

But my favorite quote:

1. I'll sum this up. You know full well right now this thing is going to crash and burn and you think we should just let that play out because you have bought into 60 years of what the Cal athletic department excuse machine tells you is seemly even though absolutely no other sports program or employer of any kind lives by these Cal only cliche's.

You are completely wrong about what I think and are very clumsy. You're standard was .500, which was lower than what I stated. SO this comment really reflects more you than me. I get it. You feel upset and betrayed - but you don't need to take it out on me. Maybe you should just take some time off.

And as for argumentative vs being nice. Not much difference - keep trying - you'll get it someday.

BeastBear69 said:

---

You guys on this board are so infatuated with stars and high school pedigree. Berkeley will never consistently be able to get those guys. We need guys who want to play here and play team basketball like Oregon state. Of course you need talent but more importantly you need a team. They never played like a team with Bradley out there. Is fox the guy to figure out how to build a system with under recruited guys? Yet to be seen. But we were never going to win with Bradley

---

If you are suggesting that Bradley was selfish or not a team player, I disagree. If Cal did not play as well as they should have with Bradley on the floor, I would have to put that on the coaching staff, with a helping of derailed team preparation/coordination due to his untimely injury and (earlier) coronavirus hurdles. Matt Bradley is an amazing college basketball player, who cannot be readily replaced, and who I, for one will greatly, greatly miss, if he leaves. This is just terrible news for the Bears.

ClayK said:

---

BeastBear69 said:

---

We need guys who want to play here and play team basketball like Oregon state.

---

It starts with recruiting, and for Cal, as far as I can tell, step one would be a massive investment in facilities so that talented players would want to play basketball in Berkeley. The academic aspect is pretty meaningless to an elite 17-year-old athlete who knows he can make a lot of money playing overseas even if he isn't good enough for the NBA, and envisions a post-playing career in some aspect of sports.

---

I find myself wondering AGAIN why Cal basketball presently is a fit for this type of investment? Cal football, which is receiving elevated funding, is attractive to OKG which among other things means to the coaching staff someone interested in academics and meeting certain criteria that are not present in the current men's basketball climate. Look at what you said, the "academic aspect is pretty meaningless to an elite 17-year-old athlete." And by athlete you meant men's basketball player.

Cal is not going to go dirty, is going to demand players show-up to class and matriculate, really has no tolerance to hire or bribe AAU coaches to recruit players, and onward ad museum. The best recent performances were under a coach, Monty, who left in part because of his objection to the sleazy recruiting environment that exists, generally played with OKGs who were not deep into an AAU cult, and did it all without facilities investment.

We likely will have a national champion from a program that developed on the backs of lightly recruited players who had defined roles, and never had the big NBA careers. I get that recently they can attract some talent that becomes a first round draft pick these days, which finally came with SUSTAINED success. But they did't take Arizona or USC short cuts (I know everyone wants to point a finger at Altman, but I'm not convinced he is that dirty, and he has a proven track record of program growth at several schools ). They also showed strategic recruiting insight by making an international push before that became fashionable. Gonzaga may not be Cal academically, but they keep their players in class, eligible and graduating over the decades. There is continuity in coaching and staffing. They built momentum over the long term without five star elite players, eventually attracting the talent, fans, and money (and thus better facilities) that have elevated the program to a likely championship.

The problem is Cal fans want a doormat program to change overnight. They think that a new coach that will bring instant recruiting mojo will change the program forever. So how did Counzo work for you? Or why not throw money at a facilities? The thinking at this point needs to move beyond the sugar high.

It may be that Fox is not the guy to achieve long term progress at Cal. Right now momentum seems on the wane. Fine, then find the right guy, take the necessary steps to have a sustained program build the way you can, and when the program is attracting more talent, fans, and money, make the investment that is warranted.