The grad transfer piece is a Cal issue that is being dealt with. Cal doesn't have a problem getting undergraduate transfers. I think you will find, rightly or wrongly, that non-athletes from Fresno State don't get transfer slots very often, but we got one for basketball with no problem.diva1 said:
Third-year coach Mark Fox needs help, immediately, but Cal lacks flexibility with the transfer portal because of the academic piece.
The outlook is gloomy in Berkeley.
So we have a tough time getting grad transfers and portal entrants, what coach would want this job?
A coach that did not have a better option. Which is most college head coaches, almost all assistant college coaches and many NBA assistants. Let's not forget we had 3 high school all americans plus a fourth guy who played in the NBA just a few years ago. Because the current guy can't recruit does not mean no one could recruit. Even WJ recruited reasonably well.diva1 said:
Third-year coach Mark Fox needs help, immediately, but Cal lacks flexibility with the transfer portal because of the academic piece.
The outlook is gloomy in Berkeley.
So we have a tough time getting grad transfers and portal entrants, what coach would want this job?
Exactly.OaktownBear said:
... For now this is a red herring. Grad transfers who would be rejected on academics grounds are rejecting us first because our program sucks. We actually have an advantage with grad transfers from academic schools. They just aren't very good at basketball and if they were they go somewhere else because plain and simple the number one thing keeping players away from our program is it completely sucks ...
I agree the right coach could recruit to Cal. Unhappily, almost any "right coach" could find myriad options elsewhere for his services that are more attractive without having to deal with sub-standard facilities, our hostile faculty environment, a largely disinterested student body and an apathetic alumni base. Oh yes, and probably more money to boot.sluggo said:A coach that did not have a better option. Which is most college head coaches, almost all assistant college coaches and many NBA assistants. Let's not forget we had 3 high school all americans plus a fourth guy who played in the NBA just a few years ago. Because the current guy can't recruit does not mean no one could recruit. Even WJ recruited reasonably well.diva1 said:
Third-year coach Mark Fox needs help, immediately, but Cal lacks flexibility with the transfer portal because of the academic piece.
The outlook is gloomy in Berkeley.
So we have a tough time getting grad transfers and portal entrants, what coach would want this job?
Cal is one of the best schools in the world, has the best weather in the world (imo), plays in a power conference, and is in an interesting urban environment. Plus it pays a competitive salary. The right coach could recruit to Cal.
Yes. Fox was a known quantity. At first blush, it didn't seem like a good hire, but there was hope he could improve compared to what he did at GA. Now it's looking like he's regressed, if anything.mdbear said:
Sadly, I think a lot of our current problems were evident when we hired Fox. He had nine years at Georgia to build a high quality program, and he did not. He had an overall losing record in conference, and Georgia came 11th out of 12 conference teams in his last year. Georgia is fertile recruiting ground, with the only other power conference team in the state (Georgia Tech) having serious academic requirements. Yet Fox did not show that he could lure local talent. Fox took over a terrible Cal team, but one that was also only two years removed from a 4 seed in the NCAA tournament. He knew the academic requirements going in. The best we could have hoped for was that he would take us from bad to mediocre. Barring a miracle next season, that appears unlikely.
They should interview 5 candidates, rank them from 1-5 and then hire the one they like the least.HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:Yes. Fox was a known quantity. At first blush, it didn't seem like a good hire, but there was hope he could improve compared to what he did at GA. Now it's looking like he's regressed, if anything.mdbear said:
Sadly, I think a lot of our current problems were evident when we hired Fox. He had nine years at Georgia to build a high quality program, and he did not. He had an overall losing record in conference, and Georgia came 11th out of 12 conference teams in his last year. Georgia is fertile recruiting ground, with the only other power conference team in the state (Georgia Tech) having serious academic requirements. Yet Fox did not show that he could lure local talent. Fox took over a terrible Cal team, but one that was also only two years removed from a 4 seed in the NCAA tournament. He knew the academic requirements going in. The best we could have hoped for was that he would take us from bad to mediocre. Barring a miracle next season, that appears unlikely.
This is now two Cal MBB HC's in a row where the hire looked stupid from the beginning and turned out to in fact be a stupid hire. Maybe Cal's admin should switch things up next time and try hiring a PROMISING coach...? I think they'd be pleasantly surprised at how quickly the program could turn around. Turning around a basketball program is easy, it doesn't take years and years of recruitment and development, it can be done in 1-2 years if the coach knows what he's doing.
They absolutely need to start from a more fundamental position - WHO ARE WE AS AN SCHOOL FROM THE D1 BASKETBALL PERSPECTIVE and then find a candate that works.OaktownBear said:They should interview 5 candidates, rank them from 1-5 and then hire the one they like the least.HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:Yes. Fox was a known quantity. At first blush, it didn't seem like a good hire, but there was hope he could improve compared to what he did at GA. Now it's looking like he's regressed, if anything.mdbear said:
Sadly, I think a lot of our current problems were evident when we hired Fox. He had nine years at Georgia to build a high quality program, and he did not. He had an overall losing record in conference, and Georgia came 11th out of 12 conference teams in his last year. Georgia is fertile recruiting ground, with the only other power conference team in the state (Georgia Tech) having serious academic requirements. Yet Fox did not show that he could lure local talent. Fox took over a terrible Cal team, but one that was also only two years removed from a 4 seed in the NCAA tournament. He knew the academic requirements going in. The best we could have hoped for was that he would take us from bad to mediocre. Barring a miracle next season, that appears unlikely.
This is now two Cal MBB HC's in a row where the hire looked stupid from the beginning and turned out to in fact be a stupid hire. Maybe Cal's admin should switch things up next time and try hiring a PROMISING coach...? I think they'd be pleasantly surprised at how quickly the program could turn around. Turning around a basketball program is easy, it doesn't take years and years of recruitment and development, it can be done in 1-2 years if the coach knows what he's doing.
This. At some point as a program you have to set your expectations and know your ceiling.Chabbear said:
"WHO ARE WE AS AN SCHOOL FROM THE D1 BASKETBALL PERSPECTIVE and then find a candate that works. "
Can we get that answer???
I have posited many times that this is exactly our problem. We have decided we are willing to simply go through the motions of competing, starting with hiring a low cost HC and staff in the hope of spinning chaff into gold. Look at our hires over the last 60 years. They fall into 3 categories: 1) unproven assistants (Herrerias, Kuchen Bozeman, Jones) we hope are on the cusp of development into quality HCs; lower level coaches (Edwards, Campy, Braun) we hope are ready for the step up; retreads (Monty, Martin, Fox) we hope can reproduce some level of success they had achieved elsewhere and who were available for sundry reasons at bargain rates. We rang the bell only with Monty, got brief flashes of hope with Bozo and Martin and, with Braun, maybe Campy, got almost exactly what I think we (e.g., Cal admins) want, a respectable enough level of competitiveness to avoid embarrassment. I think there is a strong undercurrent running through the Cal community that doesn't want athletics to rise to a level that would in any way diminish the luster of our academic stature, strongest among the faculty but existing within the administration, student body and alumni as well.Chabbear said:
"WHO ARE WE AS AN SCHOOL FROM THE D1 BASKETBALL PERSPECTIVE and then find a candate that works. "
Can we get that answer???
This is crazy, of course. Success in basketball has not diminished the academic luster of Duke University. Success in football and playing in the Rose Bowl has not diminished the academic stature of furd. It's ridiculous.59bear said:I think there is a strong undercurrent running through the Cal community that doesn't want athletics to rise to a level that would in any way diminish the luster of our academic stature, strongest among the faculty but existing within the administration, student body and alumni as well.Chabbear said:
"WHO ARE WE AS AN SCHOOL FROM THE D1 BASKETBALL PERSPECTIVE and then find a candate that works. "
Can we get that answer???
I didn't say it made sense, just that it exists. An elitist perspective much like the notion that winning is less important than playing the game the "right" way.BigDaddy said:This is crazy, of course. Success in basketball has not diminished the academic luster of Duke University. Success in football and playing in the Rose Bowl has not diminished the academic stature of furd. It's ridiculous.59bear said:I think there is a strong undercurrent running through the Cal community that doesn't want athletics to rise to a level that would in any way diminish the luster of our academic stature, strongest among the faculty but existing within the administration, student body and alumni as well.Chabbear said:
"WHO ARE WE AS AN SCHOOL FROM THE D1 BASKETBALL PERSPECTIVE and then find a candate that works. "
Can we get that answer???
Yes, I was simply agreeing with you.59bear said:I didn't say it made sense, just that it exists. An elitist perspective much like the notion that winning is less important than playing the game the "right" way.BigDaddy said:This is crazy, of course. Success in basketball has not diminished the academic luster of Duke University. Success in football and playing in the Rose Bowl has not diminished the academic stature of furd. It's ridiculous.59bear said:I think there is a strong undercurrent running through the Cal community that doesn't want athletics to rise to a level that would in any way diminish the luster of our academic stature, strongest among the faculty but existing within the administration, student body and alumni as well.Chabbear said:
"WHO ARE WE AS AN SCHOOL FROM THE D1 BASKETBALL PERSPECTIVE and then find a candate that works. "
Can we get that answer???
Your comments are pretty close to a long comment I wrote on W4C. But you left out one very good approach -- hire and up and comer who has done well at a smaller school. Better if they have strong Cal roots. Exampes would be DeCuire (Cal assistant) and a good record at Mondana, though not last seas,) and Dennis Gates, also a Cal assistant, with a pretty good, but short, tenure at Cleveland State. Must be lots of "hot coaches" out there, like the illustration of SDSA hiring Oats.59bear said:I have posited many times that this is exactly our problem. We have decided we are willing to simply go through the motions of competing, starting with hiring a low cost HC and staff in the hope of spinning chaff into gold. Look at our hires over the last 60 years. They fall into 3 categories: 1) unproven assistants (Herrerias, Kuchen Bozeman, Jones) we hope are on the cusp of development into quality HCs; lower level coaches (Edwards, Campy, Braun) we hope are ready for the step up; retreads (Monty, Martin, Fox) we hope can reproduce some level of success they had achieved elsewhere and who were available for sundry reasons at bargain rates. We rang the bell only with Monty, got brief flashes of hope with Bozo and Martin and, with Braun, maybe Campy, got almost exactly what I think we (e.g., Cal admins) want, a respectable enough level of competitiveness to avoid embarrassment. I think there is a strong undercurrent running through the Cal community that doesn't want athletics to rise to a level that would in any way diminish the luster of our academic stature, strongest among the faculty but existing within the administration, student body and alumni as well.trongChabbear said:
"WHO ARE WE AS AN SCHOOL FROM THE D1 BASKETBALL PERSPECTIVE and then find a candate that works. "
Can we get that answer???
