4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Thanks for your insider perspective. I would never guess that Fox's failures are a result of his not working hard enough. Rather, he appears to be a dinosaur. The world moved and he did not move with it. I don't know what he thought he would do when he got that Cal job, a job that he should not have gotten given his mediocre to worse results. But he was available and the AD felt cultural affinity for him.

---

---

---

Definitely some good/accurate points - My disagreement centers more on success for Cal bball (fleeting over past 61 years - with just one conf title!) shows that its a combination of factors that Cal comes up short in. Its exceeding difficult to win our conference/finish top 3/4 consistently with the academic standards in place, w/o an exceptional HC And a practice facility. I am forcing myself to be objective and thus refrain from "he must go" until we see his 3rd year results (especially the dregs taken over and this past season hits including all season long on and off key injuries to starters and top reserves). Totally agree on points 1,2.4,5 though.
.
.
.
All of this discussion on winning/records/competitiveness certainly requires a top HC - but also must include the key factors of a reasonable admission office (one that does not require a live review interview with those that are considered marginal applicants, and or having a sub 3.0 gpa, a entrance test that scored below set standards etc), and having a dedicated practice facility.

---

Look, I agree that certain athletes can be cut some slack on entrance requirements, but given high school grade inflation, a 3.0 is not that hard to obtain. Especially given the time demands of their sport, there needs to be some indication that the recruit can survive in Cal's academic environment, doesn't there?

---

Just 5 years ago we had 3 McDonald's All Americans on the team with the same admission standards. We went undefeated at home and earned a 4 seed. And that was with a coach who was not great with the X's and O's.

Admissions is very low on our current list of issues.

---

Always will be the isolated exception/recruiting situation - but to believe that admissions office standards for our basketball team is not a difficult hurdle to overcome, is simply being uninformed. Cuonzo was very frustrated that several key recruits who wanted to play for him were denied admissions and that was a key factor (not just the money and being closer to his home area) for his departure. Likewise straight from our past (WJ) and current staff, the lack of willingness to consider/admit talented sought after recruits is a big obstacle. With the exception of Stanford, every other conference member has easier acceptance standards and process than at Cal.

---

Weren't the current entrance requirements in place when Cuonzo took the Cal job?

Your point seems to be that Cal's entrance requirements for athletes are excessive. But back prior to 2014 or whenever the requirements were lower, the Cal men's basketball grad rate was last in the Pac-12 and football was last among all Power-5 schools. If the current requirements are lowered, what will keep that from happening again? That's the real hurdle!

How do you take a recruit with a mediocre academic background, drop them in the extremely competitive Cal environment with faculty who are not inclined to accomodate the additional demands that athletics place on that kid and get them to progress towards graduation?

---

As Cuonzo pointed out to me - You take the occasional chance with the applicant who has endured unusual and very difficult upbringing (often lack thereof). Cuonzo said "If I was not given a chance into college where I played, I would not be where I am today". Young men can raise their academic game, when tutored and monitored. Cuonzo spoke with each professor of his players to ensure any reports of unexpected absence, required all his players to sit in the front rows, turn off all cell phones during class and keep his staff abreast of their class progress/assignment completions etc. Ben Braun generously donated a cumulative $250K over his existing contract to fund an additional tutor/academic support. Will there be a few who fail? likely - but there will be many more who will thrive and benefit via lifelong experiences gained at Cal.
Yes the entrance requirements are excessive and often penalize the young men who could handle the academic load and this greatly hampers our program from being able to compete for upper division results let alone for a title. Many examples could be given, one currently starting at OSU in our league. Classic football example that fortunately turned out well (but barely) was the QB Geoff Webb that transferred to Cal from Texas Tech. He had a 2.98gpa and patiently endured 6 months of admissions required follow up, interviews, paperwork all required as part of the appeal process for acceptance. At the very last day of deadline University acceptance - He and his Mom were driving to Colorado to reluctantly sign/move into campus to enroll. Dykes called him with about 3 hours before he would have arrived Colorado campus nd said "you have been accepted"!! Webb played a pivotal role for our team during his time here and when asked to speak at the Grid Club - greatly impressed the audience with his message about his positive experiences at Cal, both on the field and in the classroom.

---

Let's be clear: everybody (including me) on this board wants to see the most talented football and basketball players get into Cal, see them be successful in their sports, and see them progress and eventually graduate. We also know that many of these recruits come from difficult backgrounds which frequently create a large educational gap between their peers at Cal and them.

I supplied you with a some data: Cal's abysmal graduation rates for football and basketball players around 2014 which obviously drove the raising of admission standards to their current level. You replied with anecdotes about what Cuonzo Martin said and about Davis Webb's experience (pretty irrelevant as he applied to a graduate program so had already demonstrated he could succeed in college).

Your anecdotes didn't answer my question so I'll ask it once again: if the current admissions requirements are lowered, what will be in place to prevent the graduation rate dropping in the same way it did prior to 2014?

Here's a corollary: how does UCLA, with it's lower requirements, manage to keep their APR high? Answer: They don't! Until Mick Cronin arrived for the 2019-2020 season, UCLA's multi-year APR was down to 933, within an eyelash of the 930 threshold for penalties. No doubt as a result of that, Cronin apparently has incentive clauses in his contract if the team hits certain APR levels. Is that all it takes?

---

The current admissions requirements will not be lowered, the discussion was to enlighten the majority of readers/posters on this site of the immense difficulties the program has had over the years and currently faces with the unusually strict admissions policies. Its simply not a level "playing field" in our conference and this issue is a major factor in the ongoing performance on the court. Yes occasionally (Monty and Cuonzo total of 2 seasons) shine and excel - but that is exceedingly difficult and unrealistic to assume that can occur more than once every 8-10 seasons. Its sad but true - However, if the requirements could be slightly lowered (ie strongly consider the occasional 2.7-2.8 gpa inner city kid who faced unusual obstacles in HS) Cal would significantly improve the product on the court. By doing so - donor's, HC etc would need to create additional educational support/ full time tutor's, to ensure the class assignments were being met to satisfactory standards. The funds could certainly be raised. People naively point to Duke as an example of success with "stringent admission standards". Completely false assumption, Coach K for decades has had an agreement in place with the Chancellor, that the staff is allowed one scholarship player/season who does not meet the minimum levels of acceptance at the university. Only one? no, it means there are typically 2-3 players on each season's roster and the impact is huge.
Most schools weight their end of roster players/walk ons with strong academics, to help with the overall gpa etc, Cal simply does not have the marginal student athlete on their roster. The point is not to become an "Oregon/Kentucky/Kansas" bball factory, its wished, that by a modest and only case by case situation, take the chance on a student athlete who demonstrates character and resolve to succeed, while enduring unusual personal situations in HS.

---

Lots of words. I got 4 letters. UCLA. Just do what they do. No more. No less.

socaltownie said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Thanks for your insider perspective. I would never guess that Fox's failures are a result of his not working hard enough. Rather, he appears to be a dinosaur. The world moved and he did not move with it. I don't know what he thought he would do when he got that Cal job, a job that he should not have gotten given his mediocre to worse results. But he was available and the AD felt cultural affinity for him.

---

---

---

Definitely some good/accurate points - My disagreement centers more on success for Cal bball (fleeting over past 61 years - with just one conf title!) shows that its a combination of factors that Cal comes up short in. Its exceeding difficult to win our conference/finish top 3/4 consistently with the academic standards in place, w/o an exceptional HC And a practice facility. I am forcing myself to be objective and thus refrain from "he must go" until we see his 3rd year results (especially the dregs taken over and this past season hits including all season long on and off key injuries to starters and top reserves). Totally agree on points 1,2.4,5 though.
.
.
.
All of this discussion on winning/records/competitiveness certainly requires a top HC - but also must include the key factors of a reasonable admission office (one that does not require a live review interview with those that are considered marginal applicants, and or having a sub 3.0 gpa, a entrance test that scored below set standards etc), and having a dedicated practice facility.

---

Look, I agree that certain athletes can be cut some slack on entrance requirements, but given high school grade inflation, a 3.0 is not that hard to obtain. Especially given the time demands of their sport, there needs to be some indication that the recruit can survive in Cal's academic environment, doesn't there?

---

Just 5 years ago we had 3 McDonald's All Americans on the team with the same admission standards. We went undefeated at home and earned a 4 seed. And that was with a coach who was not great with the X's and O's.

Admissions is very low on our current list of issues.

---

Always will be the isolated exception/recruiting situation - but to believe that admissions office standards for our basketball team is not a difficult hurdle to overcome, is simply being uninformed. Cuonzo was very frustrated that several key recruits who wanted to play for him were denied admissions and that was a key factor (not just the money and being closer to his home area) for his departure. Likewise straight from our past (WJ) and current staff, the lack of willingness to consider/admit talented sought after recruits is a big obstacle. With the exception of Stanford, every other conference member has easier acceptance standards and process than at Cal.

---

Weren't the current entrance requirements in place when Cuonzo took the Cal job?

Your point seems to be that Cal's entrance requirements for athletes are excessive. But back prior to 2014 or whenever the requirements were lower, the Cal men's basketball grad rate was last in the Pac-12 and football was last among all Power-5 schools. If the current requirements are lowered, what will keep that from happening again? That's the real hurdle!

How do you take a recruit with a mediocre academic background, drop them in the extremely competitive Cal environment with faculty who are not inclined to accomodate the additional demands that athletics place on that kid and get them to progress towards graduation?

---

As Cuonzo pointed out to me - You take the occasional chance with the applicant who has endured unusual and very difficult upbringing (often lack thereof). Cuonzo said "If I was not given a chance into college where I played, I would not be where I am today". Young men can raise their academic game, when tutored and monitored. Cuonzo spoke with each professor of his players to ensure any reports of unexpected absence, required all his players to sit in the front rows, turn off all cell phones during class and keep his staff abreast of their class progress/assignment completions etc. Ben Braun generously donated a cumulative $250K over his existing contract to fund an additional tutor/academic support. Will there be a few who fail? likely - but there will be many more who will thrive and benefit via lifelong experiences gained at Cal.
Yes the entrance requirements are excessive and often penalize the young men who could handle the academic load and this greatly hampers our program from being able to compete for upper division results let alone for a title. Many examples could be given, one currently starting at OSU in our league. Classic football example that fortunately turned out well (but barely) was the QB Geoff Webb that transferred to Cal from Texas Tech. He had a 2.98gpa and patiently endured 6 months of admissions required follow up, interviews, paperwork all required as part of the appeal process for acceptance. At the very last day of deadline University acceptance - He and his Mom were driving to Colorado to reluctantly sign/move into campus to enroll. Dykes called him with about 3 hours before he would have arrived Colorado campus nd said "you have been accepted"!! Webb played a pivotal role for our team during his time here and when asked to speak at the Grid Club - greatly impressed the audience with his message about his positive experiences at Cal, both on the field and in the classroom.

---

Let's be clear: everybody (including me) on this board wants to see the most talented football and basketball players get into Cal, see them be successful in their sports, and see them progress and eventually graduate. We also know that many of these recruits come from difficult backgrounds which frequently create a large educational gap between their peers at Cal and them.

I supplied you with a some data: Cal's abysmal graduation rates for football and basketball players around 2014 which obviously drove the raising of admission standards to their current level. You replied with anecdotes about what Cuonzo Martin said and about Davis Webb's experience (pretty irrelevant as he applied to a graduate program so had already demonstrated he could succeed in college).

Your anecdotes didn't answer my question so I'll ask it once again: if the current admissions requirements are lowered, what will be in place to prevent the graduation rate dropping in the same way it did prior to 2014?

Here's a corollary: how does UCLA, with it's lower requirements, manage to keep their APR high? Answer: They don't! Until Mick Cronin arrived for the 2019-2020 season, UCLA's multi-year APR was down to 933, within an eyelash of the 930 threshold for penalties. No doubt as a result of that, Cronin apparently has incentive clauses in his contract if the team hits certain APR levels. Is that all it takes?

---

The current admissions requirements will not be lowered, the discussion was to enlighten the majority of readers/posters on this site of the immense difficulties the program has had over the years and currently faces with the unusually strict admissions policies. Its simply not a level "playing field" in our conference and this issue is a major factor in the ongoing performance on the court. Yes occasionally (Monty and Cuonzo total of 2 seasons) shine and excel - but that is exceedingly difficult and unrealistic to assume that can occur more than once every 8-10 seasons. Its sad but true - However, if the requirements could be slightly lowered (ie strongly consider the occasional 2.7-2.8 gpa inner city kid who faced unusual obstacles in HS) Cal would significantly improve the product on the court. By doing so - donor's, HC etc would need to create additional educational support/ full time tutor's, to ensure the class assignments were being met to satisfactory standards. The funds could certainly be raised. People naively point to Duke as an example of success with "stringent admission standards". Completely false assumption, Coach K for decades has had an agreement in place with the Chancellor, that the staff is allowed one scholarship player/season who does not meet the minimum levels of acceptance at the university. Only one? no, it means there are typically 2-3 players on each season's roster and the impact is huge.
Most schools weight their end of roster players/walk ons with strong academics, to help with the overall gpa etc, Cal simply does not have the marginal student athlete on their roster. The point is not to become an "Oregon/Kentucky/Kansas" bball factory, its wished, that by a modest and only case by case situation, take the chance on a student athlete who demonstrates character and resolve to succeed, while enduring unusual personal situations in HS.

---

Lots of words. I got 4 letters. UCLA. Just do what they do. No more. No less.

---

UCLA has some inbuilt advantages given their success on the court. Cal doesn't have the same reputation nor does it deserve to.

socaltownie said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Thanks for your insider perspective. I would never guess that Fox's failures are a result of his not working hard enough. Rather, he appears to be a dinosaur. The world moved and he did not move with it. I don't know what he thought he would do when he got that Cal job, a job that he should not have gotten given his mediocre to worse results. But he was available and the AD felt cultural affinity for him.

---

---

---

Definitely some good/accurate points - My disagreement centers more on success for Cal bball (fleeting over past 61 years - with just one conf title!) shows that its a combination of factors that Cal comes up short in. Its exceeding difficult to win our conference/finish top 3/4 consistently with the academic standards in place, w/o an exceptional HC And a practice facility. I am forcing myself to be objective and thus refrain from "he must go" until we see his 3rd year results (especially the dregs taken over and this past season hits including all season long on and off key injuries to starters and top reserves). Totally agree on points 1,2.4,5 though.
.
.
.
All of this discussion on winning/records/competitiveness certainly requires a top HC - but also must include the key factors of a reasonable admission office (one that does not require a live review interview with those that are considered marginal applicants, and or having a sub 3.0 gpa, a entrance test that scored below set standards etc), and having a dedicated practice facility.

---

Look, I agree that certain athletes can be cut some slack on entrance requirements, but given high school grade inflation, a 3.0 is not that hard to obtain. Especially given the time demands of their sport, there needs to be some indication that the recruit can survive in Cal's academic environment, doesn't there?

---

Just 5 years ago we had 3 McDonald's All Americans on the team with the same admission standards. We went undefeated at home and earned a 4 seed. And that was with a coach who was not great with the X's and O's.

Admissions is very low on our current list of issues.

---

Always will be the isolated exception/recruiting situation - but to believe that admissions office standards for our basketball team is not a difficult hurdle to overcome, is simply being uninformed. Cuonzo was very frustrated that several key recruits who wanted to play for him were denied admissions and that was a key factor (not just the money and being closer to his home area) for his departure. Likewise straight from our past (WJ) and current staff, the lack of willingness to consider/admit talented sought after recruits is a big obstacle. With the exception of Stanford, every other conference member has easier acceptance standards and process than at Cal.

---

Weren't the current entrance requirements in place when Cuonzo took the Cal job?

Your point seems to be that Cal's entrance requirements for athletes are excessive. But back prior to 2014 or whenever the requirements were lower, the Cal men's basketball grad rate was last in the Pac-12 and football was last among all Power-5 schools. If the current requirements are lowered, what will keep that from happening again? That's the real hurdle!

How do you take a recruit with a mediocre academic background, drop them in the extremely competitive Cal environment with faculty who are not inclined to accomodate the additional demands that athletics place on that kid and get them to progress towards graduation?

---

As Cuonzo pointed out to me - You take the occasional chance with the applicant who has endured unusual and very difficult upbringing (often lack thereof). Cuonzo said "If I was not given a chance into college where I played, I would not be where I am today". Young men can raise their academic game, when tutored and monitored. Cuonzo spoke with each professor of his players to ensure any reports of unexpected absence, required all his players to sit in the front rows, turn off all cell phones during class and keep his staff abreast of their class progress/assignment completions etc. Ben Braun generously donated a cumulative $250K over his existing contract to fund an additional tutor/academic support. Will there be a few who fail? likely - but there will be many more who will thrive and benefit via lifelong experiences gained at Cal.
Yes the entrance requirements are excessive and often penalize the young men who could handle the academic load and this greatly hampers our program from being able to compete for upper division results let alone for a title. Many examples could be given, one currently starting at OSU in our league. Classic football example that fortunately turned out well (but barely) was the QB Geoff Webb that transferred to Cal from Texas Tech. He had a 2.98gpa and patiently endured 6 months of admissions required follow up, interviews, paperwork all required as part of the appeal process for acceptance. At the very last day of deadline University acceptance - He and his Mom were driving to Colorado to reluctantly sign/move into campus to enroll. Dykes called him with about 3 hours before he would have arrived Colorado campus nd said "you have been accepted"!! Webb played a pivotal role for our team during his time here and when asked to speak at the Grid Club - greatly impressed the audience with his message about his positive experiences at Cal, both on the field and in the classroom.

---

Let's be clear: everybody (including me) on this board wants to see the most talented football and basketball players get into Cal, see them be successful in their sports, and see them progress and eventually graduate. We also know that many of these recruits come from difficult backgrounds which frequently create a large educational gap between their peers at Cal and them.

I supplied you with a some data: Cal's abysmal graduation rates for football and basketball players around 2014 which obviously drove the raising of admission standards to their current level. You replied with anecdotes about what Cuonzo Martin said and about Davis Webb's experience (pretty irrelevant as he applied to a graduate program so had already demonstrated he could succeed in college).

Your anecdotes didn't answer my question so I'll ask it once again: if the current admissions requirements are lowered, what will be in place to prevent the graduation rate dropping in the same way it did prior to 2014?

Here's a corollary: how does UCLA, with it's lower requirements, manage to keep their APR high? Answer: They don't! Until Mick Cronin arrived for the 2019-2020 season, UCLA's multi-year APR was down to 933, within an eyelash of the 930 threshold for penalties. No doubt as a result of that, Cronin apparently has incentive clauses in his contract if the team hits certain APR levels. Is that all it takes?

---

The current admissions requirements will not be lowered, the discussion was to enlighten the majority of readers/posters on this site of the immense difficulties the program has had over the years and currently faces with the unusually strict admissions policies. Its simply not a level "playing field" in our conference and this issue is a major factor in the ongoing performance on the court. Yes occasionally (Monty and Cuonzo total of 2 seasons) shine and excel - but that is exceedingly difficult and unrealistic to assume that can occur more than once every 8-10 seasons. Its sad but true - However, if the requirements could be slightly lowered (ie strongly consider the occasional 2.7-2.8 gpa inner city kid who faced unusual obstacles in HS) Cal would significantly improve the product on the court. By doing so - donor's, HC etc would need to create additional educational support/ full time tutor's, to ensure the class assignments were being met to satisfactory standards. The funds could certainly be raised. People naively point to Duke as an example of success with "stringent admission standards". Completely false assumption, Coach K for decades has had an agreement in place with the Chancellor, that the staff is allowed one scholarship player/season who does not meet the minimum levels of acceptance at the university. Only one? no, it means there are typically 2-3 players on each season's roster and the impact is huge.
Most schools weight their end of roster players/walk ons with strong academics, to help with the overall gpa etc, Cal simply does not have the marginal student athlete on their roster. The point is not to become an "Oregon/Kentucky/Kansas" bball factory, its wished, that by a modest and only case by case situation, take the chance on a student athlete who demonstrates character and resolve to succeed, while enduring unusual personal situations in HS.

---

Lots of words. I got 4 letters. UCLA. Just do what they do. No more. No less.

---

Besides a stronger MBB history and reputation, UCLA has had some boosters more akin to those at Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona, If you know what I mean. Personally, I don't think we want to 'Just do what they do'.

But I think there are many other things about UCLA and most P12 programs that Cal can do a MUCH better job emulating. I think 4thgen sums them up pretty well. We also need a coach that can work with Cal's advantages and disadvantages to maximize recruiting. This staff has proven (to me, at least) that they are not up to snuff in this department). Even if, at this point, Fox was to land a 5-star or even a 4-star or two, it would be too little and too late. Cuonzo had some splashy recruits, but overall his recruiting strategy was not going to fit with Cal.

If your market is self restricted (like Cal's is), then you need to use the other tools to maximize your efficiency in closing to gain market share. It's never going to be a level playing field. MBB recruiting is sales, and this staff is not good at it.

socaltownie said:

---

You guys are missing my point. UCLA's admission standards should be neither higher or lower than Cal.

---

FIFY

socaltownie said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Thanks for your insider perspective. I would never guess that Fox's failures are a result of his not working hard enough. Rather, he appears to be a dinosaur. The world moved and he did not move with it. I don't know what he thought he would do when he got that Cal job, a job that he should not have gotten given his mediocre to worse results. But he was available and the AD felt cultural affinity for him.

---

---

---

Definitely some good/accurate points - My disagreement centers more on success for Cal bball (fleeting over past 61 years - with just one conf title!) shows that its a combination of factors that Cal comes up short in. Its exceeding difficult to win our conference/finish top 3/4 consistently with the academic standards in place, w/o an exceptional HC And a practice facility. I am forcing myself to be objective and thus refrain from "he must go" until we see his 3rd year results (especially the dregs taken over and this past season hits including all season long on and off key injuries to starters and top reserves). Totally agree on points 1,2.4,5 though.
.
.
.
All of this discussion on winning/records/competitiveness certainly requires a top HC - but also must include the key factors of a reasonable admission office (one that does not require a live review interview with those that are considered marginal applicants, and or having a sub 3.0 gpa, a entrance test that scored below set standards etc), and having a dedicated practice facility.

---

Look, I agree that certain athletes can be cut some slack on entrance requirements, but given high school grade inflation, a 3.0 is not that hard to obtain. Especially given the time demands of their sport, there needs to be some indication that the recruit can survive in Cal's academic environment, doesn't there?

---

Just 5 years ago we had 3 McDonald's All Americans on the team with the same admission standards. We went undefeated at home and earned a 4 seed. And that was with a coach who was not great with the X's and O's.

Admissions is very low on our current list of issues.

---

Always will be the isolated exception/recruiting situation - but to believe that admissions office standards for our basketball team is not a difficult hurdle to overcome, is simply being uninformed. Cuonzo was very frustrated that several key recruits who wanted to play for him were denied admissions and that was a key factor (not just the money and being closer to his home area) for his departure. Likewise straight from our past (WJ) and current staff, the lack of willingness to consider/admit talented sought after recruits is a big obstacle. With the exception of Stanford, every other conference member has easier acceptance standards and process than at Cal.

---

Weren't the current entrance requirements in place when Cuonzo took the Cal job?

Your point seems to be that Cal's entrance requirements for athletes are excessive. But back prior to 2014 or whenever the requirements were lower, the Cal men's basketball grad rate was last in the Pac-12 and football was last among all Power-5 schools. If the current requirements are lowered, what will keep that from happening again? That's the real hurdle!

How do you take a recruit with a mediocre academic background, drop them in the extremely competitive Cal environment with faculty who are not inclined to accomodate the additional demands that athletics place on that kid and get them to progress towards graduation?

---

As Cuonzo pointed out to me - You take the occasional chance with the applicant who has endured unusual and very difficult upbringing (often lack thereof). Cuonzo said "If I was not given a chance into college where I played, I would not be where I am today". Young men can raise their academic game, when tutored and monitored. Cuonzo spoke with each professor of his players to ensure any reports of unexpected absence, required all his players to sit in the front rows, turn off all cell phones during class and keep his staff abreast of their class progress/assignment completions etc. Ben Braun generously donated a cumulative $250K over his existing contract to fund an additional tutor/academic support. Will there be a few who fail? likely - but there will be many more who will thrive and benefit via lifelong experiences gained at Cal.
Yes the entrance requirements are excessive and often penalize the young men who could handle the academic load and this greatly hampers our program from being able to compete for upper division results let alone for a title. Many examples could be given, one currently starting at OSU in our league. Classic football example that fortunately turned out well (but barely) was the QB Geoff Webb that transferred to Cal from Texas Tech. He had a 2.98gpa and patiently endured 6 months of admissions required follow up, interviews, paperwork all required as part of the appeal process for acceptance. At the very last day of deadline University acceptance - He and his Mom were driving to Colorado to reluctantly sign/move into campus to enroll. Dykes called him with about 3 hours before he would have arrived Colorado campus nd said "you have been accepted"!! Webb played a pivotal role for our team during his time here and when asked to speak at the Grid Club - greatly impressed the audience with his message about his positive experiences at Cal, both on the field and in the classroom.

---

Let's be clear: everybody (including me) on this board wants to see the most talented football and basketball players get into Cal, see them be successful in their sports, and see them progress and eventually graduate. We also know that many of these recruits come from difficult backgrounds which frequently create a large educational gap between their peers at Cal and them.

I supplied you with a some data: Cal's abysmal graduation rates for football and basketball players around 2014 which obviously drove the raising of admission standards to their current level. You replied with anecdotes about what Cuonzo Martin said and about Davis Webb's experience (pretty irrelevant as he applied to a graduate program so had already demonstrated he could succeed in college).

Your anecdotes didn't answer my question so I'll ask it once again: if the current admissions requirements are lowered, what will be in place to prevent the graduation rate dropping in the same way it did prior to 2014?

Here's a corollary: how does UCLA, with it's lower requirements, manage to keep their APR high? Answer: They don't! Until Mick Cronin arrived for the 2019-2020 season, UCLA's multi-year APR was down to 933, within an eyelash of the 930 threshold for penalties. No doubt as a result of that, Cronin apparently has incentive clauses in his contract if the team hits certain APR levels. Is that all it takes?

---

The current admissions requirements will not be lowered, the discussion was to enlighten the majority of readers/posters on this site of the immense difficulties the program has had over the years and currently faces with the unusually strict admissions policies. Its simply not a level "playing field" in our conference and this issue is a major factor in the ongoing performance on the court. Yes occasionally (Monty and Cuonzo total of 2 seasons) shine and excel - but that is exceedingly difficult and unrealistic to assume that can occur more than once every 8-10 seasons. Its sad but true - However, if the requirements could be slightly lowered (ie strongly consider the occasional 2.7-2.8 gpa inner city kid who faced unusual obstacles in HS) Cal would significantly improve the product on the court. By doing so - donor's, HC etc would need to create additional educational support/ full time tutor's, to ensure the class assignments were being met to satisfactory standards. The funds could certainly be raised. People naively point to Duke as an example of success with "stringent admission standards". Completely false assumption, Coach K for decades has had an agreement in place with the Chancellor, that the staff is allowed one scholarship player/season who does not meet the minimum levels of acceptance at the university. Only one? no, it means there are typically 2-3 players on each season's roster and the impact is huge.
Most schools weight their end of roster players/walk ons with strong academics, to help with the overall gpa etc, Cal simply does not have the marginal student athlete on their roster. The point is not to become an "Oregon/Kentucky/Kansas" bball factory, its wished, that by a modest and only case by case situation, take the chance on a student athlete who demonstrates character and resolve to succeed, while enduring unusual personal situations in HS.

---

Lots of words. I got 4 letters. UCLA. Just do what they do. No more. No less.

---

Besides a stronger MBB history and reputation, UCLA has had some boosters more akin to those at Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona, If you know what I mean. Personally, I don't think we want to 'Just do what they do'.

But I think there are many other things about UCLA and most P12 programs that Cal can do a MUCH better job emulating. I think 4thgen sums them up pretty well. We also need a coach that can work with Cal's advantages and disadvantages to maximize recruiting. This staff has proven (to me, at least) that they are not up to snuff in this department). Even if, at this point, Fox was to land a 5-star or even a 4-star or two, it would be too little and too late. Cuonzo had some splashy recruits, but overall his recruiting strategy was not going to fit with Cal.

If your market is self restricted (like Cal's is), then you need to use the other tools to maximize your efficiency in closing to gain market share. It's never going to be a level playing field. MBB recruiting is sales, and this staff is not good at it.

---

You guys are missing my point. Cal's admission standards should be neither higher or lower than UCLA.

---

Got it. Agreed.

BeachedBear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Thanks for your insider perspective. I would never guess that Fox's failures are a result of his not working hard enough. Rather, he appears to be a dinosaur. The world moved and he did not move with it. I don't know what he thought he would do when he got that Cal job, a job that he should not have gotten given his mediocre to worse results. But he was available and the AD felt cultural affinity for him.

---

---

---

Definitely some good/accurate points - My disagreement centers more on success for Cal bball (fleeting over past 61 years - with just one conf title!) shows that its a combination of factors that Cal comes up short in. Its exceeding difficult to win our conference/finish top 3/4 consistently with the academic standards in place, w/o an exceptional HC And a practice facility. I am forcing myself to be objective and thus refrain from "he must go" until we see his 3rd year results (especially the dregs taken over and this past season hits including all season long on and off key injuries to starters and top reserves). Totally agree on points 1,2.4,5 though.
.
.
.
All of this discussion on winning/records/competitiveness certainly requires a top HC - but also must include the key factors of a reasonable admission office (one that does not require a live review interview with those that are considered marginal applicants, and or having a sub 3.0 gpa, a entrance test that scored below set standards etc), and having a dedicated practice facility.

---

Look, I agree that certain athletes can be cut some slack on entrance requirements, but given high school grade inflation, a 3.0 is not that hard to obtain. Especially given the time demands of their sport, there needs to be some indication that the recruit can survive in Cal's academic environment, doesn't there?

---

Just 5 years ago we had 3 McDonald's All Americans on the team with the same admission standards. We went undefeated at home and earned a 4 seed. And that was with a coach who was not great with the X's and O's.

Admissions is very low on our current list of issues.

---

Always will be the isolated exception/recruiting situation - but to believe that admissions office standards for our basketball team is not a difficult hurdle to overcome, is simply being uninformed. Cuonzo was very frustrated that several key recruits who wanted to play for him were denied admissions and that was a key factor (not just the money and being closer to his home area) for his departure. Likewise straight from our past (WJ) and current staff, the lack of willingness to consider/admit talented sought after recruits is a big obstacle. With the exception of Stanford, every other conference member has easier acceptance standards and process than at Cal.

---

Weren't the current entrance requirements in place when Cuonzo took the Cal job?

Your point seems to be that Cal's entrance requirements for athletes are excessive. But back prior to 2014 or whenever the requirements were lower, the Cal men's basketball grad rate was last in the Pac-12 and football was last among all Power-5 schools. If the current requirements are lowered, what will keep that from happening again? That's the real hurdle!

How do you take a recruit with a mediocre academic background, drop them in the extremely competitive Cal environment with faculty who are not inclined to accomodate the additional demands that athletics place on that kid and get them to progress towards graduation?

---

As Cuonzo pointed out to me - You take the occasional chance with the applicant who has endured unusual and very difficult upbringing (often lack thereof). Cuonzo said "If I was not given a chance into college where I played, I would not be where I am today". Young men can raise their academic game, when tutored and monitored. Cuonzo spoke with each professor of his players to ensure any reports of unexpected absence, required all his players to sit in the front rows, turn off all cell phones during class and keep his staff abreast of their class progress/assignment completions etc. Ben Braun generously donated a cumulative $250K over his existing contract to fund an additional tutor/academic support. Will there be a few who fail? likely - but there will be many more who will thrive and benefit via lifelong experiences gained at Cal.
Yes the entrance requirements are excessive and often penalize the young men who could handle the academic load and this greatly hampers our program from being able to compete for upper division results let alone for a title. Many examples could be given, one currently starting at OSU in our league. Classic football example that fortunately turned out well (but barely) was the QB Geoff Webb that transferred to Cal from Texas Tech. He had a 2.98gpa and patiently endured 6 months of admissions required follow up, interviews, paperwork all required as part of the appeal process for acceptance. At the very last day of deadline University acceptance - He and his Mom were driving to Colorado to reluctantly sign/move into campus to enroll. Dykes called him with about 3 hours before he would have arrived Colorado campus nd said "you have been accepted"!! Webb played a pivotal role for our team during his time here and when asked to speak at the Grid Club - greatly impressed the audience with his message about his positive experiences at Cal, both on the field and in the classroom.

---

Let's be clear: everybody (including me) on this board wants to see the most talented football and basketball players get into Cal, see them be successful in their sports, and see them progress and eventually graduate. We also know that many of these recruits come from difficult backgrounds which frequently create a large educational gap between their peers at Cal and them.

I supplied you with a some data: Cal's abysmal graduation rates for football and basketball players around 2014 which obviously drove the raising of admission standards to their current level. You replied with anecdotes about what Cuonzo Martin said and about Davis Webb's experience (pretty irrelevant as he applied to a graduate program so had already demonstrated he could succeed in college).

Your anecdotes didn't answer my question so I'll ask it once again: if the current admissions requirements are lowered, what will be in place to prevent the graduation rate dropping in the same way it did prior to 2014?

Here's a corollary: how does UCLA, with it's lower requirements, manage to keep their APR high? Answer: They don't! Until Mick Cronin arrived for the 2019-2020 season, UCLA's multi-year APR was down to 933, within an eyelash of the 930 threshold for penalties. No doubt as a result of that, Cronin apparently has incentive clauses in his contract if the team hits certain APR levels. Is that all it takes?

---

The current admissions requirements will not be lowered, the discussion was to enlighten the majority of readers/posters on this site of the immense difficulties the program has had over the years and currently faces with the unusually strict admissions policies. Its simply not a level "playing field" in our conference and this issue is a major factor in the ongoing performance on the court. Yes occasionally (Monty and Cuonzo total of 2 seasons) shine and excel - but that is exceedingly difficult and unrealistic to assume that can occur more than once every 8-10 seasons. Its sad but true - However, if the requirements could be slightly lowered (ie strongly consider the occasional 2.7-2.8 gpa inner city kid who faced unusual obstacles in HS) Cal would significantly improve the product on the court. By doing so - donor's, HC etc would need to create additional educational support/ full time tutor's, to ensure the class assignments were being met to satisfactory standards. The funds could certainly be raised. People naively point to Duke as an example of success with "stringent admission standards". Completely false assumption, Coach K for decades has had an agreement in place with the Chancellor, that the staff is allowed one scholarship player/season who does not meet the minimum levels of acceptance at the university. Only one? no, it means there are typically 2-3 players on each season's roster and the impact is huge.
Most schools weight their end of roster players/walk ons with strong academics, to help with the overall gpa etc, Cal simply does not have the marginal student athlete on their roster. The point is not to become an "Oregon/Kentucky/Kansas" bball factory, its wished, that by a modest and only case by case situation, take the chance on a student athlete who demonstrates character and resolve to succeed, while enduring unusual personal situations in HS.

---

Lots of words. I got 4 letters. UCLA. Just do what they do. No more. No less.

---

Besides a stronger MBB history and reputation, UCLA has had some boosters more akin to those at Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona, If you know what I mean. Personally, I don't think we want to 'Just do what they do'.

But I think there are many other things about UCLA and most P12 programs that Cal can do a MUCH better job emulating. I think 4thgen sums them up pretty well. We also need a coach that can work with Cal's advantages and disadvantages to maximize recruiting. This staff has proven (to me, at least) that they are not up to snuff in this department). Even if, at this point, Fox was to land a 5-star or even a 4-star or two, it would be too little and too late. Cuonzo had some splashy recruits, but overall his recruiting strategy was not going to fit with Cal.

If your market is self restricted (like Cal's is), then you need to use the other tools to maximize your efficiency in closing to gain market share. It's never going to be a level playing field. MBB recruiting is sales, and this staff is not good at it.

---

You guys are missing my point. Cal's admission standards should be neither higher or lower than UCLA.

---

Got it. Agreed.

---

Agreed, admission standards should be the same as UCLA's.

I'm not seeing any evidence that they are not. Is there someone who is at UCLA that we think could not get into Cal?

Oakbear said:

---

many support mediocrity .. I had my questions about the hiring process and am now a strong believer that a change needs to be made, sooner rather than later

---

Mediocrity at this point is a goal, not the status quo.

bluesaxe said:

---

calumnus said:

---

It was only a few years ago we had 3 McDonalds All Americans on the team. Cuonzo Martin was able to recruit at a high level and attract top players to Cal without a practice facility. We went undefeated at home and earned a 4 seed. This complaining about Cal's disadvantages ignores all our advantages when in the right hands. Cuonzo's and Fox's basketball strategies were similarly deficient, but Cuonzo could recruit. Cal is not the problem. Practice facilities don't win games. Talented players who are well coached win games.

Fox combines the worst features for a Cal coach: 1) an old school personality and command and control coaching style that is so last century and is unattractive to recruits and even drives good players to transfer 2) a playing style and pace that is boring to watch and is unattractive to recruits and fans, 3) a lack of X's and O's acumen that could make up for talent deficiencies and allow you to increase the pace (get good looks earlier in the shot clock), 4) a lack of Weat Coast recruiting ties that have not improved, 5) a lack of social media savvy that could help him connect with recruits and fans, especially during a pandemic.

He is not a young, up and coming coach that we might just say we need to be patient with. He is a veteran coach with a long track record of exactly what we are seeing: mediocrity or worse.

All this focus on a dedicated practice faculty reminds me of late Tedford focus on spending $500 million on a stadium. Tedford's best teams were early, when he was a hot young coach with crappy facilities and excellent coaching. Cal attracts top talent when we have a good young coach.

Jason Kidd lead to the building of Haas, not the other way around. A dedicated practice faculty is a worthwhile project, but it is separate from the coach. The coach is single most important investment. Lack of a dedicated practice faculty should not be an excuse to retain a bad coach. A good coach will bring the excitement that will make raising money for a dedicated practice faculty much easier.

---

I agree with most of this, but how many hoops coaches in the last 20 years have been good recruiters at Cal? Sure, if we are fortunate we could hire a guy who can overcome things like the lack of a practice facility and lack of recruiting funding compared to other programs. But the absence of those things makes the job harder than it otherwise would be. And think of how the one successful guy in recent times did it. Cuonzo got lucky with Jalen Brown which was the key to his recruiting success. You can't count on that kind of luck recurring with any frequency. But until there's something more exciting happening with this program it's hard to see the money being there to remedy the deficiencies.

What we need is a young, really talented HC of the sort that a good AD would identify, hire and retain. Not some search firm retread. Do we have that AD? I don't think so.

---

And that AD just got an unprecedented 8 year extension.

Supporters of that decision want us to believe we are getting to the Sweet 16 with grad transfers.

We're a good bet to make the top 16 in our conference. Even if it expands.

BeastBear69 said:

---

Berkeley will always be a hard place to recruit and will take a savvy coach to be successful here.

---

You know what's a really hard place to recruit to? Corvallis. And right now we'd be thrilled to have a basketball program as good as Oregon State.

BearSD said:

---

BeastBear69 said:

---

Berkeley will always be a hard place to recruit and will take a savvy coach to be successful here.

---

You know what's a really hard place to recruit to? Corvallis. And right now we'd be thrilled to have a basketball program as good as Oregon State.

---

Well until they made the NCAA run I wouldn't say I envied them too much. But maybe they get some momentum from that.

KoreAmBear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

BeastBear69 said:

---

Berkeley will always be a hard place to recruit and will take a savvy coach to be successful here.

---

You know what's a really hard place to recruit to? Corvallis. And right now we'd be thrilled to have a basketball program as good as Oregon State.

---

Well until they made the NCAA run I wouldn't say I envied them too much. But maybe they get some momentum from that.

---

I wouldn't say envied, but look at the last 4 seasons. In 2019-20, the Bears and Beavers were each 7-11 in conference. In each of the other 3 of the last 4 seasons, Oregon State was at least 5 games better than Cal in conference. The Bears have to get up to their level before we start talking about being like Oregon or UCLA in hoops.

BearSD said:

---

KoreAmBear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

BeastBear69 said:

---

Berkeley will always be a hard place to recruit and will take a savvy coach to be successful here.

---

You know what's a really hard place to recruit to? Corvallis. And right now we'd be thrilled to have a basketball program as good as Oregon State.

---

Well until they made the NCAA run I wouldn't say I envied them too much. But maybe they get some momentum from that.

---

I wouldn't say envied, but look at the last 4 seasons. In 2019-20, the Bears and Beavers were each 7-11 in conference. In each of the other 3 of the last 4 seasons, Oregon State was at least 5 games better than Cal in conference. The Bears have to get up to their level before we start talking about being like Oregon or UCLA in hoops.

---

I thought they actually underachieved a little when they had Tinkle's son and Stephen Thompson. They seemed to go nowhere under Tinkle until finally they made the NCAAs (by winning the tournament which was their first breakthrough). Winning a few more games each year doesn't seem to be so much better than being the BDWs we are now. With hoops not requiring the volume it takes to turn a program around like in football, we should expect at least NITs. Not from Fox because I don't really see us going anywhere with him, but in general.

KoreAmBear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

KoreAmBear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

BeastBear69 said:

---

Berkeley will always be a hard place to recruit and will take a savvy coach to be successful here.

---

You know what's a really hard place to recruit to? Corvallis. And right now we'd be thrilled to have a basketball program as good as Oregon State.

---

Well until they made the NCAA run I wouldn't say I envied them too much. But maybe they get some momentum from that.

---

I wouldn't say envied, but look at the last 4 seasons. In 2019-20, the Bears and Beavers were each 7-11 in conference. In each of the other 3 of the last 4 seasons, Oregon State was at least 5 games better than Cal in conference. The Bears have to get up to their level before we start talking about being like Oregon or UCLA in hoops.

---

I thought they actually underachieved a little when they had Tinkle's son and Stephen Thompson. They seemed to go nowhere under Tinkle until finally they made the NCAAs (by winning the tournament which was their first breakthrough). Winning a few more games each year doesn't seem to be so much better than being the BDWs we are now. With hoops not requiring the volume it takes to turn a program around like in football, we should expect at least NITs. Not from Fox because I don't really see us going anywhere with him, but in general.

---

They are bringing in a number of transfers, including the #1 JC shooting guard out of NYC, that are probably a cut higher than they would have without the Tournament run. With Tinkle's coaching probably enough to give us fits.

OSU is going to have a good team this season again

I do agree they under performed with the two dads/three sons

calumnus said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

OSU is going to have a good team this season again

I do agree they under performed with the two dads/three sons

---

OSU is no longer a BDW. We are clearly again the worst team in the conference and the distance is increasing fast. The teams that finished just above us, UW and WSU, got big infusions of talent. As did ASU. Utah blew up their program but it looks like Craig Smith rebuilt immediately with solid players, even though I think Krystkowiak is a better coach. They are definitely better than us. Haase sucks, but he has brought in good talent once again.

Even our preseason games look tough. My guess is we add a couple patsies to try to assure we have a few wins. It is looking very bleak.

---

Sf City thinks we might be better. I agree

oskidunker said:

---

Sf City thinks we might be better. I agree

---

We do have a lot of returning players who should improve between seasons. But they'll have to improve more than their competition for us to be better.

stu said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Sf City thinks we might be better. I agree

---

We do have a lot of returning players who should improve between seasons. But they'll have to improve more than their competition for us to be better.

---

I think the team would have had a good chance to be better but then it lost its best player so

Oh, is it Prediction Time?

We will be better than last season, but not enough to where it is clear cut that Fox deserves Season Four (also not clear cut that he should be let go, all things considered). We will once again be in purgatory... no-man's land. Bear Insider will be split down the middle, as usual, between "negabears" and "sunshine pumpers".

In approximately 5-8 years we will have a couple of pretty darn good teams, but that will be ephemeral, as are most of our resurgences.

Life as a Cal Basketball fan.

Big C said:

---

Oh, is it Prediction Time?

We will be better than last season, but not enough to where it is clear cut that Fox deserves Season Four (also not clear cut that he should be let go, all things considered). We will once again be in purgatory... no-man's land. Bear Insider will be split down the middle, as usual, between "negabears" and "sunshine pumpers".

In approximately 5-8 years we will have a couple of pretty darn good teams, but that will be ephemeral, as are most of our resurgences.

Life as a Cal Basketball fan.

---

Last year we lost to PAC-12 teams a record 19 times. I think we will lose fewer games to Pac-12 opponents this year.

However last year we beat PAC-12 opponents four times. I think we will have trouble matching that this year.

We were 5-1 out of conference. I think with a tougher schedule this year we have trouble matching those wins even playing more games. However, I think we should wait for the final schedule before we make predictions.

No disrespect to the current players, but I hope this season is a disaster and Fox gets canned. It would really suck for everyone but it would yield the result that the program needs.

Ideal, albeit unlikely, scenario would be finishing in the top half of the conference and establishing enough momentum to improve recruiting and build some excitement. But to finish around 9 to 11th place, which could buy the staff more time, vs. dead last, I would most certainly favor dead last.

parentswerebears said:

---

I like what you did there, but I have zero hope that your scenario will happen. So next best thing is that he goes.

---

I have some hope. Okay, it is a tiny amount, but still. Heck, that's what hope is all about!

Big C said:

---

parentswerebears said:

---

I like what you did there, but I have zero hope that your scenario will happen. So next best thing is that he goes.

---

I have some hope. Okay, it is a tiny amount, but still. Heck, that's what hope is all about!

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

Ideal, albeit unlikely, scenario would be finishing in the top half of the conference and establishing enough momentum to improve recruiting and build some excitement. But to finish around 9 to 11th place, which could buy the staff more time, vs. dead last, I would most certainly favor dead last.

---

The problem would be something like 7 and 11 with a winning record out of conference run up against D2 teams. Just enought to get him an extension and JK is NOT looking at recruiting (I am not sure any AD does) and so the future would be another 3 years of these awful results.