Why is Mark Fox still our coach?

24,107 Views | 177 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by KoreAmBear
GMP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

calumnus said:

bearister said:

HearstMining said:

Civil Bear said:

Dduster said:

The Bears do not have enough talent to be competitive in the Pac 12. Phil Jackson could be the coach and 10th thru 12th will be the end result. You cannot tell the difference between 'walk-ons' and wasted scholarships.
If Phil Jackson was the coach we wouldn't have the current talent deficit.
Jackson realized that NBA success was way more about talent than coaching and I recall him saying he'd never take on a team that needed a complete rebuild.


Kyle Smith took that on.


Kyle Smith took that on at Columbia, USF and now at Washington State.
We need a coach who can rebuild. But what we have is a coach who can maintain. Unfortunately there's nothing to maintain.


Considering it takes recruiting to maintain longer than a year or two, I think it's generous to even say Fox can do that.
Big Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philbert said:



c'mon K-State!
we should start a Go-Fund-Me account to help K-State hire Fox!
OdontoBear66
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.



The biggest question mark for any new player in the Aztec program is whether they will pick up the defensive philosophies. "They told me straight up if I'm lacking on defense, then I won't be on the court, and I have accepted that since day one," Bradley said. "I've never played this caliber of defense before as far as not just relying on my individual defense but having everybody else's back on the court."

Bradley agrees that there is a stark difference in commitment and focus to defense here than in most other programs in the country. "Defense is what separates San Diego State from a lot of programs," he said. "At San Diego State, I've seen games where the offense wasn't on point necessarily, but the defense was. You can't really control how many shots you make, but if you control the defensive side of things, you are most likely going to win more games."

Pulliam agrees that the program's defensive schemes are a lot to take in for newcomers. "Everybody who comes to the program has it rough early on, but the more you do it every day and the more you put into it, it gets easier."
Butler noted Bradley is still trying to figure out the defensive schemes, but he is "a force of nature defensively due to his big body." Keshad Johnson echoed Butler's comment, telling EVT that "his physical build is going to be his best attribute on the defensive end, and if he can learn to use his strength to his advantage, he will be a nightmare on that end."

(Source: SDSU Men's Basketball Season Preview: Matt Bradley)

GMP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.


Rarely are recruits ranked based on their defense. Mostly it's about coaching and desire.
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GMP said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.


Rarely are recruits ranked based on their defense. Mostly it's about coaching and desire.
I think length, strength, quickness, vision, BBIQ also contribute to defense.
Big Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
looks like Dennis Gates is now off the table.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/33550805/sources-missouri-tigers-expected-hire-dennis-gates-men-basketball-coach
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

GMP said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.


Rarely are recruits ranked based on their defense. Mostly it's about coaching and desire.
I think length, strength, quickness, vision, BBIQ also contribute to defense.
many people think defense is all hustle, quickness and length

agree strength and BBIQ are also key ingrediants

but it's also technique and scheme

just a few examples of technique, how to close out on a shooter, how to protect the baseline and guide your man into help defense, your stance so ball handlers have a harder time attacking your high foot, where your hands should be in what situations, how to defend someone who got the first step on you ... etc, etc, etc.

Also scheme is very important. Help principals, zone principals, switching or not, hedging or not, in what situations you trap, special packages for special situations, scouting teams, scouting players, etc, etc, etc.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.



You are using as his excuse for having a worse defense that St. Mary's and San Francisco get much better athletes than he does?
CalLifer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.



You are using as his excuse for having a worse defense that St. Mary's and San Francisco get much better athletes than he does?


That question is so damning for Fox, no matter how you look at it.
OdontoBear66
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.



You are using as his excuse for having a worse defense that St. Mary's and San Francisco get much better athletes than he does?
Actually what I was saying is that #83 is pretty good when if I were to rate our entire roster relative to the entire NCAA, my guess would be between 200-250 somewhere. So coaching defense at an #83 rating is not bad for the tools you have in your bin. And I am not making excuses for Fox at all. I wish he were gone, but am trying to be somewhat objective. His biggest downfalls so far are his recruiting and ability to get top quality players to Cal.
And I would also guess we are way, way down in being rated offensively.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.



You are using as his excuse for having a worse defense that St. Mary's and San Francisco get much better athletes than he does?
Actually what I was saying is that #83 is pretty good when if I were to rate our entire roster relative to the entire NCAA, my guess would be between 200-250 somewhere. So coaching defense at an #83 rating is not bad for the tools you have in your bin. And I am not making excuses for Fox at all. I wish he were gone, but am trying to be somewhat objective. His biggest downfalls so far are his recruiting and ability to get top quality players to Cal.
And I would also guess we are way, way down in being rated offensively.


Yeah, It is the 7th best defense in the conference. So pretty average, if not slightly below. But maybe better than some would think, worse than others seem to think.

Our offense is #221 which is 12th in conference. So comparatively, the defense is much better, but not what I would call "good." It just seems that way compared to the offense, That is what I mean.

And there are over 330 schools playing basketball, most are not in P5. Those schools have always been our athletic peers, not UC Davis, UC San Diego etc. The many small schools, small conference schools should not have better offenses than Cal.
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.



You are using as his excuse for having a worse defense that St. Mary's and San Francisco get much better athletes than he does?
Actually what I was saying is that #83 is pretty good when if I were to rate our entire roster relative to the entire NCAA, my guess would be between 200-250 somewhere. So coaching defense at an #83 rating is not bad for the tools you have in your bin. And I am not making excuses for Fox at all. I wish he were gone, but am trying to be somewhat objective. His biggest downfalls so far are his recruiting and ability to get top quality players to Cal.
And I would also guess we are way, way down in being rated offensively.


Yeah, It is the 7th best defense in the conference. So pretty average, if not slightly below. But maybe better than some would think, worse than others seem to think.

Our offense is #221 which is 12th in conference. So comparatively, the defense is much better, but not what I would call "good." It just seems that way compared to the offense,
That is what I mean.

And there are over 330 schools playing basketball, most are not in P5. Those schools have always been our athletic peers, not UC Davis, UC San Diego etc. The many small schools, small conference schools should not have better offenses than Cal.
Agree with the bold. That's probably the best way to look at it, although defensive rating within conference would be the best measure (defensive and offensive vs the rest of the Pac12 teams only)

Regarding the other 330 schools: first in basketball it's the P6 including the Big East.

Second, re: some of the mid-major conferences, There are top teams that established themselves as the king of their conferences inflating their W/L record by beating up on 70% of their conference. This gets them to the tournament most years and therefore recruit at a high level. The top teams in these conferences are absolutely P6 level. Examples: Zags, San Diego State, Memphis, Creighton, UAB, St Marys, Xavier, etc

So probably another 30+ teams, bringing the "other" schools to 300

Your point is still valid, but I've always thought the focus on the P6 was missing this point. If you look who is getting to the Elite 8 and Final 4, it is well represented by mid-majors
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

calumnus said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

OdontoBear66 said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think Fox has taught individual and team defense pretty well. To my eyes we mostly look like we know what we're doing at that end of the court.


Cal this year has the #83 rated defense on Ken Pom. While that is far better than our offense, that is not particularly good, certainly not elite or NCAA Tournament worthy. Under Cuonzo we had the #19 rated defense.

Others this year:
San Diego State #2
St. Mary's #10
UCLA #14
San Francisco #23
Whoa, you've gotta compare your estimate of the general quality of player Fox has and with that I think #83 out of 326 is not bad. No fan of his staying, but c'mon, he doesn't not have a lot of stars on the roster. Just read U$C is losing a couple of good players but bringing in a 5*, 2 four stars, and a 3*....Speak to our roster.



You are using as his excuse for having a worse defense that St. Mary's and San Francisco get much better athletes than he does?
Actually what I was saying is that #83 is pretty good when if I were to rate our entire roster relative to the entire NCAA, my guess would be between 200-250 somewhere. So coaching defense at an #83 rating is not bad for the tools you have in your bin. And I am not making excuses for Fox at all. I wish he were gone, but am trying to be somewhat objective. His biggest downfalls so far are his recruiting and ability to get top quality players to Cal.
And I would also guess we are way, way down in being rated offensively.


Yeah, It is the 7th best defense in the conference. So pretty average, if not slightly below. But maybe better than some would think, worse than others seem to think.

Our offense is #221 which is 12th in conference. So comparatively, the defense is much better, but not what I would call "good." It just seems that way compared to the offense,
That is what I mean.

And there are over 330 schools playing basketball, most are not in P5. Those schools have always been our athletic peers, not UC Davis, UC San Diego etc. The many small schools, small conference schools should not have better offenses than Cal.
Agree with the bold. That's probably the best way to look at it, although defensive rating within conference would be the best measure (defensive and offensive vs the rest of the Pac12 teams only)

Regarding the other 330 schools: first in basketball it's the P6 including the Big East.

Second, re: some of the mid-major conferences, There are top teams that established themselves as the king of their conferences inflating their W/L record by beating up on 70% of their conference. This gets them to the tournament most years and therefore recruit at a high level. The top teams in these conferences are absolutely P6 level. Examples: Zags, San Diego State, Memphis, Creighton, UAB, St Marys, Xavier, etc

So probably another 30+ teams, bringing the "other" schools to 300

Your point is still valid, but I've always thought the focus on the P6 was missing this point. If you look who is getting to the Elite 8 and Final 4, it is well represented by mid-majors


Agree, it is not just the P6. Overall we are #141 in Ken Pom, so we are actually in the top half of the NCAA, though #11 in the PAC-12. The efficiency rankings (offense, defense and overall) take into account the quality of the opponent. Most of the PAC-12 is in the Top 100.

My main point is that Fox emphasizes defense, but his teams don't really play great defense, not like elite defensive teams. We play average PAC-12 defense. Fox's teams limit the other team's scoring by stretching the clock on both sides of the ball to limit the number of possessions, which also limits our scoring as well. We were #330 in tempo. That is the most obvious characteristic of his teams. He plays slow and tries to milk the clock he wants his players to deny all shots, not just good shots.
BeachedBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:


.....

My main point is that Fox emphasizes defense, but his teams don't really play great defense, not like elite defensive teams. We play average PAC-12 defense. Fox's teams limit the other team's scoring by stretching the clock on both sides of the ball to limit the number of possessions, which also limits our scoring as well. We were #330 in tempo. That is the most obvious characteristic of his teams. He plays slow and tries to milk the clock he wants his players to deny all shots, not just good shots.
I would add that watching the team this year - they were generally playing VERY GOOD DEFENSE, except when they weren't. I'm not saying the metrics were significantly better, but simply the individual and team execution was better. First off - fewer mistakes. Second off - better fundamentals (footwork, positioning), Third off - better team concepts (spacing, timing, help, communication).

HOWEVER (and this is a big however) - that was probably the optimal defensive performance for this talent group. Yes - that's damning praise. The players and staff get credit for maximizing their efficiency. In particular, I noticed dramatic improvement from Grant, Lars and Kuany this year defensively. But Cal simply doesn't have the talent level to be a top defensive team - and doesn't look like they will for a while.

Even when they play their best, like this year - it took 3 season for most to get to this level of average. The team needs to be able to get to this level at the end of 1 year - not three. And then get better in year 2.
HearstMining
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Why is Mark Fox still our coach?"

I think at this point, a more useful question for our emotional well-being is: When does spring football practice start?
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BeachedBear said:

calumnus said:


.....

My main point is that Fox emphasizes defense, but his teams don't really play great defense, not like elite defensive teams. We play average PAC-12 defense. Fox's teams limit the other team's scoring by stretching the clock on both sides of the ball to limit the number of possessions, which also limits our scoring as well. We were #330 in tempo. That is the most obvious characteristic of his teams. He plays slow and tries to milk the clock he wants his players to deny all shots, not just good shots.
I would add that watching the team this year - they were generally playing VERY GOOD DEFENSE, except when they weren't. I'm not saying the metrics were significantly better, but simply the individual and team execution was better. First off - fewer mistakes. Second off - better fundamentals (footwork, positioning), Third off - better team concepts (spacing, timing, help, communication).

HOWEVER (and this is a big however) - that was probably the optimal defensive performance for this talent group. Yes - that's damning praise. The players and staff get credit for maximizing their efficiency. In particular, I noticed dramatic improvement from Grant, Lars and Kuany this year defensively. But Cal simply doesn't have the talent level to be a top defensive team - and doesn't look like they will for a while.

Even when they play their best, like this year - it took 3 season for most to get to this level of average. The team needs to be able to get to this level at the end of 1 year - not three. And then get better in year 2.
agree with this

for example, it used to drive me crazy when the WK would repeatedly over help and allow open 3, after open 3, after open 3

Also Lars and Grant have improved immensely on defense and rebounding

Part of that was just getting Lars to stop making dumb fouls, and both got substantially stronger (S&C program + players working hard?)
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How Many More Years
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
coaching matters
and fox doesn't coach offense
westcoast101
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

coaching matters
and fox doesn't coach offense


So basically the same story as our football program?
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.


Wilcox is a genuinely good guy who cares about his players and that comes through to recruits. Recruits talk about the "family atmosphere." In personality and temperament he is a good fit for Cal and Cal student athletes. His challenge is 1) producing an offense and 2) he might be too laid back. He needs to be able to show more enthusiasm, fire up the troops.

The HC's personality is far more important in basketball because of the smaller numbers, the players are working directly with the HC every day.

Dennis Gates has a great positive demeanor and philosophy that his players really respond too. Travis DeCuire at Cal was the calm encouraging coach instructing the players when Monty had to just sit and fold his arms so he wouldn't piss off or discourage his players or get tossed by the refs.

socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

stu said:

I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.


Wilcox is a genuinely good guy who cares about his players and that comes through to recruits. Recruits talk about the "family atmosphere." In personality and temperament he is a good fit for Cal and Cal student athletes. His challenge is 1) producing an offense and 2) he might be too laid back. He needs to be able to show more enthusiasm, fire up the troops.

The HC's personality is far more important in basketball because of the smaller numbers, the players are working directly with the HC every day.

Dennis Gates has a great positive demeanor and philosophy that his players really respond too. Travis DeCuire at Cal was the calm encouraging coach instructing the players when Monty had to just sit and fold his arms so he wouldn't piss off or discourage his players or get tossed by the refs.


My own take is that Wilcox's progress has been hampered by some glaring problems in the offense - notably Chase's inability to throw the long ball with accuracy AND the lack of speed among our receiver corp. It ultimately met that people could play us with man and stack the box....which made EVERYTHING look bad. Plus we haven't recruited well/developed our Oline. Next year should be interesting - I know we are thin at QB but we have a good OL at least on paper and that is the engine that drives the football car.
Take care of your Chicken
parentswerebears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fire Fox. It's the only thing that matters.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.


Wilcox is a genuinely good guy who cares about his players and that comes through to recruits. Recruits talk about the "family atmosphere." In personality and temperament he is a good fit for Cal and Cal student athletes. His challenge is 1) producing an offense and 2) he might be too laid back. He needs to be able to show more enthusiasm, fire up the troops.

The HC's personality is far more important in basketball because of the smaller numbers, the players are working directly with the HC every day.

Dennis Gates has a great positive demeanor and philosophy that his players really respond too. Travis DeCuire at Cal was the calm encouraging coach instructing the players when Monty had to just sit and fold his arms so he wouldn't piss off or discourage his players or get tossed by the refs.


My own take is that Wilcox's progress has been hampered by some glaring problems in the offense - notably Chase's inability to throw the long ball with accuracy AND the lack of speed among our receiver corp. It ultimately met that people could play us with man and stack the box....which made EVERYTHING look bad. Plus we haven't recruited well/developed our Oline. Next year should be interesting - I know we are thin at QB but we have a good OL at least on paper and that is the engine that drives the football car.

I don't want to harsh your mellow, but the latest outlook is that it's only our interior OL that looks good, whether on paper, turf or real grass.
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
When Wilcox refused the Oregon job his popularity here went up,, worst losing record in 100;years in the pac12. We need to go over 500 in the conference
Go Bears!
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.


Wilcox is a genuinely good guy who cares about his players and that comes through to recruits. Recruits talk about the "family atmosphere." In personality and temperament he is a good fit for Cal and Cal student athletes. His challenge is 1) producing an offense and 2) he might be too laid back. He needs to be able to show more enthusiasm, fire up the troops.

The HC's personality is far more important in basketball because of the smaller numbers, the players are working directly with the HC every day.

Dennis Gates has a great positive demeanor and philosophy that his players really respond too. Travis DeCuire at Cal was the calm encouraging coach instructing the players when Monty had to just sit and fold his arms so he wouldn't piss off or discourage his players or get tossed by the refs.


My own take is that Wilcox's progress has been hampered by some glaring problems in the offense - notably Chase's inability to throw the long ball with accuracy AND the lack of speed among our receiver corp. It ultimately met that people could play us with man and stack the box....which made EVERYTHING look bad. Plus we haven't recruited well/developed our Oline. Next year should be interesting - I know we are thin at QB but we have a good OL at least on paper and that is the engine that drives the football car.


"Wilcox's progress has been hampered by…"?

When he arrived we had tremendous speed at WR, including a returning freshman All American, and Garbers was just a committed recruit, part of the first of 5 Wilcox recruiting classes. Wilcox is in charge of the program, in charge of recruiting and staff hiring, he is not the victim of bad hires, poor initial player retention and poor recruiting. Those things are his job.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker said:

When Wilcox refused the Oregon job his popularity here went up,, worst losing record in 100;years in the pac12. We need to go over 500 in the conference


The only other coach in Cal history to go into year 6 with a losing record over all and never having had a winning conference record is Ray Willsey, though in year 5 he went 7-3-1 (2-2-1) and was ranked as high as #8 with big wins at Michigan and over Colorado, a 43-0 beat down of #10 Syracuse, plus wins over San Jose State and Hawaii. Losses were to #1 USC, Army and Stanford.

Willsey then followed that up with:
5-5 (2-4)
6-5 (4-3)
6-5 (4-3)

Which is probably a good model for Wilcox, but substituting more OOC wins with the current cream puff schedule vs the murders row we used to schedule.
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

stu said:

I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.


Wilcox is a genuinely good guy who cares about his players and that comes through to recruits. Recruits talk about the "family atmosphere." In personality and temperament he is a good fit for Cal and Cal student athletes. His challenge is 1) producing an offense and 2) he might be too laid back. He needs to be able to show more enthusiasm, fire up the troops.

The HC's personality is far more important in basketball because of the smaller numbers, the players are working directly with the HC every day.

Dennis Gates has a great positive demeanor and philosophy that his players really respond too. Travis DeCuire at Cal was the calm encouraging coach instructing the players when Monty had to just sit and fold his arms so he wouldn't piss off or discourage his players or get tossed by the refs.
I sometimes listen to ESPN U radio morning show

one of the two hosts is former UCLA football coach Rick Neuheisel. He is so smooth. I can imagine he would do very well with recruits and their parents









Chapman_is_Gone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker said:

When Wilcox refused the Oregon job his popularity here went up,, worst losing record in 100;years in the pac12. We need to go over 500 in the conference
So you love Fox and dislike Wilcox. Very interesting.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

calumnus said:

stu said:

I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.


Wilcox is a genuinely good guy who cares about his players and that comes through to recruits. Recruits talk about the "family atmosphere." In personality and temperament he is a good fit for Cal and Cal student athletes. His challenge is 1) producing an offense and 2) he might be too laid back. He needs to be able to show more enthusiasm, fire up the troops.

The HC's personality is far more important in basketball because of the smaller numbers, the players are working directly with the HC every day.

Dennis Gates has a great positive demeanor and philosophy that his players really respond too. Travis DeCuire at Cal was the calm encouraging coach instructing the players when Monty had to just sit and fold his arms so he wouldn't piss off or discourage his players or get tossed by the refs.
I sometimes listen to ESPN U radio morning show

one of the two hosts is former UCLA football coach Rick Neuheisel. He is so smooth. I can imagine he would do very well with recruits and their parents




Mike Pawlawski would be even better.
BeachedBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

stu said:

I think our football program recruits better and Musgrave brought some life to the offense.


Wilcox is a genuinely good guy who cares about his players and that comes through to recruits. Recruits talk about the "family atmosphere." In personality and temperament he is a good fit for Cal and Cal student athletes. His challenge is 1) producing an offense and 2) he might be too laid back. He needs to be able to show more enthusiasm, fire up the troops.

The HC's personality is far more important in basketball because of the smaller numbers, the players are working directly with the HC every day.

Dennis Gates has a great positive demeanor and philosophy that his players really respond too. Travis DeCuire at Cal was the calm encouraging coach instructing the players when Monty had to just sit and fold his arms so he wouldn't piss off or discourage his players or get tossed by the refs.


Agree with all of this, but I would expand the second point (about HC's personality). While in football, we can get a glimpse of sideline demeanor - it is not close to the exposure for a baskteball HC. Another way to frame it is that in football - there is more opportunity to control the personality image vis a vis pressers and such. That is probably where most indirect assessment comes from. Whereas in basketball, most of that indirect assessment comes from the bench.

By indirect assessment - I mean the impression of personality from people that don't know the individual personally. That would include most fans, media types and potential recruits (that have not yet 'met' the staff).

I think we would all agree that Fox has a pretty big image issue. He could do a lot to address that by engaging with indirect impressions. However, he has chosen not to do so. Personally, I found that part of my job abhorent in the past and ended up navigating my career away from it. But that is part of the job for a P5 HC.

oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Chapman_is_Gone said:

oskidunker said:

When Wilcox refused the Oregon job his popularity here went up,, worst losing record in 100;years in the pac12. We need to go over 500 in the conference
So you love Fox and dislike Wilcox. Very interesting.

No. i don't like either one. I think Fox deserves one more year, thats my issue. Some players have gotten better under Fox. Theiman, Kelly and Kuani. I agree that recruiting is bad.
Go Bears!
Dgoldnbaer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Recruiting is the engine that drives every good program and both Wilcox and Fox's ability there is laughingly bad. In 5 years how many 4 or 5 stars has Wilcox recruited? And ... How many top notch qb's have come to Cal during this span? And Fox ... Who the bleep has he recruited in his 3 years?!?! Wish I was Knowlton - if so, Fox would already be gone & Wilcox MUST win at least 7 this year or he's gone, too. Mediocrity or worse for so long in each sport is sad ... a joke ... Driving me insane!
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

I sometimes listen to ESPN U radio morning show

one of the two hosts is former UCLA football coach Rick Neuheisel. He is so smooth. I can imagine he would do very well with recruits and their parents
Neuheisel is really good on TV.

But his UCLA coaching record was 21-29, at a place where it should be easier to win than at Cal.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.