dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

What about Rod Palmer, currently an assistant at UCLA?

He has never been a head coach, but he was an assistant under some pretty good ones.

He is a strong recruiter and obviously already familiar with UC.

---

I don't know enough about his personally and how he would be as a HC, but honestly Wyking Jones had a MUCH better resume and also knew UC and Cal specifically.

However, Palmer was clearly a solid pickup for Cronin when he came out West to help recruit SoCal.

In general, I'd rather hire a successful up and coming HC than an assistant at a major program. West Coast ties are good, Cal ties are great.

---

I think Jones was a pretty good hire. He just didn't pan out, but like you said he had a pretty good pedigree and was familiar with Cal.

The problem with trying to hire a successful head coach is that there would have to be a big financial benefit to coming to Cal. That means we need to be looking at head coaches in small conferences.

If we also want West Coast ties that means we are pretty much limited to the head coaches for the Big West, Mountain West, or WCC

That is a pretty small list unless there are a lot of assistant coaches from out West that are now head coaches back East somewhere.

If you want an African-American coach the list is even smaller, but I am not sure that's a necessary requirement.

---

Sorry, I struggle to understand how anyone thought Jones was a good hire. He was in the coaching ranks for twenty years without ever being a head coach and actually wasn't even an assistant head coach at any stop. He was on no coaching lists and given the recent success under Martin AND the Missouri buyout money Cal had in hand, a terrible hire to go with. The results were entirely predictable.

---

Look at Palmer's resume. Jones' was the same but much better. If Jones was a bad hire based on resume, then Palmer is worse. But then so was Wilcox in football.

However, if you are consistently an assistant to Hall of Fame coaches there is a reason you are not "promoted" to head coach. You are not taking that guys job. You might be a good HC if you give it a try or get a chance. Or you might not. It is not a "bad" is is no info.

That is why I prefer hiring HCs who are up and comers, you have positive indication they are good HCs. That is why Troy Taylor gave up being a P5 OC to become a FCS HC. To prove himself. As a HC. He has already been a P5 OC. You want to see how a guy handles being in charge, both in basketball and football.

---

Exactly. Jones was an assistant to some very good coaches and was known as a recruiter with West Coast ties. He pretty much checked off all the boxes outlined above including being African-American and being familiar with UC. I think people were hoping we'd land a proven coach after Cuonzo left, but it wasn't absurd to give Wyking a shot.

If you had asked me to choose between Wyking and Fox at the time I would have gone with Wyking and I still think we might have been better off with Wyking even in hindsight.

Should we have hired Gates or Legans or Musselman or Decuire or even Kidd instead? Probably, but the Jones hire wasn't as bad at the time as it proved to be later. I don't think anyone expected him to go 5-31 in conference and if you say you did you are not being honest about it. He failed spectacularly, but you are letting hindsight drive your opinion of the hiring.

---

We all hated the hire when it happened. Maybe we didn't expect 5-31, but we expected to be a bottom third program as long as he was coach. Jones had never been AHC at any level, let alone HC. If you believe the rumors, he was essentially a glorified bagman under Pitino. What isn't secondhand is that wo Cal players that played under Cuonzo (with Jones) directly told me at the time that they felt it was a bad hire and that Jones was lazy and a huge *******. These were guys who absolutely LOVED Cuonzo.

PtownBear1 said:

---

Jones and Fox were both terrible, extremely lazy hires bordering on malfeasance. The difference was at least there was some hope with Jones since he hadn't been an HC so we didn't really know what we were getting. It was a clear as day what we were getting with Fox though.

---

Yes.

calumnus said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

What about Rod Palmer, currently an assistant at UCLA?

He has never been a head coach, but he was an assistant under some pretty good ones.

He is a strong recruiter and obviously already familiar with UC.

---

I don't know enough about his personally and how he would be as a HC, but honestly Wyking Jones had a MUCH better resume and also knew UC and Cal specifically.

However, Palmer was clearly a solid pickup for Cronin when he came out West to help recruit SoCal.

In general, I'd rather hire a successful up and coming HC than an assistant at a major program. West Coast ties are good, Cal ties are great.

---

I think Jones was a pretty good hire. He just didn't pan out, but like you said he had a pretty good pedigree and was familiar with Cal.

The problem with trying to hire a successful head coach is that there would have to be a big financial benefit to coming to Cal. That means we need to be looking at head coaches in small conferences.

If we also want West Coast ties that means we are pretty much limited to the head coaches for the Big West, Mountain West, or WCC

That is a pretty small list unless there are a lot of assistant coaches from out West that are now head coaches back East somewhere.

If you want an African-American coach the list is even smaller, but I am not sure that's a necessary requirement.

---

Sorry, I struggle to understand how anyone thought Jones was a good hire. He was in the coaching ranks for twenty years without ever being a head coach and actually wasn't even an assistant head coach at any stop. He was on no coaching lists and given the recent success under Martin AND the Missouri buyout money Cal had in hand, a terrible hire to go with. The results were entirely predictable.

---

Look at Palmer's resume. Jones' was the same but much better. If Jones was a bad hire based on resume, then Palmer is worse. But then so was Wilcox in football.

However, if you are consistently an assistant to Hall of Fame coaches there is a reason you are not "promoted" to head coach. You are not taking that guys job. You might be a good HC if you give it a try or get a chance. Or you might not. It is not a "bad" is is no info.

That is why I prefer hiring HCs who are up and comers, you have positive indication they are good HCs. That is why Troy Taylor gave up being a P5 OC to become a FCS HC. To prove himself. As a HC. He has already been a P5 OC. You want to see how a guy handles being in charge, both in basketball and football.

---

Exactly. Jones was an assistant to some very good coaches and was known as a recruiter with West Coast ties. He pretty much checked off all the boxes outlined above including being African-American and being familiar with UC. I think people were hoping we'd land a proven coach after Cuonzo left, but it wasn't absurd to give Wyking a shot.

If you had asked me to choose between Wyking and Fox at the time I would have gone with Wyking and I still think we might have been better off with Wyking even in hindsight.

Should we have hired Gates or Legans or Musselman or Decuire or even Kidd instead? Probably, but the Jones hire wasn't as bad at the time as it proved to be later. I don't think anyone expected him to go 5-31 in conference and if you say you did you are not being honest about it. He failed spectacularly, but you are letting hindsight drive your opinion of the hiring.

---

We all hated the hire when it happened. Maybe we didn't expect 5-31, but we expected to be a bottom third program as long as he was coach. Jones had never been AHC at any level, let alone HC. If you believe the rumors, he was essentially a glorified bagman under Pitino. What isn't secondhand is that wo Cal players that played under Cuonzo (with Jones) directly told me at the time that they felt it was a bad hire and that Jones was lazy and a huge *******. These were guys who absolutely LOVED Cuonzo.

---

Thanks for the insight. From the outside, Fox seems like an even bigger jerk. Jones did lose me when he forced players from the team for simply not being good enough (ie,his mistake).

Jones was coach for only 2 years. His recruiting was pretty good. We were young, but talented. Our best players (Sueing, Bradley) said they loved him. The biggest issue I had was not giving him a contract much more favorable to Cal. If we had made a good hire after Jones that could keep the team together we would be in a good place.

Fox was a fully known entity. When Cal slaughtered his talented but poorly coached Georgia team while he screamed at his players from the sideline, then threw them under the bus in the post game, I thought "Wow, I am so glad that guy is not our coach."

We are going into year 4 of Fox, with the worst recruiting in my 40+ years as a fan and our best players transferring out year after year. And our record getting worse. And Fox was extended "for COVID." By the time we move on the program will be in a FAR worse place than he found it.

---

I think there is one last shot to save the program, and that will be the next hire. Assuming (and this is a big assumption) Knowlton has any sense and fires Fox after this season, I think we have 1 last crack at saving Cal hoops. I do not think the program can recover if we make 3 consecutive bad hires. It is already nearly dead as-is

eastcoastcal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

What about Rod Palmer, currently an assistant at UCLA?

He has never been a head coach, but he was an assistant under some pretty good ones.

He is a strong recruiter and obviously already familiar with UC.

---

I don't know enough about his personally and how he would be as a HC, but honestly Wyking Jones had a MUCH better resume and also knew UC and Cal specifically.

However, Palmer was clearly a solid pickup for Cronin when he came out West to help recruit SoCal.

In general, I'd rather hire a successful up and coming HC than an assistant at a major program. West Coast ties are good, Cal ties are great.

---

I think Jones was a pretty good hire. He just didn't pan out, but like you said he had a pretty good pedigree and was familiar with Cal.

The problem with trying to hire a successful head coach is that there would have to be a big financial benefit to coming to Cal. That means we need to be looking at head coaches in small conferences.

If we also want West Coast ties that means we are pretty much limited to the head coaches for the Big West, Mountain West, or WCC

That is a pretty small list unless there are a lot of assistant coaches from out West that are now head coaches back East somewhere.

If you want an African-American coach the list is even smaller, but I am not sure that's a necessary requirement.

---

Sorry, I struggle to understand how anyone thought Jones was a good hire. He was in the coaching ranks for twenty years without ever being a head coach and actually wasn't even an assistant head coach at any stop. He was on no coaching lists and given the recent success under Martin AND the Missouri buyout money Cal had in hand, a terrible hire to go with. The results were entirely predictable.

---

Look at Palmer's resume. Jones' was the same but much better. If Jones was a bad hire based on resume, then Palmer is worse. But then so was Wilcox in football.

However, if you are consistently an assistant to Hall of Fame coaches there is a reason you are not "promoted" to head coach. You are not taking that guys job. You might be a good HC if you give it a try or get a chance. Or you might not. It is not a "bad" is is no info.

That is why I prefer hiring HCs who are up and comers, you have positive indication they are good HCs. That is why Troy Taylor gave up being a P5 OC to become a FCS HC. To prove himself. As a HC. He has already been a P5 OC. You want to see how a guy handles being in charge, both in basketball and football.

---

Exactly. Jones was an assistant to some very good coaches and was known as a recruiter with West Coast ties. He pretty much checked off all the boxes outlined above including being African-American and being familiar with UC. I think people were hoping we'd land a proven coach after Cuonzo left, but it wasn't absurd to give Wyking a shot.

If you had asked me to choose between Wyking and Fox at the time I would have gone with Wyking and I still think we might have been better off with Wyking even in hindsight.

Should we have hired Gates or Legans or Musselman or Decuire or even Kidd instead? Probably, but the Jones hire wasn't as bad at the time as it proved to be later. I don't think anyone expected him to go 5-31 in conference and if you say you did you are not being honest about it. He failed spectacularly, but you are letting hindsight drive your opinion of the hiring.

---

We all hated the hire when it happened. Maybe we didn't expect 5-31, but we expected to be a bottom third program as long as he was coach. Jones had never been AHC at any level, let alone HC. If you believe the rumors, he was essentially a glorified bagman under Pitino. What isn't secondhand is that wo Cal players that played under Cuonzo (with Jones) directly told me at the time that they felt it was a bad hire and that Jones was lazy and a huge *******. These were guys who absolutely LOVED Cuonzo.

---

Thanks for the insight. From the outside, Fox seems like an even bigger jerk. Jones did lose me when he forced players from the team for simply not being good enough (ie,his mistake).

Jones was coach for only 2 years. His recruiting was pretty good. We were young, but talented. Our best players (Sueing, Bradley) said they loved him. The biggest issue I had was not giving him a contract much more favorable to Cal. If we had made a good hire after Jones that could keep the team together we would be in a good place.

Fox was a fully known entity. When Cal slaughtered his talented but poorly coached Georgia team while he screamed at his players from the sideline, then threw them under the bus in the post game, I thought "Wow, I am so glad that guy is not our coach."

We are going into year 4 of Fox, with the worst recruiting in my 40+ years as a fan and our best players transferring out year after year. And our record getting worse. And Fox was extended "for COVID." By the time we move on the program will be in a FAR worse place than he found it.

---

I think there is one last shot to save the program, and that will be the next hire. Assuming (and this is a big assumption) Knowlton has any sense and fires Fox after this season, I think we have 1 last crack at saving Cal hoops. I do not think the program can recover if we make 3 consecutive bad hires. It is already nearly dead as-is

---

As I go back a tiny bit further than you (euphemism for me being born when Eisenhower was still President), I can say, with great perspective, that a program can always be revived. Just gotta start doing things right. Invest in a winning program, staff, NIL, facilities, etc. Make good decisions. We're doing none of that. (Except on this forum!)

BeachedBear said:

---

stu said:

---

My top priority is integrity. An absolute must.

Then people skills for recruiting, motivating fans to attend, working with around the A.D., etc.

Then organizational skills, technical knowledge, work ethic.

And at Cal a willingness to rebuild a program and probably start off at a relatively low salary.

Tall order. I don't have any names to suggest.

---

I think Stu has provided a good list. I posted over 50 names at the end of last season many of which are still available. Some additional commentary:

• Integrity - agree! That used to eliminate about half the top candidates, but under new rules it probably only eliminates 10%
• Interpersonal skills. Probably one of the few things a program CAN'T work around with a competent assistant.
• Skills,Knowledge, Work Ethic - pretty much a pre-requisite anyway. But until we get the program back on track, we don't need someone SPECIAL in this regard. Talent and easy will suffice. Assistants can help with lots of this. Having three assistants that duplicate the Head Coach does NOT help.
• Rebuilding. Unfortunately, the admin doesn't support MBB, so anyone they hire will FEEL underpaid.

---

I agree with most of this. But integrity is a function of one's morals, one's character. How does the integrity of a pool of candidates change just by changing the rules of a sport?

Big C said:

---

eastcoastcal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

What about Rod Palmer, currently an assistant at UCLA?

He has never been a head coach, but he was an assistant under some pretty good ones.

He is a strong recruiter and obviously already familiar with UC.

---

I don't know enough about his personally and how he would be as a HC, but honestly Wyking Jones had a MUCH better resume and also knew UC and Cal specifically.

However, Palmer was clearly a solid pickup for Cronin when he came out West to help recruit SoCal.

In general, I'd rather hire a successful up and coming HC than an assistant at a major program. West Coast ties are good, Cal ties are great.

---

I think Jones was a pretty good hire. He just didn't pan out, but like you said he had a pretty good pedigree and was familiar with Cal.

The problem with trying to hire a successful head coach is that there would have to be a big financial benefit to coming to Cal. That means we need to be looking at head coaches in small conferences.

If we also want West Coast ties that means we are pretty much limited to the head coaches for the Big West, Mountain West, or WCC

That is a pretty small list unless there are a lot of assistant coaches from out West that are now head coaches back East somewhere.

If you want an African-American coach the list is even smaller, but I am not sure that's a necessary requirement.

---

Sorry, I struggle to understand how anyone thought Jones was a good hire. He was in the coaching ranks for twenty years without ever being a head coach and actually wasn't even an assistant head coach at any stop. He was on no coaching lists and given the recent success under Martin AND the Missouri buyout money Cal had in hand, a terrible hire to go with. The results were entirely predictable.

---

Look at Palmer's resume. Jones' was the same but much better. If Jones was a bad hire based on resume, then Palmer is worse. But then so was Wilcox in football.

However, if you are consistently an assistant to Hall of Fame coaches there is a reason you are not "promoted" to head coach. You are not taking that guys job. You might be a good HC if you give it a try or get a chance. Or you might not. It is not a "bad" is is no info.

That is why I prefer hiring HCs who are up and comers, you have positive indication they are good HCs. That is why Troy Taylor gave up being a P5 OC to become a FCS HC. To prove himself. As a HC. He has already been a P5 OC. You want to see how a guy handles being in charge, both in basketball and football.

---

Exactly. Jones was an assistant to some very good coaches and was known as a recruiter with West Coast ties. He pretty much checked off all the boxes outlined above including being African-American and being familiar with UC. I think people were hoping we'd land a proven coach after Cuonzo left, but it wasn't absurd to give Wyking a shot.

If you had asked me to choose between Wyking and Fox at the time I would have gone with Wyking and I still think we might have been better off with Wyking even in hindsight.

Should we have hired Gates or Legans or Musselman or Decuire or even Kidd instead? Probably, but the Jones hire wasn't as bad at the time as it proved to be later. I don't think anyone expected him to go 5-31 in conference and if you say you did you are not being honest about it. He failed spectacularly, but you are letting hindsight drive your opinion of the hiring.

---

We all hated the hire when it happened. Maybe we didn't expect 5-31, but we expected to be a bottom third program as long as he was coach. Jones had never been AHC at any level, let alone HC. If you believe the rumors, he was essentially a glorified bagman under Pitino. What isn't secondhand is that wo Cal players that played under Cuonzo (with Jones) directly told me at the time that they felt it was a bad hire and that Jones was lazy and a huge *******. These were guys who absolutely LOVED Cuonzo.

---

Thanks for the insight. From the outside, Fox seems like an even bigger jerk. Jones did lose me when he forced players from the team for simply not being good enough (ie,his mistake).

Jones was coach for only 2 years. His recruiting was pretty good. We were young, but talented. Our best players (Sueing, Bradley) said they loved him. The biggest issue I had was not giving him a contract much more favorable to Cal. If we had made a good hire after Jones that could keep the team together we would be in a good place.

Fox was a fully known entity. When Cal slaughtered his talented but poorly coached Georgia team while he screamed at his players from the sideline, then threw them under the bus in the post game, I thought "Wow, I am so glad that guy is not our coach."

We are going into year 4 of Fox, with the worst recruiting in my 40+ years as a fan and our best players transferring out year after year. And our record getting worse. And Fox was extended "for COVID." By the time we move on the program will be in a FAR worse place than he found it.

---

I think there is one last shot to save the program, and that will be the next hire. Assuming (and this is a big assumption) Knowlton has any sense and fires Fox after this season, I think we have 1 last crack at saving Cal hoops. I do not think the program can recover if we make 3 consecutive bad hires. It is already nearly dead as-is

---

As I go back a tiny bit further than you (euphemism for me being born when Eisenhower was still President), I can say, with great perspective, that a program can always be revived. Just gotta start doing things right. Invest in a winning program, staff, NIL, facilities, etc. Make good decisions. We're doing none of that. (Except on this forum!)

---

Makes sense. How could it get this way?! Coming off a 4 seed in the tournament, having recruited several top 100 McDonalds All-Americans, how could it all fall off a cliff so quickly?

socaltownie said:

---

"Integrity" - What does this mean in the NIL era? I mean yes, you should not do anything ILLEGAL but the NCAA has essentially surrender the field when it comes to enforcement EXCEPT in on things that are really administrative paperwork issues (like holding one too many recruiting calls or not reporting buying a recruit lunch).

I want, in order,

1) An African American coach or someone who has shown in their career the ability to help guide often "first in family to college" young african american males thorugh both matriculation and, should their ability allow, moving from college to the NBA. At a school where less than 5% of the student body is AA and so many of them are scholarship athletes this is imperative.

2) West Coast Roots - Cal has never (and will never) recruit fully nationally for SPORTS (again, PLEASE for the love of all that is holy do not conflate UCB undergraduate admissions with Cal revenue sports recruiting). Our best football and basektball teams have always been built on a core of Californian (and really southern Californian) kids. A coach who does not know the top HS and AAU coaches in the greater LA region should be immediately rejected. Yes, he "can learn" but getting up to speed quickly is a tall order.

3) Abiliyt to work the inside game. UC experience is userful. Not as a student but as an employee. You have to understand what the faculty senate is and how to navigate through the politics. Basically what will give the AD a headache and what you can (and cannot) do. THis is mostly to avoid frustration - where you have a candidate like SOnny Dykes who finds out after the fact how the UC works.

4) Proven abiliyt to work the NIL game. New world folks. Go big or go home.

---

Whoa, big fella. I don't think we want to include only coaches who are African American in this search, no matter how much we feel they might be better able to relate to many of the best recruits who are also African American. I like black coaches as much as the next guy. I was good with hiring Cuonzo, but I was against hiring both Bozeman and Jones. I realize you then qualified your statement to include others, but it goes without saying that we need a coach who can relate to good players. Many of these may be white, and many are from foreign countries, so any coach we consider ought to be able to relate to and impress any recruit of any color or background. Narrowing a search to one group or color would be discrimination, and the University itself would not likely allow it, or I would hope they wouldn't allow it.

KoreAmBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

"Integrity" - What does this mean in the NIL era? I mean yes, you should not do anything ILLEGAL but the NCAA has essentially surrender the field when it comes to enforcement EXCEPT in on things that are really administrative paperwork issues (like holding one too many recruiting calls or not reporting buying a recruit lunch).

I want, in order,

1) An African American coach or someone who has shown in their career the ability to help guide often "first in family to college" young african american males thorugh both matriculation and, should their ability allow, moving from college to the NBA. At a school where less than 5% of the student body is AA and so many of them are scholarship athletes this is imperative.

2) West Coast Roots - Cal has never (and will never) recruit fully nationally for SPORTS (again, PLEASE for the love of all that is holy do not conflate UCB undergraduate admissions with Cal revenue sports recruiting). Our best football and basektball teams have always been built on a core of Californian (and really southern Californian) kids. A coach who does not know the top HS and AAU coaches in the greater LA region should be immediately rejected. Yes, he "can learn" but getting up to speed quickly is a tall order.

3) Abiliyt to work the inside game. UC experience is userful. Not as a student but as an employee. You have to understand what the faculty senate is and how to navigate through the politics. Basically what will give the AD a headache and what you can (and cannot) do. THis is mostly to avoid frustration - where you have a candidate like SOnny Dykes who finds out after the fact how the UC works.

4) Proven abiliyt to work the NIL game. New world folks. Go big or go home.

---

The NIL issue should actually be easier for the coach, since much of the fundraising, negotiating, paying can be outsourced to alumni and others. I mean - the Legends should be appointing a designated NIL merchant to the MBB team IMMEDIATELY!!!

I also like your three points - absolutely agree. Braun may have been of fair complexion, but he had demonstrated the abilities you mentioned. Fox, Campy, even Monty - not so much.

---

Monty had Travis who was the lead recruiter and a young African American mentor (how could you not like or respect Travis) -- landed Crabbe, Solomon, and Mathews and brought Cobbs from Minnesota. Not hiring Travis after Cuonzo set us back a decade at least.

---

I'd agree. Emerson Murray was not a good get, but overall his recruiting was good, I'd have hired Travis in a heartbeat.

Big C said:

---

0. integrity and ethics (it should be a given, so doesn't get a number)

1a. can coach basketball... player developement, X's and O's, game strategy, etc. (the Monty Factor)

1b. recruiting (himself or via assistants... local talent or from anywhere... from high school or the portal, just bring in talent)

1a and 1b are both crucial. Can't be weak at either. Personally, I can't favor one over the other.

2. Face of the Franchise. Promote the program. Promote NIL. Promote new facilities. Be visible and compelling. Represent California Basketball to the rest of the University Community and the public.

---

Integrity and ethics is part of character, and character is hard to judge in a candidate. If a coach hasn't broken any rules, that is good. As candidates, both Jones and Cuonzo gave no indication of character flaws, but then Jones recruited over two players he recruited, and the way Cuonzo left the program, visibly bored with his team's final tournament game, was insulting to his players and their fans.

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

What about Rod Palmer, currently an assistant at UCLA?

He has never been a head coach, but he was an assistant under some pretty good ones.

He is a strong recruiter and obviously already familiar with UC.

---

I don't know enough about his personally and how he would be as a HC, but honestly Wyking Jones had a MUCH better resume and also knew UC and Cal specifically.

However, Palmer was clearly a solid pickup for Cronin when he came out West to help recruit SoCal.

In general, I'd rather hire a successful up and coming HC than an assistant at a major program. West Coast ties are good, Cal ties are great.

---

I think Jones was a pretty good hire. He just didn't pan out, but like you said he had a pretty good pedigree and was familiar with Cal.

The problem with trying to hire a successful head coach is that there would have to be a big financial benefit to coming to Cal. That means we need to be looking at head coaches in small conferences.

If we also want West Coast ties that means we are pretty much limited to the head coaches for the Big West, Mountain West, or WCC

That is a pretty small list unless there are a lot of assistant coaches from out West that are now head coaches back East somewhere.

If you want an African-American coach the list is even smaller, but I am not sure that's a necessary requirement.

---

Jones was a very bad hire, and I said so at the time. He had never been a head coach at any level, college, high school, middle or elementary school, AAU, Boy Scouts, Epiphany peanuts, nowhere at all. If you haven't done that, haven't been the man responsible, haven't given the orders, haven't hired or picked assistants, and haven't delegated tasks to assistants, you are nothing but someone who may have played at some level, or maybe walked around with a clipboard, collecting statistics, or at best have coached some players individually to improve. That is not enough.

I knew that Jones would fail very fast, when I heard his opening strategy of full court press for 40 minutes. Had he even looked at his personnel first? After a few games, he announced that his go-to player on offense would be Don Coleman, of all people. The poor kid was a loose cannon, an out of control madman with a basketball in his hands (just kidding, Don). He was capable of the great play, but just as easily made 10 errors to make up for the one good play.

Whoever we hire needs to have head coach experience at some level in the past, I believe.

dimitrig said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

What about Rod Palmer, currently an assistant at UCLA?

He has never been a head coach, but he was an assistant under some pretty good ones.

He is a strong recruiter and obviously already familiar with UC.

---

I don't know enough about his personally and how he would be as a HC, but honestly Wyking Jones had a MUCH better resume and also knew UC and Cal specifically.

However, Palmer was clearly a solid pickup for Cronin when he came out West to help recruit SoCal.

In general, I'd rather hire a successful up and coming HC than an assistant at a major program. West Coast ties are good, Cal ties are great.

---

I think Jones was a pretty good hire. He just didn't pan out, but like you said he had a pretty good pedigree and was familiar with Cal.

The problem with trying to hire a successful head coach is that there would have to be a big financial benefit to coming to Cal. That means we need to be looking at head coaches in small conferences.

If we also want West Coast ties that means we are pretty much limited to the head coaches for the Big West, Mountain West, or WCC

That is a pretty small list unless there are a lot of assistant coaches from out West that are now head coaches back East somewhere.

If you want an African-American coach the list is even smaller, but I am not sure that's a necessary requirement.

---

Sorry, I struggle to understand how anyone thought Jones was a good hire. He was in the coaching ranks for twenty years without ever being a head coach and actually wasn't even an assistant head coach at any stop. He was on no coaching lists and given the recent success under Martin AND the Missouri buyout money Cal had in hand, a terrible hire to go with. The results were entirely predictable.

---

Look at Palmer's resume. Jones' was the same but much better. If Jones was a bad hire based on resume, then Palmer is worse. But then so was Wilcox in football.

However, if you are consistently an assistant to Hall of Fame coaches there is a reason you are not "promoted" to head coach. You are not taking that guys job. You might be a good HC if you give it a try or get a chance. Or you might not. It is not a "bad" is is no info.

That is why I prefer hiring HCs who are up and comers, you have positive indication they are good HCs. That is why Troy Taylor gave up being a P5 OC to become a FCS HC. To prove himself. As a HC. He has already been a P5 OC. You want to see how a guy handles being in charge, both in basketball and football.

---

Exactly. Jones was an assistant to some very good coaches and was known as a recruiter with West Coast ties. He pretty much checked off all the boxes outlined above including being African-American and being familiar with UC. I think people were hoping we'd land a proven coach after Cuonzo left, but it wasn't absurd to give Wyking a shot.

If you had asked me to choose between Wyking and Fox at the time I would have gone with Wyking and I still think we might have been better off with Wyking even in hindsight.

Should we have hired Gates or Legans or Musselman or Decuire or even Kidd instead? Probably, but the Jones hire wasn't as bad at the time as it proved to be later. I don't think anyone expected him to go 5-31 in conference and if you say you did you are not being honest about it. He failed spectacularly, but you are letting hindsight drive your opinion of the hiring.

---

At the time I thought it was one of the worst hires of all time. Many other posters thought the same. Hiring a coach is more than checking boxes. Knowlton appears to have tried to check the boxes with this Fox hire and look how that's turning out.

---

Which boxes did Fox check other than being a previous P5 coach?

---

He was successful at Nevada, in spite of what calumnus says. At Nevada he did recruit a few players who had good NBA careers. At Georgia, he was mediocre. He did recruit one good NBA player, and also recruited some decent players from Africa. Integrity and character seems to be impeccable. He's proven in the past he can develop players. He did not check enough boxes, however, to be picked for the Cal job.

SFCityBear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

"Integrity" - What does this mean in the NIL era? I mean yes, you should not do anything ILLEGAL but the NCAA has essentially surrender the field when it comes to enforcement EXCEPT in on things that are really administrative paperwork issues (like holding one too many recruiting calls or not reporting buying a recruit lunch).

I want, in order,

1) An African American coach or someone who has shown in their career the ability to help guide often "first in family to college" young african american males thorugh both matriculation and, should their ability allow, moving from college to the NBA. At a school where less than 5% of the student body is AA and so many of them are scholarship athletes this is imperative.

2) West Coast Roots - Cal has never (and will never) recruit fully nationally for SPORTS (again, PLEASE for the love of all that is holy do not conflate UCB undergraduate admissions with Cal revenue sports recruiting). Our best football and basektball teams have always been built on a core of Californian (and really southern Californian) kids. A coach who does not know the top HS and AAU coaches in the greater LA region should be immediately rejected. Yes, he "can learn" but getting up to speed quickly is a tall order.

3) Abiliyt to work the inside game. UC experience is userful. Not as a student but as an employee. You have to understand what the faculty senate is and how to navigate through the politics. Basically what will give the AD a headache and what you can (and cannot) do. THis is mostly to avoid frustration - where you have a candidate like SOnny Dykes who finds out after the fact how the UC works.

4) Proven abiliyt to work the NIL game. New world folks. Go big or go home.

---

Whoa, big fella. I don't think we want to include only coaches who are African American in this search, no matter how much we feel they might be better able to relate to many of the best recruits who are also African American. I like black coaches as much as the next guy. I was good with hiring Cuonzo, but I was against hiring both Bozeman and Jones. I realize you then qualified your statement to include others, but it goes without saying that we need a coach who can relate to good players. Many of these may be white, and many are from foreign countries, so any coach we consider ought to be able to relate to and impress any recruit of any color or background. Narrowing a search to one group or color would be discrimination, and the University itself would not likely allow it, or I would hope they wouldn't allow it.

---

<eyeroll>

When has Cal EVER really built an international pipeline? Again, this is SO "I was an undergrad and my experience translates to athletic recruitment" thinking.

THe programs that have international connections are those who are able through recruiting budgets to fund coaches to go overseas AND who have long standing ties to AAU program equivelents. They also, increasingly, have pipelines to the "academies."

At the risk of hearing about your beloved lowel of 1956 the simple facts are.

1) Our teams of note have ALWAYS had core talent of AA players that are usually from Southern California (or the Southern Central Valley depending on where you classify Bakersfield) or Bay Area prep legends.

2) Cal is ABSYMAL (not just cause Cal) for admitting and retaining non-athletic AA students. Seriously, go look at the statistics and shake your head.

3) 1 +2 means that our coach has to be able to create a safe and nuturing space in a highly UNDIVERSE (when it comes to AA students) campus. That is possible for a coach of any race but far more likely for a coach who brings lived experience and background. Fox ain't it. Pretty sure Campy wasn't it either. Not Monty either who had assistants who could help and a HoF resume to overcome his recruiting and leadership failures. Even then - see the Push.


Now of COURSE the university can't say these things out loud. But the bottom line is that is the sort of coach that can revive Cal because the alpha and omega of doing that is recruiting D1 talent.

calumnus said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

What about Rod Palmer, currently an assistant at UCLA?

He has never been a head coach, but he was an assistant under some pretty good ones.

He is a strong recruiter and obviously already familiar with UC.

---

I don't know enough about his personally and how he would be as a HC, but honestly Wyking Jones had a MUCH better resume and also knew UC and Cal specifically.

However, Palmer was clearly a solid pickup for Cronin when he came out West to help recruit SoCal.

In general, I'd rather hire a successful up and coming HC than an assistant at a major program. West Coast ties are good, Cal ties are great.

---

I think Jones was a pretty good hire. He just didn't pan out, but like you said he had a pretty good pedigree and was familiar with Cal.

The problem with trying to hire a successful head coach is that there would have to be a big financial benefit to coming to Cal. That means we need to be looking at head coaches in small conferences.

If we also want West Coast ties that means we are pretty much limited to the head coaches for the Big West, Mountain West, or WCC

That is a pretty small list unless there are a lot of assistant coaches from out West that are now head coaches back East somewhere.

If you want an African-American coach the list is even smaller, but I am not sure that's a necessary requirement.

---

Sorry, I struggle to understand how anyone thought Jones was a good hire. He was in the coaching ranks for twenty years without ever being a head coach and actually wasn't even an assistant head coach at any stop. He was on no coaching lists and given the recent success under Martin AND the Missouri buyout money Cal had in hand, a terrible hire to go with. The results were entirely predictable.

---

Look at Palmer's resume. Jones' was the same but much better. If Jones was a bad hire based on resume, then Palmer is worse. But then so was Wilcox in football.

However, if you are consistently an assistant to Hall of Fame coaches there is a reason you are not "promoted" to head coach. You are not taking that guys job. You might be a good HC if you give it a try or get a chance. Or you might not. It is not a "bad" is is no info.

That is why I prefer hiring HCs who are up and comers, you have positive indication they are good HCs. That is why Troy Taylor gave up being a P5 OC to become a FCS HC. To prove himself. As a HC. He has already been a P5 OC. You want to see how a guy handles being in charge, both in basketball and football.

---

Exactly. Jones was an assistant to some very good coaches and was known as a recruiter with West Coast ties. He pretty much checked off all the boxes outlined above including being African-American and being familiar with UC. I think people were hoping we'd land a proven coach after Cuonzo left, but it wasn't absurd to give Wyking a shot.

If you had asked me to choose between Wyking and Fox at the time I would have gone with Wyking and I still think we might have been better off with Wyking even in hindsight.

Should we have hired Gates or Legans or Musselman or Decuire or even Kidd instead? Probably, but the Jones hire wasn't as bad at the time as it proved to be later. I don't think anyone expected him to go 5-31 in conference and if you say you did you are not being honest about it. He failed spectacularly, but you are letting hindsight drive your opinion of the hiring.

---

At the time I thought it was one of the worst hires of all time. Many other posters thought the same. Hiring a coach is more than checking boxes. Knowlton appears to have tried to check the boxes with this Fox hire and look how that's turning out.

---

Which boxes did Fox check other than being a previous P5 coach?

---

He was successful at Nevada, in spite of what calumnus says. At Nevada he did recruit a few players who had good NBA careers. At Georgia, he was mediocre. He did recruit one good NBA player, and also recruited some decent players from Africa. Integrity and character seems to be impeccable. He's proven in the past he can develop players. He did not check enough boxes, however, to be picked for the Cal job.

---

I NEVER said he wasn't successful at Nevada.

I just attributed much of his early success to the recruiting and upward trajectory of his predecessor Trent Johnson, a Monty disciple who left Nevada to succeed Monty at Stanford, plus the good fortune of having two of the highest rated recruits ever come out of Reno while he was there as well as playing in a very weak WAC conference. Fox made the Tournanent his first three years, then missed in year 4 and 5 falling behind Utah State before he took the Georgia job.

It was his 9 years at Georgia, making the Tournament only twice, never ranked, that cemented his reputation as a mediocre D1 coach. His best year at Georgia, as at Nevada, was his second, with players he inherited (often the case with coaches known as disciplinarians, especially before the transfer portal). Between Georgia and Cal he is 198-191 overall, 92-122 in conference.

I would much rather take a chance on an unknown with potential to ge good than with guy that has proven he is not, proven he cannot regularly develop a Tournament quality team with his own recruits despite coaching at a school in a great recruiting area.

---

Plus Many

Fox's leash would be MUCH longer if he had succeeded in recruitting where Cal HAS to recruit well to win - in Southern California. He really didn't -- as noted benefiting from a couple of local kids (kudos to him for keeping them home).

SFCityBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

stu said:

---

My top priority is integrity. An absolute must.

Then people skills for recruiting, motivating fans to attend, working with around the A.D., etc.

Then organizational skills, technical knowledge, work ethic.

And at Cal a willingness to rebuild a program and probably start off at a relatively low salary.

Tall order. I don't have any names to suggest.

---

I think Stu has provided a good list. I posted over 50 names at the end of last season many of which are still available. Some additional commentary:

• Integrity - agree! That used to eliminate about half the top candidates, but under new rules it probably only eliminates 10%
• Interpersonal skills. Probably one of the few things a program CAN'T work around with a competent assistant.
• Skills,Knowledge, Work Ethic - pretty much a pre-requisite anyway. But until we get the program back on track, we don't need someone SPECIAL in this regard. Talent and easy will suffice. Assistants can help with lots of this. Having three assistants that duplicate the Head Coach does NOT help.
• Rebuilding. Unfortunately, the admin doesn't support MBB, so anyone they hire will FEEL underpaid.

---

I agree with most of this. But integrity is a function of one's morals, one's character. How does the integrity of a pool of candidates change just by changing the rules of a sport?

---

Well one's morals and character has at least something to do with following rules to some extent, no? Anyway, I get your point, but in Mens College basketball over the last few decades, a MAJOR portion of integrity related to the job - had to do with how the coach dealt with an array of artificial rules around recruiting and paying players and recruits. Since 90% (or more of those rules are now out the window), I extrapolated that makes the integrity portion much clearer (and easier).

calumnus said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

stu said:

---

My top priority is integrity. An absolute must.

Then people skills for recruiting, motivating fans to attend, working with around the A.D., etc.

Then organizational skills, technical knowledge, work ethic.

And at Cal a willingness to rebuild a program and probably start off at a relatively low salary.

Tall order. I don't have any names to suggest.

---

I think Stu has provided a good list. I posted over 50 names at the end of last season many of which are still available. Some additional commentary:

• Integrity - agree! That used to eliminate about half the top candidates, but under new rules it probably only eliminates 10%
• Interpersonal skills. Probably one of the few things a program CAN'T work around with a competent assistant.
• Skills,Knowledge, Work Ethic - pretty much a pre-requisite anyway. But until we get the program back on track, we don't need someone SPECIAL in this regard. Talent and easy will suffice. Assistants can help with lots of this. Having three assistants that duplicate the Head Coach does NOT help.
• Rebuilding. Unfortunately, the admin doesn't support MBB, so anyone they hire will FEEL underpaid.

---

I agree with most of this. But integrity is a function of one's morals, one's character. How does the integrity of a pool of candidates change just by changing the rules of a sport?

---

Well one's morals and character has at least something to do with following rules to some extent, no? Anyway, I get your point, but in Mens College basketball over the last few decades, a MAJOR portion of integrity related to the job - had to do with how the coach dealt with an array of artificial rules around recruiting and paying players and recruits. Since 90% (or more of those rules are now out the window), I extrapolated that makes the integrity portion much clearer (and easier).

---

One of Fox's problems has been his sanctimoniousness about "doing it the right way" his willingness to speak out about other coaches "they are ruining the game I love" and his hostility to the AAU circuit and coaches.

Yes, follow the rules because there are penalties if you don't, but have some perspective. This is a game. Giving a kid money to play basketball ranks very low in the great crimes and outrages of the world. In fact, the Supreme Court has now ruled NOT paying them for the value they create was what was illegal/immoral.

Tosh was successful as a recruiter at Cal largely because he was a step ahead of the NCAA rules, when phone calls with recruits weee limited, he was texting, when texting later became limited he was DMing while playing Madden with recruits on Xbox.

The morals I want in a coach are that they are for the student athletes first and foremost. Second, in accepting $millions in pay from our school they will do everything they can within the rules to produce a winning program, keeping in line with the first rule.

---

I also want a coach that respects our traditions, our culture, and our priorities. In fact, that should come ahead of the student-athletes and having a winning program. Most of us don't want to be USC even if it meant our kids were treated well and we had a winning program.

calumnus said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

stu said:

---

My top priority is integrity. An absolute must.

Then people skills for recruiting, motivating fans to attend, working with around the A.D., etc.

Then organizational skills, technical knowledge, work ethic.

And at Cal a willingness to rebuild a program and probably start off at a relatively low salary.

Tall order. I don't have any names to suggest.

---

I think Stu has provided a good list. I posted over 50 names at the end of last season many of which are still available. Some additional commentary:

• Integrity - agree! That used to eliminate about half the top candidates, but under new rules it probably only eliminates 10%
• Interpersonal skills. Probably one of the few things a program CAN'T work around with a competent assistant.
• Skills,Knowledge, Work Ethic - pretty much a pre-requisite anyway. But until we get the program back on track, we don't need someone SPECIAL in this regard. Talent and easy will suffice. Assistants can help with lots of this. Having three assistants that duplicate the Head Coach does NOT help.
• Rebuilding. Unfortunately, the admin doesn't support MBB, so anyone they hire will FEEL underpaid.

---

I agree with most of this. But integrity is a function of one's morals, one's character. How does the integrity of a pool of candidates change just by changing the rules of a sport?

---

Well one's morals and character has at least something to do with following rules to some extent, no? Anyway, I get your point, but in Mens College basketball over the last few decades, a MAJOR portion of integrity related to the job - had to do with how the coach dealt with an array of artificial rules around recruiting and paying players and recruits. Since 90% (or more of those rules are now out the window), I extrapolated that makes the integrity portion much clearer (and easier).

---

One of Fox's problems has been his sanctimoniousness about "doing it the right way" his willingness to speak out about other coaches "they are ruining the game I love" and his hostility to the AAU circuit and coaches.

Yes, follow the rules because there are penalties if you don't, but have some perspective. This is a game. Giving a kid money to play basketball ranks very low in the great crimes and outrages of the world. In fact, the Supreme Court has now ruled NOT paying them for the value they create was what was illegal/immoral.

Tosh was successful as a recruiter at Cal largely because he was a step ahead of the NCAA rules, when phone calls with recruits weee limited, he was texting, when texting later became limited he was DMing while playing Madden with recruits on Xbox.

The morals I want in a coach are that they are for the student athletes first and foremost. Second, in accepting $millions in pay from our school they will do everything they can within the rules to produce a winning program, keeping in line with the first rule.

---

While I can't directly disagree with anything you wrote, I will offer up the following pre-NIL scenarios:

Coach X: Pretty good coach. "Old school", yells at his players (without approaching what might be "abuse"). Follows all NCAA rules. Now and then, strongly encourages "bust" recruits to transfer (w/o violating NCAA or conference rules).

Coach Y: Also pretty good coach. Never yells, super-"nice" to players. Actively funnels fairly large amounts of cash to players and recruits, in direct violation of NCAA rules, but never gets caught, nor will he.

Both coaches win about 60% of their games, enough to keep getting their contracts renewed.

Again, this is pre-NIL. I'd rather have Coach X than Coach Y.

(yes, I understand that NIL doesn't mean coach is personally paying players... just an example here)