We all know this. The players know it. Fox himself knows it.
What is Jimbo waiting for?
Post Reply
1 of 1
Fox needs to be fired
2,991 Views |
34 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by calumnus
We all know this. The players know it. Fox himself knows it.
What is Jimbo waiting for?
dimitrig said:
We all know this. The players know it. Fox himself knows it.
What is Jimbo waiting for?
The blowing up and scrubbing of Wyking's -16 in a row school record?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Probably the investigative report on Teri McKeever and whether an investigation could be launched on a complaint of his failure to act when confronted with serious allegations of University policy. He's waiting to see if he himself will be canned. That's my hope.dimitrig said:
We all know this. The players know it. Fox himself knows it.
What is Jimbo waiting for?
Maybe he's waiting for Fox to make history by having a power conference team with 30 losses. Maybe he's waiting for the season to be over because there is no point to a mid-season firing when you have no appropriate interim to take over. Maybe he's waiting for the season to be over because Fox's buyout will drop a lot and it will save the AD money.
And keep in mind, Knowlton is the guy who hired Fox. Why? Yes, there was no expectation the program would ever get to the point where it was THIS bad under Fox, but there was zero hope that it would ever be a consistent tourney team under Fox. Why hire a guy like that? I don't expect Knowlton to fire Fox mid-season when he never should have hired him in the first place.
I do, however, expect Knowlton to fire Fox immediately after the conclusion of the worst season in Cal basketball history, whether or not it is the worst season in power conference history.
And keep in mind, Knowlton is the guy who hired Fox. Why? Yes, there was no expectation the program would ever get to the point where it was THIS bad under Fox, but there was zero hope that it would ever be a consistent tourney team under Fox. Why hire a guy like that? I don't expect Knowlton to fire Fox mid-season when he never should have hired him in the first place.
I do, however, expect Knowlton to fire Fox immediately after the conclusion of the worst season in Cal basketball history, whether or not it is the worst season in power conference history.
How many of you record Cal bball games and then only watch 10-15 minutes before deleting the rest? I've gotten to that point.
Yep. I scrub through the games in that amount of time hoping to see our young players score some buckets. Alas, that doesn't happen very often.HearstMining said:
How many of you record Cal bball games and then only watch 10-15 minutes before deleting the rest? I've gotten to that point.
I don't even bother watching anymore unless there is absolutely nothing for me to do.HearstMining said:
How many of you record Cal bball games and then only watch 10-15 minutes before deleting the rest? I've gotten to that point.
There is a company in Concord that leases portable Termination Tarmacs for Kiffin-ing coaches on after a home game.
The smallest size would fit nicely on the People's Park acreage.
The smallest size would fit nicely on the People's Park acreage.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
KoreAmBear said:Probably the investigative report on Teri McKeever and whether an investigation could be launched on a complaint of his failure to act when confronted with serious allegations of University policy. He's waiting to see if he himself will be canned. That's my hope.dimitrig said:
We all know this. The players know it. Fox himself knows it.
What is Jimbo waiting for?
Whether he is canned or not, Fox needs to be fired.
You can't send the message that this performance is acceptable.
you wanna know the truth, dimtrig?dimitrig said:
We all know this. The players know it. Fox himself knows it.
What is Jimbo waiting for?
knowlton is waiting for donors like his confidante & rope a dope pal califortunate to finance the fox buyout exclusively with donor money so he won't have to tap into athletic department funds despite the fact it was the con man's decision to hire fox in the 1st place & then amazingly his unilateral decision to extend his contract from 2024 to 2025
the current athletic director wants all buyout money for the mbb coach (and recent offensive coordinator hire) to be donor money so he can continue to waste department money on his title ix sports that nobody cares about
so to answer your question, not gonna happen anytime soon as an increasing number of donors are done with knowlton & his scams like the $125,000,000+ quidditch practice facility
vote for andrew mcgraw for athletic director#
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension*:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
*Fox got a 1 year extension through 2024-2025 season.
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
*Fox got a 1 year extension through 2024-2025 season.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
I think going 0-fer-whatever it ends up being is a good cause for firing.
Carol thinks that there are more important things that winning, and gave Knowlton his ridiculous extension while our revenue sports have been imploding. So we are stuck until she is gone.
ab, chancellor christ has done more for cal athletics than any chancellor in modern times, she made 1 mistake when knowlton lied to her about the northwestern athletic director job search & she extended him until 2029
carol is not the problem, the next chancellor will 99% be less supportive of athletics than her
the problem is the con man, this is really not that complicated
carol is not the problem, the next chancellor will 99% be less supportive of athletics than her
the problem is the con man, this is really not that complicated
Somebody please step up with a giant chunk of money! (I'm a little short this month. My kids want Xmas presents and all.)
Unfortunately "cause" in most employment contracts requires some violation of University policy or some bad act besides historic ineptitude.dimitrig said:bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
I think going 0-fer-whatever it ends up being is a good cause for firing.
He needs to be drawn and quartered. I want the upper left part.
So, Shocky do you predict Fox will be fired at the end of the season? Is there a chance he will be retained and will a search firm be used to scour the entire US?
Go Bears!
Shocky1 said:
ab, chancellor christ has done more for cal athletics than any chancellor in modern times, she made 1 mistake when knowlton lied to her about the northwestern athletic director job search & she extended him until 2029
carol is not the problem, the next chancellor will 99% be less supportive of athletics than her
the problem is the con man, this is really not that complicated
That is a pretty big and gullible mistake. Have to be honest, as I think her job is taking care of academics, I'd kind of prefer to think she is generally not supportive than to think she was so easily swindled
dimitrig said:bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
I think going 0-fer-whatever it ends up being is a good cause for firing.
Under the Code of Honor we live our lives by for sure, but not under standard law governing this issue.
"Termination for cause is an easier decision in many ways than firing a coach for other reasons because the decision is clear. The coach has crossed a well-defined line he or she has broken rules, committed a felony, violated a contract, or committed some other such action."
https://us.humankinetics.com/blogs/excerpt/rare-advice-helps-athletic-directors-handle-coach-termination
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Good, I hope the next chancellor is not as supportive of athletics. I hope the next chancellor is the one brave enough to finally cut a large portion of our cash-burning varsity sports that don't even sniff a chance of a championshipShocky1 said:
ab, chancellor christ has done more for cal athletics than any chancellor in modern times, she made 1 mistake when knowlton lied to her about the northwestern athletic director job search & she extended him until 2029
carol is not the problem, the next chancellor will 99% be less supportive of athletics than her
the problem is the con man, this is really not that complicated
bearister said:dimitrig said:bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
I think going 0-fer-whatever it ends up being is a good cause for firing.
Under the Code of Honor we live our lives by for sure, but not under standard law governing this issue.
"Termination for cause is an easier decision in many ways than firing a coach for other reasons because the decision is clear. The coach has crossed a well-defined linehe or she has broken rules, committed a felony, violated a contract, or committed some other such action."
https://us.humankinetics.com/blogs/excerpt/rare-advice-helps-athletic-directors-handle-coach-termination
Pretty sure he has violated his contract, which requires him to coach the basketball team. I see no evidence of that.
bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension*:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
*Fox got a 1 year extension through 2024-2025 season.
If that is true then:
If Knowlton waits until March to fire Fox then he will have paid him for 2022-23 and will owe him 100% for both 2023-24 and 2024-25.
However if Knowlton fires Fox mid-season he would owe him for the rest of 2022-23, 100% of 2023-24 but only 75% of 2024-2025.
Thus, it appears we could save about $500,000 by firing Fox midseason rather than waiting until the end of the season to do it.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Maybe let Fox get the loss record. Promote Andrew Francis to interim. Begin assembling an advisory committee of Cal basketball alums to conduct the next search.
During the SC game I paid close attention to the coachescalumnus said:bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension*:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
*Fox got a 1 year extension through 2024-2025 season.
If that is true then:
If Knowlton waits until March to fire Fox then he will have paid him for 2022-23 and will owe him 100% for both 2023-24 and 2024-25.
However if Knowlton fires Fox mid-season he would owe him for the rest of 2022-23, 100% of 2023-24 but only 75% of 2024-2025.
Thus, it appears we could save about $500,000 by firing Fox midseason rather than waiting until the end of the season to do it.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Maybe let Fox get the loss record. Promote Andrew Francis to interim. Begin assembling an advisory committee of Cal basketball alums to conduct the next search.
Didn't see any abusive behavior or over the top yelling from any of the coaches. Basically all business. But the coaches pretty much kept to themselves during the warm ups and game. The coach I saw engaging the players the most was Francis. My take is he has the best communications with the players, while the others aren't really relationship people
HoopDreams said:During the SC game I paid close attention to the coachescalumnus said:bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension*:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
*Fox got a 1 year extension through 2024-2025 season.
If that is true then:
If Knowlton waits until March to fire Fox then he will have paid him for 2022-23 and will owe him 100% for both 2023-24 and 2024-25.
However if Knowlton fires Fox mid-season he would owe him for the rest of 2022-23, 100% of 2023-24 but only 75% of 2024-2025.
Thus, it appears we could save about $500,000 by firing Fox midseason rather than waiting until the end of the season to do it.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Maybe let Fox get the loss record. Promote Andrew Francis to interim. Begin assembling an advisory committee of Cal basketball alums to conduct the next search.
Didn't see any abusive behavior or over the top yelling from any of the coaches. Basically all business. But the coaches pretty much kept to themselves during the warm ups and game. The coach I saw engaging the players the most was Francis. My take is he has the best communications with the players, while the others aren't really relationship people
Yes, the other two guys are like Fox. Francis is the guy to make the interim.
Most of the successful Cal Athletic programs are the ones it appears most of you want axed.
Then Cal would really be nothing on the athletic side of the equation.
University of Chicago model here we come!
Then Cal would really be nothing on the athletic side of the equation.
University of Chicago model here we come!
The only teams that have won a championship in the last 20 years are Rugby, Rowing, Water Polo, Swimming, Softball and Women's Tennis. Those sports can stay, but every other sport can be cut and we won't be any worse
1. I don't think that is true. Most of our successful programs have pretty strong donor support (like swimming and rowing, for instance.diva1 said:
Most of the successful Cal Athletic programs are the ones it appears most of you want axed.
Then Cal would really be nothing on the athletic side of the equation.
University of Chicago model here we come!
2. Nobody is talking about going to the University of Chicago model. They are talking about diverting the investment to football, which can actually make a fiscal difference, and if it makes enough of a difference, maybe some of those sports can come back. Or not. Focusing on the one sport that brings in significant revenue, even if you lose at it is definitely not Chicago model
3. You are basically talking about PRESERVING an Ivy model. For instance, in rowing, instead of doing what we used to do, which is recruiting mostly from the student body and coaching them up, we are largely giving scholarships to rich, foreign kids from elite private high schools or rich American kids whose parents steer them to rowing because there are literally not enough kids participating in rowing in high school to fill all the college slots and they know that it is extremely easy to at minimum get a rowing slot at a Division III, elite private school. We recruit these mostly foreign kids so that we can beat the likes of Brown for a top ranking. Cal doesn't need to be good at a sport that Brown is good at. I pick on rowing because it is such a complete boondoggle at most schools, but at Cal because we essentially have a century of tradition competing and strong donor support, there is at least a point to it. My issue that I would take up with donors is wouldn't it be better to run the team how we traditionally have and provide that experience for Californians, rather than go get ringers from Britain and Australia so we can say we won. That being said, the donors are the donors and they provide a lot of support, so I'm just going to have to live with it. But let's be clear, in most of those sports, we succeed because there are few other schools that want to.
Study after study after study indicates that the socioeconomic disparity in admissions is bolstered by two main practices - 1. legacy admissions; and 2. Sports like the ones you are trying to protect. Cal doesn't do #1 in any meaningful way. Cal does #2 in a major way. I'm sorry, but these sports provide no entertainment or social value to the campus community. They provide value to their participants. And the biggest value they provide to their participants are admissions. AND RICH PARENTS KNOW THIS. That is the game. In any wealthy community, you have parents picking sports for their kids and paying for years of training to get them preferred admissions at schools that offer those sports. C'mon. What kid wakes up at eight years old and says "I know, I want to be a star lacrosse player!" Yeah, right. Cal should not be playing this game where even unathletic kids can train up in a sport no one plays and get preferred admissions or even schollies at a Division I.
Those are the sports we need to get rid of and I don't care if that means we can't beat Cornell at those anymore. If those are the only sports we can succeed in, then yeah, we need to question our athletic program. No one is talking about things like swimming and water polo (which have huge donor support and at this point are about the only thing that bring any notoriety to our athletics).
BearlyCareAnymore said:1. I don't think that is true. Most of our successful programs have pretty strong donor support (like swimming and rowing, for instance.diva1 said:
Most of the successful Cal Athletic programs are the ones it appears most of you want axed.
Then Cal would really be nothing on the athletic side of the equation.
University of Chicago model here we come!
2. Nobody is talking about going to the University of Chicago model. They are talking about diverting the investment to football, which can actually make a fiscal difference, and if it makes enough of a difference, maybe some of those sports can come back. Or not. Focusing on the one sport that brings in significant revenue, even if you lose at it is definitely not Chicago model
3. You are basically talking about PRESERVING an Ivy model. For instance, in rowing, instead of doing what we used to do, which is recruiting mostly from the student body and coaching them up, we are largely giving scholarships to rich, foreign kids from elite private high schools or rich American kids whose parents steer them to rowing because there are literally not enough kids participating in rowing in high school to fill all the college slots and they know that it is extremely easy to at minimum get a rowing slot at a Division III, elite private school. We recruit these mostly foreign kids so that we can beat the likes of Brown for a top ranking. Cal doesn't need to be good at a sport that Brown is good at. I pick on rowing because it is such a complete boondoggle at most schools, but at Cal because we essentially have a century of tradition competing and strong donor support, there is at least a point to it. My issue that I would take up with donors is wouldn't it be better to run the team how we traditionally have and provide that experience for Californians, rather than go get ringers from Britain and Australia so we can say we won. That being said, the donors are the donors and they provide a lot of support, so I'm just going to have to live with it. But let's be clear, in most of those sports, we succeed because there are few other schools that want to.
Study after study after study indicates that the socioeconomic disparity in admissions is bolstered by two main practices - 1. legacy admissions; and 2. Sports like the ones you are trying to protect. Cal doesn't do #1 in any meaningful way. Cal does #2 in a major way. I'm sorry, but these sports provide no entertainment or social value to the campus community. They provide value to their participants. And the biggest value they provide to their participants are admissions. AND RICH PARENTS KNOW THIS. That is the game. In any wealthy community, you have parents picking sports for their kids and paying for years of training to get them preferred admissions at schools that offer those sports. C'mon. What kid wakes up at eight years old and says "I know, I want to be a star lacrosse player!" Yeah, right. Cal should not be playing this game where even unathletic kids can train up in a sport no one plays and get preferred admissions or even schollies at a Division I.
Those are the sports we need to get rid of and I don't care if that means we can't beat Cornell at those anymore. If those are the only sports we can succeed in, then yeah, we need to question our athletic program. No one is talking about things like swimming and water polo (which have huge donor support and at this point are about the only thing that bring any notoriety to our athletics).
Yes!!!!
And it gets worse. The sport often on the cutting block is track and field....which contributes a significant percentage of cals African American undergrad population. If I had my way we would be cutting gynamistics (Olympic athletes dont go to college for the most part), lacrosse, field hockey, baseball, golf, rowing, and soccer. Swim and dive would have to be soley.self supporting AND have a mandatory minimum percentage of california residents. It makes no sense at all for a PULBic university that admits less than 15 percent of instate applicants to have any admission slots set aside for socioeconomically privileged kids who couldn't get in on merit when they were born on third base.
Yes. We have title ix and so some of the aforementioned have to come back to be in compliance. But you start there and add back.
Take care of your Chicken
You know what the biggest problem is?
The reason viewership in live sports broadcasts is down:
"73% of Gen Zers said a reason they hadn't watched was because "I'm not interested in sports." It's imperative that leagues figure out how to get that number down."Axios
*This will spill over to college sports. If the students have no interest (soon to become alumni with no interest), why should the institution?
*Soda and video,games, we salute you.
The reason viewership in live sports broadcasts is down:
"73% of Gen Zers said a reason they hadn't watched was because "I'm not interested in sports." It's imperative that leagues figure out how to get that number down."Axios
*This will spill over to college sports. If the students have no interest (soon to become alumni with no interest), why should the institution?
*Soda and video,games, we salute you.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
calumnus said:bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension*:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
*Fox got a 1 year extension through 2024-2025 season.
If that is true then:
If Knowlton waits until March to fire Fox then he will have paid him for 2022-23 and will owe him 100% for both 2023-24 and 2024-25.
However if Knowlton fires Fox mid-season he would owe him for the rest of 2022-23, 100% of 2023-24 but only 75% of 2024-2025.
Thus, it appears we could save about $500,000 by firing Fox midseason rather than waiting until the end of the season to do it.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Maybe let Fox get the loss record. Promote Andrew Francis to interim. Begin assembling an advisory committee of Cal basketball alums to conduct the next search.
That isn't how it works. Cal doesn't save anything by firing him mid season
He has explained better how it works that way than you have explained how it doesn't. Please explain the error of his ways.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
BearlyCareAnymore said:calumnus said:bearister said:
These were the buyout terms in his original contract prior to extension*:
If he were to be fired without cause, he would receive 100% of his salary the contract year he was fired and the year after. If more than two years remain on the contract, the percentage shrinks to 75%, then 50%, and then 25% for each subsequent year.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/platform/amp/2019/7/23/20706539/california-golden-bears-basketball-mark-fox-pac-12
*Fox got a 1 year extension through 2024-2025 season.
If that is true then:
If Knowlton waits until March to fire Fox then he will have paid him for 2022-23 and will owe him 100% for both 2023-24 and 2024-25.
However if Knowlton fires Fox mid-season he would owe him for the rest of 2022-23, 100% of 2023-24 but only 75% of 2024-2025.
Thus, it appears we could save about $500,000 by firing Fox midseason rather than waiting until the end of the season to do it.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Maybe let Fox get the loss record. Promote Andrew Francis to interim. Begin assembling an advisory committee of Cal basketball alums to conduct the next search.
That isn't how it works. Cal doesn't save anything by firing him mid season
It is true if the contract language is as reported.
It is not true if the entire contract is guaranteed (as with Wilcox's contract).
Are you saying the contract terms were incorrectly reported or were subsequently changed?
The contract year doesn't end at triple zero of the last game. Unless Cal were to be even more stupid than usual and wait too long, if they fire Fox at the end of the season, it will still be the same contract year as if they fire him in the middle of the season.bearister said:
He has explained better how it works that way than you have explained how it doesn't. Please explain the error of his ways.
BearlyCareAnymore said:The contract year doesn't end at triple zero of the last game. Unless Cal were to be even more stupid than usual and wait too long, if they fire Fox at the end of the season, it will still be the same contract year as if they fire him in the middle of the season.bearister said:
He has explained better how it works that way than you have explained how it doesn't. Please explain the error of his ways.
That right. The new contract year begins April 1 (April Fools, how appropriate). As long as he is fired before then we will save the $500,000 on his final year. We save nothing more firing him sooner (ie mid-season).
Featured Stories
See All
Mendoza Named ACC Quarterback Of The Week
by Cal Athletics
Bears Slip By Sac State, 83-77
by Jim McGill
The Rodcast: The Greatest Drive Ever?
by Rod Benson
Cal Hosts Stanford In 127th Big Game
by Cal Athletics